#sorry sorry I don't mean to sound like upset or overly defensive or anything this is just a story that means a TON to me

[tiktaaliker]

WHY DON'T PANIK AND TYTO HAVE DESIGNS. THEY'RE COOL AND RELEVANT!!!! 😤😤😤😤😤

ok answering this now just to say that it's because almost all the other characters had a design first and THEN a personality/role. tyto and panik had their role made later and I DID go thru a design or two but since I was working backwards it just. didn't work out? like ok a character getting a design at the same time as they got a personality/role is EXTREMELY rare with all of these. if a minor character has a face it's probably because the face came WAY before the character lol. like pedal had a design before gazer did but wasn't shoehorned into the story until like a few months ago. nil only got a face until like MAYBE a year ago after not having one for almost 4 years despite having a VERY developed character arc. like I've also got a hefty amount of other unused designs I probably COULD make tyto and panik but I just haven't clicked with anything yet

[canipetthatdeaddove]

Hi!

Just saw you reblog that post about Thorin and physical touch from me with your thoughts, and I wanted to say I’m not trying to tone police anyone, or virtue signal, or anything like that at all, really! I just thought it was an interesting take, is all. I really enjoy reading other folks headcanons, and I think however anyone wants to interpret the source material, films *or* book, is completely fair enough. Truly, I just really love seeing all the variations that people come up with - it’s one of my favourite parts of fandom!

Anyway, I’m sorry if it upset you, or if my reblogging it made you or anyone else feel attacked - that was certainly not my intention! Of course the post wasn’t mine, as such, but since you reblogged directly from me and it’s been in my queue for a few months now (so I’ve essentially reintroduced it, I guess?) I just wanted to clarify, and apologise if I caused any upset.

Thanks, and take care!

@conkers-thecosy NOOOOO CONKERS NEVER! You are the sweetest most precious thing you've never done anything wrong a day in your life and if anything happened to you I'd kill everyone in this room and then myself. (Parasocial relationships are weird, but I've been following for a couple years before my last blogged was nuked and I know what a force for positivity you are in this fandom.)

I am coming from a humble place, but unfortunately my writing style is "condescending, stuck up" so bear with me. I don't mean to sound like a butthole when I write.

These anti-dark-Thorin takes get reblogged by all the popular bloggers in the fandom. I'm never personally offended by them, just exasperated because I think it's almost an auto-reflex people aren't really inspecting very closely. We ARE all anti-censorship, right? We're not, like... passively encouraging totalitarianism, yeah? Not even accidentally by reblogging posts that discourage a negative depiction of a character in favor of a positive one, right? RIGHT!!!??? (insert padme and anakin meme)

All of this could have been said without invalidating those people who write dark-Thorin. That's ONE of the main points I want to make here. Love romantic, heart-melting, chivalrous, not-bigoted Thorin. Promote him. Write about him. But don't make him the standard. That's not reality.

Maybe because of the shades-of-grey character that Thorin is, it's caused people to come out the gates in defense of him. And I love all the ways in which writers have enriched his character by leaning into or creating positive qualities so it's easier and more satisfying to enjoy him and Bagginshield. (So that's its easier for Bilbo to put up with his ass lololol.)

I think it's wrong and a terrible disservice to, as I said, imply that people who explore the dark side of Thorin misunderstood the source material. Or to discourage creativity. "You're not playing in the sandbox right!" No, it's just I'm writing a Game of Thrones AU, and you're doing The Princess Bride AU. Neither is wrong just very different.

I know, @conkers-thecosy, your intention was not to do what I have described above. I don't think its the intention of MOST authors to repeat censorship-y rhetoric. I just don't think a lot of Hobbit fandom writers are inspecting this at all because they feel very strongly about a negative depiction of Thorin.

I have a great deal of admiration and respect for you @conkers-thecosy and nearly ALL the writers I've seen do this. I'm not mad at anyone. When I'm writing in my own voice, though, I can be what others have called "spicy". Blunt, direct, er... rude? That's not my intention towards you or anyone else in this fandom in regards to this issue. I'm sorry if my reblog was overly-aggressive.

[vamptastic]

I recognize that my ask sounded belligerent because it was pretty short and brusque but I genuinely didn't intend to engage in bad faith. the reason I don't think it's a fair framing of protesters is this: I think that it's clear why people who weren't previously invested in israel would become invested following the killing in gaza, and claiming that protesters are only "masquerading" as people who care discounts the possibility that anyone might genuinely be moved to action after seeing what's happening. I'm sure the idea that they're just adventurists who don't actually care to learn the history is true about some people, but doesn't at all seem accurate to the protesters I've personally interacted with.

genuine question also: if you think the current wave of anti-israel protests is pointless because it hasn't affected material change in gaza/the west bank, how would you rather people respond?

I appreciate that, and I'm genuinely sorry for how belligerent MY response was. I've frequently had people IRL try to jerk me around on stuff I'm interested in because they think it's funny to see how I talk (I have ADHD) so I'm a bit oversensitive to the idea that somebody is just nitpicking to upset me and isn't seriously invested in a discussion. In hindsight I think I was kind of harsh and overly defensive and a lot of my response should have been left out.

Anyway, that aside. My main gripe is not that people do not genuinely care about the lives of Palestinians. They do care- but care does not in and of itself translate into material good being done. I have spoken to a many people that do not seem to have a broader understanding of why and how Israel was founded nor any actionable, longterm plans for peace. When I said they masquerade as freedom fighters, what I meant was that a lot of people seem to parrot anything that sounds revolutionary without a good understanding of what it means- not that they are pretending to fight or to care for freedom. I'm not talking about people being too self-important about protesting, but rather being susceptible to dangerous ideas as long as they paint a sufficiently revolutionary picture.

What I would really like to see is for people to organize themselves around what they want the future of Israel and Palestine to look like. The antiZionist movement in America seems to be currently organized around demands for ceasefire and a reduction in US military aid, which I agree with and would like to see. But that doesn't seem to be actually happening, and on top of that the vast majority of self proclaimed antiZionists do not seem to take 'wanting a ceasefire' as sufficient to be part of the movement. If you're working towards a shortterm goal, you need to be willing to work with organizations and individuals that have a different long-term vision. If you're not willing to work towards an imperfect but urgently needed shorterm- like an immediate end to hostilities without promise of greater concessions- then you need to clearly state your longterm goals and how this current situation will help you achieve them, if things go your way. I don't see that happening. Instead, I see a messy combination of demanding perfect ideological commitment sans clear definition of what that ideology consists of, on both an institutional and individual level.

That being said, I'm thinking about in terms of people I've talked to and my local JVP chapter. I don't know what you're doing and who you're talking to- it's perfectly possible that you've only encountered level-headed people who have accrued a solid level of understanding and know what they want and how their actions will achieve it. I just personally have encountered a lot of people who are throwing themselves headfirst into things, seemingly fruitlessly. Only people that have some personal investment in the matter (ie being Jewish or Palestinian) or an area of expertise that involves knowledge relevant to the situation seem to not consistently express wildly stupid ideas to me.