#sorry yall i rambled lol

[half-a-life-left]

LOYALTY (PART 6/?)

[tsutsumi-kurose]

Do you have any Tsukasa analyses?

hi!! thank you sm for the ask!! i love tsukasa analyses, so i was really excited to get this!! there is a small/specific thing i've been thinking about with regards to a couple tsukasa moments recently, and that is:

tsukasa and some not-so-rhetorical questions

there are two specific instances i've been thinking about recently of tsukasa asking typically rhetorical questions in a genuine way. the first time happens in chapter 91. when hanako and nene ask tsukasa how he got to them and why he was there, he asks "who cares?"

i find it really interesting that this question comes before tsukasa asks a long series of hard hitting questions about nene's lifespan, hanako's wish, and destroying the yorishiros. he's asking very real, actionable questions! and this question is grouped in with them! so while "who cares?" is typically a very throwaway question, coming from tsukasa in this moment, i read it as having much more weight. i think tsukasa is experiencing the feeling of that in a very real way. especially given the context of more recent chapters ("he doesn't come when i call," "if you want out, you're going to have to do the best you can by yourself," etc.) while this question may come across as flippant, tsukasa must truly be wondering: "genuinely, who cares where i've been? how or why i'm here? genuinely, do either of the two of you care what i'm up to? you're worried about nene's lifespan and the yorishiros. who he cares about how i got here or why? i have no reason to believe you do." i don't think it's a stretch to think that a boy whose calls for help don't get answered would genuinely wonder: who cares?

and with all the context of 91 up to now, i love to read this question in 110 as a genuine question from tsukasa that hanako hears as rehtorical, and flippant:

"so?" asked so briefly and bluntly is often a rhetorical question: more a statement of "that doesn't matter" or "i don't care." and from hanako's perspective, he has just poured his heart out. he's just said, "yes i could have anything in the whole world, but then i wouldn't have you." to him, this surely must seem like a logical fill in of, "I wouldn't trade you for anything."

but this is tsukasa. tsukasa, who has spent god knows how many years calling out for amane with no response. tsukasa, who knows the following to be fact: 1) hanako knows tsukasa is his yorishiro. 2) hanako has been working to destroy all the yorishiros. thus, the logic from the facts tsukasa has would say that hanako prefers to be without tsukasa. of course he'll be confused that hanako's words suggest he doesn't want to be apart when all he's done with his actions is keep tsukasa away from himself!

it's not surprising, then, that he would want an explanation of how these things connect. the facts tsukasa has say amane doesn't care about him and is prepared to destroy him. so of course amane saying "i wouldn't give you up for anything" is not going to compute, that seems like almost an exact contradiction to the facts tsukasa is working with. the "so?" here is the same question tsukasa's been asking since 1968 in chapter 101: "you'd prefer it if i stayed here, right, amane? or would you rather me gone?" tsukasa thought he had the answer, but now amane's saying the opposite.

i love this panel, because it reads as so hopeful. i really read this as tsukasa wanting to know more about why amane is hung up on never seeing tsukasa again. how often does tsukasa ever want anything for himself? other than to know how someone is feeling? and this moment feels significantly softer than other times he's asked similar things. tsukasa's always asking: what are you thinking? what are you feeling? amane, are you happy to see me? so i think he's genuinely asking here: why would that be a problem? i interpret this panel as tsukasa really, genuinely asking amane to explain that he cares about him, that he wants to be with him. because he has nothing to go off of to prove that that's the case. are you happy to see me, amane? so what if you can never see me again, amane?

to get really specific, i love the lighting in tsukasa's eyes in this panel. his eyes are mostly in shadow, but there's just a bit of light at the tops of them; his irises are almost all black, but there's a little bit of light flooding in at the bottom. because i love to torture myself with tsukasa angst (lol), i like to interpret this specific lightning choice as representing understanding beginning to dawn for tsukasa. a literal flicker of hope. maybe... amane does care about him? maybe amane does want him around? he might just be starting to understand that amane cares, but he needs it explained more, needs it spelled out. hanako's actions have not suggested this is true, so all he can go off of are hanako's words. he needs more words from hanako to make it make sense. so? why would that matter? he's starting to get it, but he has to ask, especially since it goes against all the other signs he's been given.

but, of course, hanako is hanako/amane is amane (i love him but he does win worst communicator for more than fifty years running <3 lmao) so he takes this as a rejection, and doles out his own in return, not hearing the request tsukasa is making, thus affirming what tsukasa already thought: that he hates tsukasa.

the mix of light and dark is gone from tsukasa'a eyes after hanako says "i hate you so much."

his face and eyes are flush with light--with clarity. i know you hate me, amane. no more doubt, no more questions, no more hope.

i'm obsessed with the angst of this entire interaction, and tsukasa asking, "so?" is the hinge it all rests on. the moment of suspension.

here's their chance. here is tsukasa wanting to understand why hanako isn't going through with the plan just because the two of them would never see each other again. here is hanako's chance to explain that he cares.

but it can't line up, not expressed like this. not with "do you love me?" tsuakasa and "of course!" amane. not when they're both so sure their love for the other is obvious, not when they both hear rejection in everything. not when they've both come to expect loneliness as a default, to the point where the other caring about them is never the logical conclusion in their eyes, no matter how obvious their love for the other seems to themselves.

here is a beginning, here in tsukasa's eyes, in his question. but both of them are only ever expecting an end.

(this analysis of tsukasa's eyes in this interaction also connects to the seed of a larger theory i want to explore more soon, which is the possibility that tsukasa's eyes going black isn't necessarily--or at least not exclusively--about the entity's powers taking over, but rather/additionally a reflection of his emotional state... but then that also ties into the really long post i'm trying to wrangle into coherence about tsukasa being genuinely tsukasa... so i may have to elaborate on that another time lol)

thank you again for the ask!! i really love diving into all the possible meanings behind specific/small moments, so i had a lot of fun with this!!

[ughgoaway]

it is officially my 1 year anniversary of writing and posting my first fic, thus starting this whole tumblr thing! it was technically from my old blog that got deleted, but I still count it because this was the day it all started for me.

I still remember the anxiety of posting my first fic, waking up to see all the love it had recieved over night was so incredible. I might look back on it now and cringe, but I'm thankful for it anyway. and hopefully, over this past year, I have grown and gotten better. But even if I haven't, I've had so much fun doing it.

it might sound cheesy and a little sad to some people, but tumblr has honestly been such a positive force in my life for the past year, perhaps one of the only ones. it has brought me more joy, love, and friendship than I could've ever imagined.

the community I have on here is so close to my heart, and I truly adore all of you. thank you for putting up with me and reading my stuff for a whole year, I appreciate every one of you more than words can say.

I never thought I'd be here this long, and part of me feels like I'm kind of on borrowed time. But I will stay for as long as I'm still passionate about writing, and for as long as y'all are here enjoying it.

anyway, ik this is tumblr, and it's not that serious, but it is to me. thank you all for everything! I love you :)

[kheprriverse]

Y’all thinking about an older Ares has RUINED me

[re-colligere]

With all due respect...why do some shippers think that shipping comes with a legally binding contract where it says you HAVE to ship two people specifically, and liking any other pairing that involves one or two parties from the first pairing is a punishable offense that could send you to jail unless you officially "switch sides". I feel like the fun part of shipping is leaving our hands fellas. It's not supposed to be a competition of which ship is the best because of so and so--any ship can be the best because, guess what, this is an extremely subjective matter! Any ship is someone else's best ship!! It happens!!!

I'm feeling there's like secret shipping rules we have to abide for some reason. And at some point you've gotta ask why you have to stick by them. "Oh I can only ship one ship for x character" "I have to put all of x's ships in one timeline so some of them won't work out naturally and thus I don't like them" "multishipping is like cheating" these are all lies designed to pit us against each other. None of these are true. Other ships don't exist to attack you or your tastes. There is no need to say who's the best and therefore the ONLY ship allowed to exist. And the thing about multishipping is that these characters' relationships are fictional. Whatever they "do" does NOT have to directly affect anything ever. Different ships can exist in different scenarios. It's okay to play with your touys.

Not saying you have to like every ship there is in your fandom, nor you HAVE to multiship, you CAN have your opinions and interests obviously. I'm just saying if those opinions are personal or whatever (goes against my personal hcs / doesn't make sense to me / nuanced or simple bald answer. etc) you don't have to attack each other or put other ships down. In fact you can enjoy multiple ships if you want. It's fun. It's fine.

You're not going to go to jail if you give a character multiple bitches. I promise.

[dust-jacket-analysis]

There's a lot of discourse going on over on TikTok right now regarding Booktok. And as an avid reader, Booktok watcher, and someone who has a deep love for analyzing the media I enjoy, I'd feel remis if I didn't get my thoughts out there.

I know these particular posts never got much engagement when I posted on my old account, but if I could please just have a bit of your time. This is all apart of a larger subject of which I'm extremely passionate on.

Four days ago Booktoker @bookishwithb aka, Celine, posted a video. In that video she talked about the rise of anti-intellectualism, specifically on booktok. She addresses the way books are "marketed" or presented on booktok, and also how that has an impact on the publishing industry.

Her main talking point was how a lot of books are being recommended based on what tropes are in them. More specifically, reduced based on those tropes. Her example being the Poppy War, by R.F Kuang.

She talked about how she's seen it marketed as a book with "a strong female main character." And how infuriating that was to her. She went on to explain how there was so much more to the book and how it was about war, and trauma, and how dark and deep and impactful it is. I highly recommend this video to anyone interested. Because while controversial it says a lot about the "tropeification" of media (which will probably be a post by me sometime in the future).

And as is the ways of the internet, this sparked something huge.

So many different creators responded to her video. Some agreeing, most disagreeing. There's been outrage, and healthy debate. But mainly (and most importantly) conversation. Everyone throwing their two cents in, people defending the right to read what you want how you want.

And since the original video went up, this conversation has taken on a life of it's own. It's now become about reading for fun Vs. reading for analysis.

Many argue that it doesn't matter why people read, or how. Just that they are. Others argue it's a sign of a bigger issue that readers no longer engage in the story's their reading.

I have my own opinions. I agree with both sides on certain things, and am overall enjoying the discussions. But, as always, I have things to say.

There are some books that, while entertaining and a fun read, have no substance per say. No analytical value. I think a lot of those three-hundred page medium spice romance books you find on a table at Barnes and Noble fall under this category.

Now, I really love reading those books. Their quick easy reads that keep me entertained. But, they really cannot be analyzed past surface level. Very much not a time to try and think critically.

Those are the books I read for escapism. When I just want to decompress and turn off my brain. Or make a long car ride pass by quickly. And that's okay. Yes? Because it's still reading. I am still gaining something from it. Physiological benefits, it's encouraging and strengthening my empathy. I am still (in some cases) increasing my Lexile, and keeping my brain working. Which is amazing.

Other times I read things with very high analytical value. Such as High Fantasy Novels with social commentary reflecting our world. Or Dystopia packed full with metaphor, allegory, and symbolism. Or even my most recent read for college: Brown Girl In The Ring, by Nalo Hopkinson. An amazing book commenting on the suburban sprawl, and urban decay. Sprinkled with magical realism regarding Afro-Caribbean culture, and even mentions of Romani practices such as Tarot.

These are books I read knowing I need to turn on the part of my brain that's very analytical. That enjoys breaking things down in that way. Storylines I have to engage with on an additional level, otherwise I miss the entire point of this story. It's not only important, but necessary.

So, yes. Reading is reading, now matter what. And any reading is better than no reading. And we should foster that mindset, especially amongst younger generations. But, that doesn't mean you should never engage critically with a book or show or movie you're consuming. Because some media requires that for a base level understanding. And saying that doesn't make me elitist. Or pretentious or judgmental or a snob. Because it's really just true.

I've seen a lot of creators bring up the literacy crisis in youth, specifically in my country (America). How many kids can't read at a level they should be in elementary schools. Even in Highschool. And that we really should all just be content there's an entire community at least reading at all. That we should encourage any and all reading.

And to that I say... yes, but no.

Because here's the thing. There is in the most literal sense, a literacy crisis. The kid's can't read. And it is absolutely devastating. As someone who grew up devouring books every week, reading three grades above my own, it's soul crushing. So I do think reading should be more pushed and encouraged. In school, in the home, everywhere. As much as possible and appropriate for children. Any and all.

But, there's also another literacy crisis. A Media literacy crisis.

Media literacy, the ability to critically analyze and engage with media, is at an all time low. According to a survey done by Media Literacy Now and, the Reboot Foundation, 42% of respondents were taught how to analyze media. Let that sink in. 42%. That's less than half the people who participated in the survey.

(More statistics generated by AI with the following prompt: Give me reliable statistics regarding media literacy in terms of books/reading:

A Survey done by the National Endowment for the Humanities states 65% of adults have low literary skills when it comes to reading comprehension, critical thinking, and expression.

Pew research conducted a survey with resulted in 57% America adults having read at least one book in the last year. With 26% American adults not having read any form of book in the past year. Including audio books.

The American Library Association has said that the average American only reads four books per year. And more developed countries only have average citizens at ten books a year.

An Survey done by Reading Partners has said that 1 and 4 children read at a below basic level by the end of 4th grade.)

And we see this sentiment echoes all over the internet. Constantly videos are made with people talking about how they were never taught Media literacy, and their should be a class all about just that (Which... I have thoughts on. Again, another post).

Even though you can (rightly) argue that this skill was taught. In English class. That's not the point. The point is that people cannot only not read, but most young adults and fully grown adults cannot read critically. Cannot, will not, and aren't.

And in some cases it's because they don't and still don't have the resources. But these statistics aren't just minorities, people in poverty. These surveys and statistics cover people from every walk of life. Poor, Rich, White, Black, Asian, Hispanic. Queer, Straight, Trans, Cis. All ethnicities, wealth brackets, identities. Every demographic. It's indictive of a larger issue.

So we should encourage reading for fun. Reading to read. Reading for escapism. Reading of every kind. But, to claim that there isn't an issue? To trample creators addressing these issues with insults? To claim it's them being pretentious, snobby, elitest, Privileged etc.? That's feeding the issue.

Recently my friend recommended me a video essay, which I unfortunately can't find (Will edit the title when I can).

But in that video, my friend told me that the creator says something... so insightful. She defines stupid as this: Not a lack of knowledge, but the unwillingness to accept new knowledge.

Which is just... such a perfect way to look at it.

You aren't "stupid" for not knowing how to think critically. For not having learned to analyze media, and for not having the resources to do so. But if you have the resources, have the ability to learn how, and you don't/refuse? That makes you stupid.

And by burying your head in the sand and claiming that there is no issue, by hiding behind pseudo offense and that claims of judgement, you're being stupid.

Don't be outraged that the creator of the video that started this all. Don't feel "called out" or judged. Don't put words in her mouth. She wasn't saying people cannot read for enjoyment. She was simply pointing out a larger issue.

--------------------------------------------

To end this very long and tedious post, I'd like to provide a couple of videos in order to help improve Media Literacy! Just some videos I've watched that I found helpful (Also if you just go on youtube and search up "how to analyze..." you'll find so much more)

Crash Course Media Literacy: A playlist series that breaks down media literacy and the history of media as a whole.

How to analyze a Book- 101: This video gives techniques on how to better understand what you're reading, and how to find the main themes and organize them. It gives tips and processes.

How to Read (and Understand) Hard Books: This video breaks down the three types of reading and even gives book recommendations that touch on that.

A beginner's guide to Critical Literary Analysis: This video is made by fellow tumblr user @bluemooniegif (One of us ✊One of us✊). A very good video for beginners. They literally opens the video telling the viewer you don't need any prior knowledge. They also has another video on her channel, which is just the next step up from this one! It's super great, and perfect if you're younger or have less of an understanding on any of this.

Diving into and developing media literacy skills takes effort. It's not a skill you can gain over night, and requires time. But, if you're willing to take that time, a whole new world opens up to you. And you begin to look at everything through a whole new light.

[kikiavci]

Hey, time for another one of these!

Last time I asked how everyone thinks time works in-universe for blaseball, and while I was planning on asking about how siestas work, I think enough people answered that too that I'm gonna skip to my next thought which is:

What are Umpires?

Again, some thoughts to get the ball rolling. (And again, I am disappointed by the character limit on polls >:T)

Umpires are humans. The ability to incinerate (or alternate/curse/quest) does not change this, and may be tied to their position. Any change in eye color is not symbolic of other changes.

Umpires look human. Perhaps they were at some point. Perhaps they are possessed. Perhaps they willingly gave up their humanity to the blaseball gods in exchange for their power to Rule. Perhaps their family cashes their checks, as the thing living among them has no need for things other than Splort.

Umpires are monsters. If they were ever human, opening the book was enough to change that. They are horrible, clawing, hungry things, fire barely contained by a black mask of Law. Given their established love of Blood, I would argue this is a surprisingly textual angle.

Consider also: Perhaps, werewolf-style, these things are changed by the presence/absence/nature of an eclipse?

[leronboi]

She knows lol

[leverage-ot3]

sorry to keep personal posting but my day fucking SUCKED and ended with me dropping one of my brand new earrings from a set that I just finished cleaning down the drain, took the sink apart and still couldn’t find it 🙃

if y’all feel like asking a leverage/misc question for thoughts or headcanons I’d love to answer them in the morning! or even if you just want to say something about your day- I just like hearing from you guys 💖

[feverdreamsandlucidnightmares]

Do you ever think about how Wolfwood has to die, how it is just as inevitable as his betrayal because Wolfwood is Judas and his betrayal and death are vital to the crucifixion story, he was damned the whole time in order to enact holy works that he never gets to see the benefit of because suicide is a mortal sin (is it suicide or martyrdom) and it damns you just as much as betraying God, except Jesus will forgive you if you just ask for it (Vash always forgives Wolfwood, always knows who and what Wolfwood is) but how can you do anything but die in penance for this?

Jesus and Judas both die. Jesus comes back of course, the empty grave, the Good News. And it makes you think about free will, right? Because that’s the whole point? That God wants to save you, wants you in Heaven, but you have to want it too? That it’s something you have to ask for? You have to ask for forgiveness, but it’s your choice. Jesus dies so you can make that choice. He’s the bridge between you and all your sins and the fact you’ll never actually be good enough on your own and a loving God who wants you in Heaven. It’s the only way.

But Judas betrays Jesus. He was always going to betray Jesus just like Jesus was always going to die for the sins of mankind and then he repents. That means he should go to Heaven, right? That’s free will, he did the bad thing and he’s sorry, he’s choosing to be sorry, to repent and that’s supposed to save you. But it doesn’t. He does it wrong. He’s damned. But he tried to do the right thing (Wolfwood tries to do the right thing).

Jesus died for everyone’s sins, but you can’t choose to die for your own. Where is your faith?

If Judas doesn’t betray Jesus how does the crucifixion happen? Someone has to betray Jesus. And Jesus knows it’s Judas. Is this still free will? If Judas has to betray Jesus in order to save everyone, so that Jesus can save everyone –because Judas isn’t actually saving anyone at all, he’s just damning humanity’s savior alongside him – is that not divine providence? That Judas does not get to be happy, and that Judas cannot live with the weight of his sins.

Judas Wolfwood is damned. How much of a say can he really have?

[froschli96]

you know, i always find it really funny when dudebros complain about syndicate and odyssey being too "jokey" or not "taking its characters seriously" or whatever…

like, did y'all collectively sleep through "it's-a me, mario!", "i meant besides vaginas", ezio inventing the latte, bartolomeo's... just... *gestures vaguely* entire character, etc?

like, it's fine to have preferences of course, i myself prefer a more serious and grounded tone, but these are usually the same people who tout the ezio trilogy as "peak assassin's creed", call ac1 a glorified tech demo and hate on connor for being "too serious and boring", like? make it make sense!

[dandyshucks]

GUESS WHO GOT ACCEPTED ONTO WELFARE THIS MORNING YAYYYYY

and my counsellor said she's going to get me onto a waitlist for low-income housing in town and i'll have priority over non-indigenous folks bc of my Metis status LETS FUCKING GOOOOO HUGE WIN

i am hoping to come back here relatively soon, but also we're entering the holiday season which is Rough for me so ,,, we shall see LOL. theres my update though! i hope everyones doing okay :]

[perfectlysunny02]

hi! so i don’t ship buddie anymore! please stop sending me asks about them.

[kaiserkisser]

today is such a stark contrast to yesterday in how much i fucking hate today (vent/rant in tags bc i forgor to do it on my vent one)

[rinzler-smoocher]

I love hearing people's headcanons about their blorbos, what are some you have about Rinz? :D

Wait wait, for real? You actually WANNA hear me go wild over my blorbo?? For serious?????????????????

But yeah, ok, sure, some Rinz hc! YEAH, let's do this!! I'll start with some serious ones & then go fluffy, cuz why not? :P I'll only drop a few items here so I don't bore you tho lol. & I'll keep my oc Flint out of it as best I can, it's just time to prattle on about Rinz for now!

Now... FOR SERIOUS:

As a part of his fun adventure in being rectified, Tron was never afraid to talk back or verbally lash out at Clu & his old, fallen comrades. After some very choice comments were made tho, Clu felt Tron went TOO far & so he took delight in personally mangling Rinzler's vocal synth capabilities. It's not that he can't talk... it just really REALLY fucking hurts to speak, which is why it sounds all staticky & distorted too...

Rinz also hates his face. Seeing his own appearance makes him physically ill. It has to be something with remembering bits & pieces of who he was before he awoke as Rinzler... but he has no idea why. Otherwise, his helmet is almost always engaged, keeping himself & others from seeing the disturbing creature he's hiding inside.

Rinzler is naturally competitive thanks to his start as Tron & he truly enjoys participating in the games. But whatever savage monstrous thing that kept Tron surviving in the MCP's reign took over in full as Rinzler. He doesn't necessarily enjoy ending the games through derezzing... but some vicious, horrible part of him craves the bloodbath. He doesn't care about the audience cheers or Clu's praise. Destroying others, watching those who oppose him crumble into voxels at his hands... it's purely addicting to him. The more Rinz feeds the beast, the more Clu throws him into battles, the more Rinzler needs to derezz & kill or risk turning into some sort of nightmare that won't stop until the entire Grid is reduced to rubble.

Now then, FOR FUN:

Part of Clu's rectifying of Tron also wound up giving Rinzler fangs & brutal glowing claws. It wasn't intentional, but makes the masked program that much more threatening, so Clu left it be lol.

LIKEWISE, Clu also found it as a special chance to try & take away some other minorly threatening aspects of Tron. From reducing Rinz's height to attempting - key word here is that he "tried" - to minimize Tron's absurd strength [if anything, this one totally backfired on Clu lol], which turned Rinzler into a fiesty small chihuahua of a program then xD

Despite hating his own appearance, he is a pathetic lovesick fool & if another he cares about manages to get him to lower his guard, he'll shamefully reveal his own face, just as long as you'll exchange his misery for kisses & all lol. He is a sucker for being fawned over lmaooo

Since the Grid isn't really big on food besides basic energy items, flavors are not something Rinz ever cared about. After getting to try some user foods, he found himself utterly obsessed with sour skittles & really spicy hot ramen noodles. He needs his user food on EXTREMES & flavorless blandness is all he ever knew until being introduced to the wide world of reality in the year 2000 lol.

Rinz doesn't really feel like he belongs in the Grid, but the user world is overwhelming, loud, bright & too much. Being stuck in his state as a not-Tron Tron, he feels like he's sort of in limbo, poor guy...

Rinzler also carries doubles of near everything on his person at all times. He's so used to having Clu's resources at hand that he never hesitates to use everything & every weapon in his arsenal, even if it means destroying his lightcycle just to get ahead. When he abandons Clu's regime, he realizes VERY quickly the batons don't just grow on trees & he has to be more mindful of that lol.

Oh & as he is a program of very few words, he's also one of very few items of ownership too. But as Rinz breaks out of Clu's control, he starts collecting all sorts of things, slowly making his small personal living quarters filled with tchotkes & momentos of his adventures too♡

& finally, since coming from the Grid, when Rinz is introduced to normal clothing irl, he finds he either has to have near skintight layers underneath whatever he's wearing to replicate the feeling of his exosuit, or wear things so baggy & loose that it's almost falling off of him lmaooo

[sketchy-tour]

A shame I wasn't able to find the motivation to finish my Halloween art in time for Halloween. Might still finish it and post it late for fun, especially since it's already lined.

Started it early and everything and I still couldn't make it. Oh well. That's what I get for getting distracted doodling silly stuff.