#stop being so uptight about morality with fictional characters

[strahable]

(if I misread your tone within your reblog, I sincerely apologize.)

This post... this post, man. I have a lot to say, but I'll start with:

Well, you see... they're fictional.

Honestly, I get it, some fictional characters have done some profoundly messed up things that make you sometimes question the writer's own choices. Those are the characters that you can't forgive because they're either so horribly written, written to be unforgivable, or they're just forever tainted in your eyes when you learn what they did.

However, in my book, Theo isn't any one of those things.

Theo was not only written to be hated, but then he was written to be redeemed. Now, I know it's Jeff Davis and this dude writes some deeply messed up stuff (unforgivable things). You can see it in the earlier seasons the most. However, Theo is one of the very few characters on that show that actually deserved to be redeemed.

Now, I don't want to go too far into that because that's not my point.

Beyond redemption, Theo's actions were not great, but at the same time... who the fuck cares? He's fictional? The only reasons to get upset about fiction is to judge the writers or to worry about the messages it's sending to people. Jeff Davis has rarely sent a good message (and created a safe space for creeps because of certain plots in his show), but Theo did NOT contribute to that.

"He committed murder," "He killed so many people!" Okay? We know? We also know that millions upon millions of other characters have.

Now, how many of y'all wanted to kill someone for real or condone murder after seeing a TV show character do it? Probably not many. I don't have the numbers, but I imagine that majority of well rounded and okay individuals did NOT want to commit murder after seeing it on TV. I'd say almost all of them.

Theo killing people left and right didn't make you want to do it any more than you did before.

The point I'm trying to make is that there are some actions that even if they're fictional or not, that can either send such horrific messages or that can be so badly written that they are unforgivable. What Theo did was none of those things.

The narrative HATED Theo. It wanted him to suffer. No one was being told ✨murder is okay✨

I would also like to add that Theo was GROOMED by the Dread Doctors. They made him that way. Does the narrative suggest he had the potential to be that way on his own? Yes. However, it's by characters who are not trustworthy in their objective opinions.

There are countless other scenes with Theo himself that suggests an uneven power dynamic between him and the Dread Doctors.

So, not only did Theo's actions not contribute to an overall bad message, but his actions were also rationalizable if you just consider how deeply messed up he was from a young age.

All of this adds up to my conclusion, simply put, who the fuck cares if people are woobifying Theo? It's literally not hurting anyone to do so.

I'm also not saying that thinking critically about characters like Theo is stupid, because it's not. I have done it myself. However, making an entire post about how someone should ALWAYS be thinking critically, and taking their fun away to act all pretentious (I apologize if I'm misreading your tone) about it, that... that is stupid.

Let people have fun when it doesn't hurt anyone else.

i love doing apologism for fictional characters. yes he killed people and ruined everything but thats ok bc i like him and hes my little baby. so who cares

[braininatankwithalaptop]

Okay, yes I'm sorry I have crossover-itis, but just stick with me here. The framing of Mother of Learning is pretty clear that Zorian's presence in the plot is akin to a rounding error in fate. Zach was chosen and Zorian stumbled into it. What if we take that meta-insertion of Zorian into Zach's plot and make it more literal?

Because I think taking some of the ideas and story beats from Omniscient Reader's Viewpoint and projecting them onto Mother of Learning would work very well.

I'm not sure on the specifics of how this would work (whether Zorian is from the "real world," whether there is a leveling system, who is the Han Sooyoung equivalent) but I do think that there are a lot of interesting themes and parallels overall to have fun with.

First of all, I think it'd be funny if Zorian's and Zach's dynamic is sort of like an inverse of Kim Dojka and Yoo Joonghyuk. Zach isn't Zorian's favorite, actually Zorian kind of hates the guy. He's way too extroverted, not very academic, and way too morally uptight to take the actions that Zorian thinks would solve the problem (maybe his favorite character is Kael? idk). But when Zorian finds himself in the story he thinks "aw beans, I have to stick to this asshole don't I?" Meanwhile Zach is very up front and clear about his interest and care about Zorian. Zorian can't understand it! Even when Zorian told Zach straight to his face that he's a work of fiction and that Zorian thinks his character arc is middling at best, he won't stop being super kind to him! It's frustrating! But none of that matters to Zach, because Zorian is (overall) a good person and has all his memories when Zach is stuck in a time loop. Besides, Zorian is like his opposite in all the good ways.

There are other elements that parallel kind of nicely and otherwise work well together. Zorian's empathy and Dokja's fourth wall. The way both those things have allowed them to understand others to a greater degree while also increasing the distance between them and people. The way both protags sacrifice themselves (at least to others) and the way it causes their friends distress.

There's a lot here, but there's so many moving pieces and liberties with both works that need to be taken to work I just wanted to broadly gesture at the connection instead of doing anything more.

[arbitrarygreay]

I watched all of Killjoys with @mimeparadox! - This being my third time through seasons 1 and 2, I probably enjoyed Dutch-D'avin the most I ever have, really seeing what the show was trying to convey with that relationship. That said, I still do not like the show's attempt to make them do insipid romantic fluff at the end of S4 and S5. They still work best as comrades. - There is no best season of the show. S2=S3=S4 > S1 > S5. S2 is the best the show does with its class conflicts, having discarded the Pretty People Dramz of S1. S3 is the most coherent in its character themes, everything lensed through the tragedy of Dutch and Aneela. S4 does the most payoff for all of the relationships in the show.

- Oh, poor S5. This is the first time I've rewatched it, and I did still have a good time. Basically, S5's weaknesses all have to do with it being the final season. The Prison arc is actually quite fun...so long as it has nothing to do with The Lady. In general, the show is not as good as when it remembers that they have to tie things up and finish off this alien invasion storyline. They're great at the serialized character/relationship elements, less good at the serialized plot parts. - The Prison arc shows that Lovretta could definitely be the showrunner for a classic spy competence porn show a la Nikita. - The Lady is still great as Khlyen's third failure as The Worst Dad to Murderous Teenage Daughter. The reason I love her as a garbage fave, whereas Angel's Connor is a (hah) narrative killjoy, is that The Lady's behavior does not cause the other characters to betray themselves. For the most part, The Lady incites the others to do more competence porn, whereas Connor just incited tedious interpersonal Dramz (with maybe the exception of the return of murderous Fred). - mimeparadox and I have discovered across watching multiple shows that the best character archetype is an ultra-competent slightly neurotic uptight character getting blindsided by their Feelings (bonus points if said Feelings are romantic). We have named this archetype Paris, named after Paris Gellar from Gilmore Girls. The Paris is such a powerful type, especially as a Big Bad, that Killjoys does it twice in a row, with Aneela and The Lady. - Intriguingly, I finally saw what the show was trying to do with a series-long arc for Johnny. - In S1, the seeds are planted for the fact that Johnny wants to do more than survive, he wants to have a stronger emotional anchor than just being with Dutch (he is Dutch's gravity, but the reverse isn't true). In S1, this manifests in his being intrigued by Scarback spirituality. In S2, this manifests in his becoming more invested in Westerley's class politics (with Pawter) than Dutch's more self-centered investigation of the Hullen. And in S5, he decides that being a rootless Killjoy isn't viable in the long term. He doesn't want the warrant to be all. - Of course, the execution gets muddled, because Johnny on the mission Fun Train is entirely too compelling, as are his dynamics with everyone else on the team. Note how S3 and S4 aren't mentioned above, as in those seasons, with the exception of the Hackmod Arc, Johnny is focused on Dutch's war with Aneela and The Lady. The fact that there's no issue with the character dropping his series arc for two seasons shows that this arc isn't really critical to his character at all. - And that's exactly the conclusion that the show itself comes to, with the Oneyer absence tossed aside in the end for a "one for the road" of indefinite length. - Part of this, though, is not a betrayal of the series arc because at the end of the series, Johnny is not still simply a Killjoy, for whom the warrant is all. He's a new Level Six, and so has a purpose to genuinely care about (which also happens to enable his pursuing the other missions he wants on the side, like The Factory). - I got a better sense for Dutch's series long arc, too, which was really interesting, because she is never actually a hero in her own motivation. She is basically selfishly motivated from beginning to end, but just slightly growing the circle of who she considers under her protection. Dutch's driving motivation at the beginning of the series is to flee anything that might impinge on her personal freedom. Then, she decides to fight back instead of flee, which means that she seeks having just enough power to do so. S4 is about how she balks at the responsibility that comes with it, which we discover is rooted in how she's having an identity crisis about her biological family. In S5, she comes to a more stable place in her identity and how much responsibility she's willing to take on to defend her home, but grapples with some of the remaining things impinging on her emotional freedom (the loss of the certainty of Johnny, and then cycle of Khlyen's abuse). - Which is to say, it's pretty cool that we get to have a science fiction where where the central protagonist gets to be basically a shameless charismatic hedonist. She's all but said that she's basically outsourced her morality to the rest of her team. This is a rare character complexity for any genre show protagonist, much less a lady. And it makes the writing extra impressive for setting up the plot and world so that such a protagonist gets guided into doing heroic actions entirely on following a selfish priority through the incentive gradients. - This is all really only possible because Turin is a good boss, though. If she had a RAC supervisor who played power politics with her, she'd be toast (and probably quit the RAC to fly away in a heartbeat). Of course, that Turin is a good boss is meant to illustrate how the RAC is a an outfit that takes in misfits, people who are loathe to (and already failed to) play traditional social politics as opposed to mere sportsmanship competition (thing-oriented people over person-oriented people). They have to be the kind of people who could ever believe that the Warrant is all in the first place. - Killjoys never truly grapples with its politics. I stand by my previous stance that this is a good thing, because the very core build of its protagonists prevents that. This show, ah, kind of embraces ACAB as a good thing, nothing of which to mention how Delle Seyah and Aneela becoming allies therefore results in a "yasss genocidal girlboss aristocracy slay" conclusion? ("Colonialism is good if they appoint an emotionally invested immigrant warlord as governor") - Killjoys' broader wonky politics doesn't bother me, because FUN TRAIN! DO NOT STOP THE FUN TRAIN!! Seriously, there were definitely plot holes in this show that never went away, and I did not really care because almost every given moment of the show was delightful. The lore of how Hullen/The Green worked was laughably inconsistent, and I did not really care because the lore was whatever it was at the moment to enable storylines that were really fun. In fact, joking about the inconsistency of the lore therefore became its own pleasure, because it still did not detract from my enjoyment of canon. Altered Carbon shows how the prestige version of Killjoys would have been no fun at all. Down with Prestige TV. Which isn't to say that I've changed my mind on character vs. world-building as source for plots! I remain dedicated to my apathy to Wynonna Earp, which is a show which nominally builds its world/plot to service character, but leaves me cold. What Killjoys has, in contrast, is a rock solid world-building foundation, and then we watch the fireworks of character reacting to the setting and each other, with characters themselves serving as expressions of world-building. This is why Killjoys' writing is weakest when it has to plot for the sake up wrapping up plot and character threads, instead of plot as per how character interactions with the world organically develop. The way this doesn't contradict with the above is that Killjoys firmly declares what parts of the world-building are really important, which is the setup of institutions that determines the power-dynamics between any two given characters. Plot elements that aren't about that can be wishy-washy without therefore making the characters look incompetent. (With the exception of "stick a knife in the necks of all of the Hullen already!" because that's a very tangible action anyone can do, as opposed a squishy genre detail.)

[unreliable-narratoe]

Man, I have this take too. I think he was in his right mind and LWJ misunderstands gui dao (and he learns better in the second life- because if LWJ still thinks gui dao is harmful and doesn't comment on it, it's... Kind of weird?) Now some of the fandom agree gui dao is alright and doesnt harm the mind when there's a 'WWX had the responsibility to stop gui dao if it was affecting him and the people around him!' take but overblow WWX's "helplessness" in Jin Zixuan's death.

He was not led astray by his evil powers imo- he was consistently on edge, thought he could do everything by himself because if it's him it's okay if he hurts because he can power through and made a wrong call. If it wasn't Wen Ning but a sword in his head, Jin Zixuan would still have gotten run over.

The flute thing solidified that gui dao is more External too! Because no way is he letting a kid chew on resentment energy lmao. He's far too Good for that. I just think he's an incredibly charismatic and endearing person (hence why the wens warmed up to him) but in that current political climate he made some unfortunate calls because he thought he could combat it all with the fear he amassed as YLLZ.

Like he would win a battle but lose the war because he's focused on the daily everyday people and that's ALRIGHT. It's just how things are sometimes, and it's why the tragedy is more compelling. Maybe things would have turned out better if he did X or Y or if his loved ones did X or Y but there's never a guarantee, much like real life. So I think we should all give everybody who tried their best ( talking about WWX here in particular but also other characters) some grace without taking away their 'flaws'. Ofc it's alright to hate a character, that's different consumption of media and opinions, but interpreting everyone uncharitably and in black and white makes for a boring story. It's fiction for a reason.

Sj too! I wouldn't want to be near him in real life, but he's a very compelling character and reducing him only to Child Abuser or woobifyjng him in serious discourse is a disservice to the writing.

And the nies are so interesting!! Technically their cultivation is the closest to 'demonic and they only scrape by because at least the swords are inanimate objects of resentment.

Also RE; LWJ's come back to Gusu with me. Oh man... that one was so.... for some reason people think WWX is oblivious??? The man climbed LWJ like a tree the moment he clocked actual interest. WWX is not oblivious lmao he's working with some comphet, but in the first life he simply has a lot going on. He doesn't have time for romance + LWJ is being so vague here.... imagine the uptight guy that went around telling you your obviously FINE cultivation you're using because you don't have a golden core (cannot overstate how much this impacted WWX) is evil and needs to be stopped is asking you to come back to Gusu?? Like whaaaat?? And where is LWJ going to put the wen remnants?? (Even if they communicated, WWX didn't let his own sect come under fire for protection the wen remnants. He kept saying he could deal with it himself. Why would he take advice from someone, who in his pov, is holier than thou?? Only we know LWJ's motivations)

They all have lives outside each other and beyond the protag centered morality regardless of what mxtx says about good person-bad person, so it's just a shame to reduce them to any one pining archetype imo

If one more person calls wuxians ghost path 'demonic cultivation' with no /j attached i will take arms the way nie huaisan does it (cry)

[emma-what-son]

(Echee post) Emma Watson says J.K Rowling's quote about Hermione ending up with Harry was taken out of context and it was a joke

Posted March 6, 2014

From mtv.com/news may 2014, "Watson also seemed somewhat pessimistic about the longevity of the popular pairing, sharing at the time, "I think there are fans out there who know that too and who wonder whether Ron would have really been able to make her happy." But Watson's tune may have changed just a bit, as the starlet took to the red carpet at tonight's Oscars (her first time attending the big show, if you can believe it) and told MTV's own Josh Horowitz, "It was a real shame, because the quote that she gave was completely taken out of context." Emma change her tune? Noooooo way she would never do that!! =)~ MTV left out the part where she said it was just a joke From ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com March 2014, "It was a real shame, because the quote that she gave was completely taken out of context, and if you read the whole interview it was completely not how it was framed but it was actually kind of a joke." You know the funny part is? This is the Wonderland Magazine that Emma herself guest edited and Emma herself conducted the interview with J.K. Rowling. How could it be possibly taken out of context or even be considered a joke? There is nothing in the writing that suggests it's a joke. Maybe if the interview was conducted by video you could see their facial expressions that would tip you off that they were joking. This is typical Emma changing her tune but only because the HP fandom lost their shit over fictional characters. JK and Emma are back tracking now. I don't really care because to me it's a book made into a movie but this is Emma deceiving others as usual.

Actually I read the entire interview and what is being taken out of context and where is the punch line? Here is the part of the interview with JK about Hermione ending up with harry instead of Ron. From ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com Feb 2014 Emma: I thought we should discuss Hermione... I'm sure you've heard this a million times but now that you have written the books, do you have a new perspective on how you relate to Hermione and the relationship you have with her or had with her? JK: I know that Hermione is incredibly recognizable to a lot of readers and yet you don't see a lot of Hermione's in film or on TV except to be laughed at. I mean that the intense, clever, in some ways not terribly self-aware, girl is rarely the heroine and I really wanted her to be the heroine. She is part of me, although she is not wholly me. I think that is how I might have appeared to people when I was younger, but that is not really how I was inside. What I will say is that I wrote the Hermione/Ron relationship as a form of wish fulfillment. That's how it was conceived, really. For reasons that have very little to do with literature and far more to do with me clinging to the plot as I first imagined it, Hermione with Ron. Emma: Ah. JK: I know, I'm sorry, I can hear the rage and fury it might cause some fans, but if I'm absolutely honest, distance has given me perspective on that. It was a choice I made for very personal reasons, not for reasons of credibility. Am I breaking people's hearts by saying this? I hope not. Emma: I don't know. I think there are fans out there who know that too and who wonder whether Ron would have really been able to make her happy. JK: Yes exactly. Emma: And vice versa. JK: It was a young relationship. I think the attraction itself is plausible but the combative side of it... I'm not sure you could have got over that in an adult relationship, there was too much fundamental incompatibility. I can't believe we are saying all of this – this is Potter heresy! Emma: I know, it is heresy. JK: In some ways Hermione and Harry are a better fit and I'll tell you something very strange. When I wrote Hallows, I felt this quite strongly when I had Hermione and Harry together in the tent! I hadn't told [Steve] Kloves that and when he wrote the script he felt exactly the same thing at exactly the same point. Emma: That is just so interesting because when I was doing the scene I said to David [Heyman]: "This isn't in the book, she didn't write this". I'm not sure I am comfortable insinuating something however subtle it is! JK: Yes, but David and Steve – they felt what I felt when writing it. Emma: That is so strange. JK: And actually I liked that scene in the film, because it was articulating something I hadn't said but I had felt. I really liked it and I thought that it was right. I think you do feel the ghost of what could have been in that scene. Emma: It's a really haunting scene. It's funny because it really divided people. Some people loved that scene and some people really didn't. JK: Yes, some people utterly hated it. But that is true of so many really good scenes in books and films; they evoke that strong positive/negative feeling. I was fine with it, I liked it. Emma: I remember really loving shooting those scenes that don't have any dialogue, where you are just kind of trying to express a moment in time and a feeling without saying anything. It was just Dan and I spontaneously sort of trying to convey an idea and it was really fun. JK: And you got it perfectly, you got perfectly the sort of mixture of awkwardness and genuine emotion, because it teeters on the edge of "what are we doing? Oh come on let's do it anyway", which I thought was just right for that time. Emma: I think it was just the sense that in the moment they needed to be together and be kids and raise each other's morale. JK: That is just it, you are so right. All this says something very powerful about the character of Hermione as well. Hermione was the one that

stuck with Harry all the way through that last installment, that very last part of the adventure. It wasn't Ron, which also says something very powerful about Ron. He was injured in a way, in his self-esteem, from the start of the series. He always knew he came second to fourth best, and then had to make friends with the hero of it all and that's a hell of a position to be in, eternally overshadowed. So Ron had to act out in that way at some point. But Hermione's always there for Harry. I remember you sent me a note after you read Hallows and before you started shooting, and said something about that, because it was Hermione's journey as much as Harry's at the end. Emma: I completely agree and the fact that they were true equals and the fact that she really said goodbye to her family makes it her sacrifice too. JK: Yes, her sacrifice was massive, completely. A very calculated act of bravery. That is not an 'in the moment' act of bravery where emotion carries you through, that is a deliberate choice. Emma: Exactly. I love Hermione. JK: I love her too. Oh, maybe she and Ron will be alright with a bit of counseling, you know. I wonder what happens at wizard marriage counseling? They'll probably be fine. He needs to work on his self-esteem issues and she needs to work on being a little less critical. Emma: I think it makes sense to me that Ron would make friends with the most famous wizard in the school because I think life presents to you over and over again your biggest and most painful fear – until you conquer it. It just keeps coming up. JK: That is so true, it has happened in my own life. The issue keeps coming up because you are drawn to it and you are putting yourself in front of it all the time. At a certain point you have to choose what to do about it and sometimes conquering it is choosing to say: I don't want that anymore, I'm going to stop walking up to you because there is nothing there for me. But yes, you're so right, that's very insightful! Ron's used to playing second fiddle. I think that's a comfortable role for him, but at a certain point he has to be his own man, doesn't he? Emma: Yes and until he does it is unresolved. It is unfinished business. So maybe life presented this to him enough times until he had to make a choice and become the man that Hermione needs. JK: Just like her creator, she has a real weakness for a funny man. These uptight girls, they do like them funny. Emma: They do like them funny, they need them funny. JK: It's such a relief from being so intense yourself – you need someone who takes life, or appears to take life, a little more light heartedly.

^This post made Ron cry, lol I really don't care who ended up with who because it's a movie. I lost no sleep over it or thought about it much until I read the quote of Emma changing her tune as MTV pointed out. I will say this. In the Half Blood Prince when Ron was in the Hospital after mistakenly consuming a love potion meant for Harry there was an exchange between Hermione and Lavender Brown where Hermione said, "I've always found him interesting" meaning Ron. There was also that scene in DH2 where Hermione said she couldn't destroy the horocrux and it took Ron to coach her up to do it. There was that scene after that where they were looking for Harry using the marauders map and Ron remembered what Hermione told him about the room of requirement not being on the map and she was surprised he remembered. Then there was the Order of the Phoenix when Ron tricked Malfoy and the rest of them (with a spell of which I forget) and they got away while Hermione and Harry lead Umbridge into the Forrest. When Hermione came back she was impressed by him. I think Ron and Hermione would be just fine if they were real. They actually compliment each other by being total opposites. I'm sure true Potter fans have better examples for Ron and Hermione. Btw Emma was about Ron and Hermione for years and years. I'd post the quotes but I think true Potter fans know this to be true so there would be no argument there. It's something me and Emma fans probably agree on. I think hell just froze over. As for what Emma said about Ron making Hermione happy and stuff. In my opinion she's purely speaking from her own taste in men since she goes for the Viktor Krum's (Matt Janney/Tom Ducker) and Cormac McLaggen's (Will Adamowicz/Jay Barrymore). Emma is more of  mix of Sam (Perks) and Nicki (TBR) than she was ever Hermione. Emma would never date a Ron Weasley in real life. It's beneath her and there would be a reality gap between them since Emma lives in her own head and is out of touch with normal people. So really that statement is a full on Emmione moment where she's doing her thinking for a fictional character that is totally different from "the real Emma Watson". I've said this numerous times. If Hermione were real she would not think too kindly of Emma. Shy and introverted post is coming one of these days. I keep on saying that but it is. I put this post together in 15 minutes. I've been working on the other one for two weeks on and off by procrastinating with it mostly. It's not that complicated I'm just being lazy getting all the photos and quotes together I need. And while were on this shipping business

She supposedly interviewed JGL in Wonderland Magazine but it was not formatted like her other Interviews where she talked just as much as the person she was interviewing so this leads to believe she actually didn’t interview JGL. It was a straight Q&A without it reading like a conversation between two people in the same room like the others. And JGL has done Wonderland a few times in the past so I don’t think this was Emma’s request. Then they presented together at the Oscars. Coincidence or more Hollywood smoke and mirrors? Fans are shipping (weirdo movement) these two and it was all for show. Ok I’m going to join this weirdo movement of shipping! JGL and Dan forever!!

[funkymbtifiction]

MBTI’ing the OTP: Valentine’s Day Special

By Mysterylover123

These are just my personal ships, FYI - you don’t like em, no problem. Just thought I’d analyze the MBTI types of all my faves. Happy Valentine’s Day.

Friends: Chandler and Monica - ISFJ & ESFJ

If I had to pick my idea of a great IRL romance, this would be it. Best friends who fall in love. Chandler is the ISFJ, hesitant, eager to be liked, sticking to his guns and more practical in some ways than Monica. Monica has been typed as both ESTJ & ESFJ, and I can see a case for both - she’s ESFJ on this site and ESTJ on others. Either way, she’s more controlling and uptight than Chandler, but in some ways less practical and more emotion-driven. They make an interesting couple that works surprisingly well, who manage to balance out each others’ strengths and weaknesses nicely.

Steven Universe: Ruby and Sapphire - ESTP & INFJ

The OTP to end them all, Ruby and Sapphire are an interesting case of opposites attracting. They have the exact inverted functions of each other, Se-Ti-Fe-Ni, and combine to form the ISTP Garnet. Ruby is impulsive and Sapphire sees the future. Ruby is aggressive and Sapphire patient. They’re a great match, though potentially volatile since they’re so opposite and yet so similar. It makes crazy sense for characters with inverted functions to form a permafusion.

Harry/Ginny (ISFP/ESTP)

Everyone has a HP OTP, it seems, and mine is HG. These two have a pretty classic MBTI romance combination - both SP artisans, who like living in the moment and are often impulsive. Harry is more emotional and broody and Ginny is more logical and practical. One interesting point that I think makes these two compatible is that Harry’s Fi makes him hard to talk to and comfort easily; it takes someone with extraordinary tact and patience to get him to communicate, and Ginny has that as a Ti/Fe user - a strong perception of others’ needs. Makes them pretty perfect for each other.

Swarkles Robin/Barney (ISTP/ENTP)

These two have a rather unusual combination of MBTI - Both high Ti users but different perceiving functions. Robin, the ISTP, is a clear pragmatist who has difficulty with emotions. Barney is a big idea guy who bounces from one thing to the next endlessly, with the philosophy that new is always better. Both are a bit on the impulse, fun-loving side in this case, making for a very whacky couple with lots of sitcom adventures. Favorite line between them: “I’m such a mess, why do you even like me?” “I guess cause you’re almost as messed up as I am.”

Buffy/Faith (ESFP/ESTP)

Time to put my Buffy-verse OTPs out there! Once upon a time, I did ship Spuffy, but I’ve turned to the Fuffy side of things as time went by. Anyway, Buffy and Faith are both Se noms who love action and living in the moment. This goes badly for them in “Bad Girls” but there is a certain degree of mutual understanding between two Se doms. The difference is their T/F functions - Faith is utilitarian and Buffy inwardly moral. However, as the series goes on they come to a better understanding of each other. I always enjoy their chemistry, even if they don’t get to be canon.

Angel/Cordelia (ISFJ/ESTJ)

My biggest Buffy-verse OTP, one most people don’t get into without seeing the spinoff show Angel. But Cangel has my heart. I love slow-burn friendship ships. Anyway, the MBTI. Both strong Si users, but with a nice balance between them; Angel has the ideals and empathy that influence Cordelia to be a kinder person with his Si/Fe;  Cordy has the grounded practicality to keep Angel from disappearing into broodiness, and they balance each other out perfectly for the first 3 seasons of the show. Definitely love this one and always angry at Whedon for not letting it happen.

Daria/Jane (INFP/ISFP)

Don’t know if  y’all have seen Daria, but check it out of you have the time. It’s great. Anyway, another one with two of the same dominant functions: Both Fi’s. This means they’re both highly moral introverts who love artistic expression but struggle with expressing feelings aloud. That’s Daria and Jane, all right. The contrasting perceiving functions show in how Jane is more willing to engage in the world and give stuff (cheerleading at one point) a try, while Daria is more hesitant and less engaged. I do ship them - they’re best friends and the show wasn’t shy about teasing them. Noncanon ship here.

Clois - Clark Kent/Lois Lane (ISFP/ESTP)

I love these two in any incarnation - I’m a sucker for bickering friends to lovers - but my favorite is Smallville. The same MBTI makeup as Harry/Ginny earlier - I guess I like this combination. Again, part of what makes it work is the similar perceiving functions, but nicely balanced TF opposites. FI can get a little brooding and introverted on itself, while Ti/Fe can sometimes become too pragmatic and insensitive, so they help each other out in a lot of ways. Something about Clark/Lois just works for me - another pairing of a sweetheart dreamer and a snarky pragmatist who bicker because they care.

Harley Quinn/Poison Ivy (ESFP/ENFJ)

My favorite incarnation of these two is the animated series version - they have such great chemistry there and Timm says they are canon here. Anyway, this combo is rather frequent in fiction, ENFJ often paired off with high Se users for some reason. Ivy as the ENFJ has a lot of tact, perception and motherly behavior that helps her sweet-talk and care for the impulsive and damaged Harley. Harley, the ESFP, has a certain knack for connecting to others, and helps Ivy avoid becoming too misanthropic, since Ivy kinda hates humans in general. Great pair of wicked gal pals.

Frasier’s Niles/Daphne (INFJ/ENFP)

One of my rare pairings with complete opposite functions. But in some ways my very first OTP. They’re both Intuitive dominants, dreamers with their minds in the clouds, who are attracted to each other but take forever to act on it in any way. Both are emotionally driven - Niles outwardly, Daphne inwardly - with strong personal ethics; tertiary Thinking functions, and inferior Sensing functions. They’re definitely opposites attract, but with a caveat of perfectly aligning functions. I love this ship so damn much; it’s such a great mix of hot chemistry and tender love.

Spider-Man and Mary Jane Watson (INTP/ENFP)

Peter and MJ have many different incarnations, with varying functions. The consistent seems to be that Peter uses some kind of Ti (ISFJ, ISTP, ESTP, INTP) and is usually an introvert, while MJ is an extrovert with a strong intuitive function (ENFP/ENFJ) or occasionally adapted into an ISFP. Either way, my favorite version is the comics, which lean towards the first interpretation. As an iNTP I get along well with the ENFPs in my life, but more importantly I love this pairing too. High Ne combo that sees the possibilities in the world, and the classic Ti/Te balance.

MCU Stucky - Steve/Bucky (ISFJ/ESTP)

I have some other MM slash pairs, but they’re mostly from anime so they’re not on this list. Anyway, Stucky. Both Fe/Ti users, with dominant sensing functions of different perceptions. Steve is more of a stick-to-it kinda guy, Bucky is more willing to try other options (this pops up a lot in their interactions, with Bucky suggestion different Paths and Steve not backing down. Who says Se’s are more stubborn than Si’s?). There is a great devotion between the two, though. I know it won’t be canon but that never stopped anyone from shipping before.

Gravity falls Dipper/Pacifica (INTJ/ESTJ)

Another noncanon one. This is a very unusual combo, I can’t think of many stories that even have these two types. Both are high Te users, which in this case practically guarantees a Bickering Sexual Tension kind of relationship. Both are pragmatic and long-term planners, with Dipper being an Ni-dom who overplans and over-thinks everything, Pacifica a strong pragmatist. Both are Type A’s with a lot in common, who learn from each other. His stronger Fi function helps her come to terms with her lower Fi, and act morally. It’s very sweet.

Parks and Recreation Andy/April (ENFP/INTP?)

I’m a little uncertain of April’s type, since I’ve seen lots of different typings for her across the board. My best guess for now is INTP. Another pairing I just adore, this time canon and married. They’ve got just a great balance, both being impulsive dreamers but one more openly affectionate and the other more reticent and practical. These two just work well together - balanced and loving and supportive. The strong Ne they both share (I think they do) makes for some great vague and impractical connections. I fell in love with this ship right away, as soon as my cousin showed me the episode where they move in with Ben.

CSI Grissom/Catherine (INTP/ESTP)

Grillows is another ship that I regret not being Canon, since they have some serious chemistry. Both are strong Ti users, practical and analytical, but with contrasting perceiving functions. He likes theories, she likes to go out and do. This creates that kind of contrasting Holmes and Watson style duo between them, though Grissom is not always right, and Catherine tends to balance out his more theoretical and distant attitude nicely. She can make mistakes too, like being too impulsive or emotional, but it always feels like there’s good points on each side.

Pride and Prejudice: Elizabeth/Darcy (ENFP/INTJ)

One ship that me and Charity (and let’s face it, most people) share. They just work so perfectly together. Two intuitive dominants with big ideas, similarly blunt Te manners of analyzing and addressing logic, and reticent Fi that makes it hard for them to just talk about their feelings. The journey from bad first impression to happy ending is so enthralling every time. Austen definitely created a timeless winner with this one.

[synchronysymphony]

Hi anon!! ☀️ it’s so nice to hear from you!! And how flattering that you came to me to vent 😊

I know how you feel, because Enjolras is my very favorite character ever, and I absolutely love him with all my heart. Once, I was feeling sick at a gig, and I pulled up a drawing of him to look at, and I actually immediately felt better 😂 So it makes me so sad when people are mean to him! I get that he’s a fictional character, and people can write whatever they want— that’s totally fair. I would never speak to anyone about this or tell them to stop, because they have the right to do what they want! Fiction is for fun (among other things), and if someone wants to thoroughly misrepresent this good, loving character? They can be my guest! But I’m still going to be umami about it.

I agree that it’s sad when people represent him so poorly. I made a post about him awhile ago detailing some of the things he does that I love, and I could honestly go on for ages about why he represents hope just as much as Cosette does, and why all the light imagery is so fitting because he’s a light in the world, and blah blah blah. He’s incredibly wonderful, and he’s soft and loving and good just as much as he’s fierce and terrifying. He makes me happy even on my very saddest and darkest days, and because of his message of radical goodness, I’ve become a better person (I know it sounds corny, but I really do think that’s the case). 

Now, I know that a lot of people who write these fics may find Grantaire to be relatable. That’s fair! I do too! But you hit the nail right on the head: in order to make him be sympathetic, they have to make his foil be even more of a dick than he is, which means he has to be, as you said, a borderline abusive monster. Because the thing is, Grantaire is a dick! He’s such an asshole, my gosh. And in this strange new push for moral purity, people don’t want to relate to a character whom they deem Bad, so they have to defang him in order to make him palatable. They victimize him so that none of his bad behavior is his fault, and he can be absolved of blame. Then, he’s just a poor little sad shy baby who suffers from so many problems, not the least of them being an uptight, self-righteous, awful boyfriend who says mean things for no reason and has really bad takes on literally everything because he’s so naive. 

I think, too, that people who write these fics suffer from what I call the DC-Comic Syndrome. That is, everything has to be dark and cynical and chock-full of gritty realism (though really, DC is getting a lot better about that now, so I may have to rename that). Problem is, they don’t really think it through, so their arguments do come down to criticizing Enjolras for having hope. It’s cool to be cynical and jaded, because it’s more intellectual, and smarter, and wanting to change the world is silly and childish, and Grantaire is obviously therefore the epitome of cool. He’s smart and cultured and well-read, yes. But that doesn’t mean that he’s anything more than the 19th century equivalent of that annoying guy in your philosophy class who “just wants to play devil’s advocate” every time someone opens their mouth. 

Then, too, there’s the poor characterization. I’ve seen people say things like “oh Grantaire is better than Enjolras because he actually cares about people” like wow, did we read the same book? Grantaire is awful to people, including his friends, may I add! They tolerate him because of his good humor-- I don’t have my book on me, so I don’t have a page number, but it’s in there-- not because he has anything salient to say, or even because he’s particularly nice to be around. When Bossuet mentions that he’s drinking an awful lot, he immediately shoots back by criticizing the hole in his clothing. Sure, it’s funny, but it’s not very good proof that he’s a warm and cuddly friend. Enjolras, on the other hand, canonically stands around thinking about how great his friends are. He gives Grantaire a chance, even though they both know that he doesn’t believe in the cause, and when Grantaire flubs it, he still happily shares a death with him, he’s ready to exchange Javert for Jehan, and he feels such empathy for the artillery sergeant that he claims him as his brother, and cries when shooting him. He’s a very loving person! I think a big problem is that he isn’t so nice to Grantaire, and this makes people think of him in a poor light. But we have to remember how much Grantaire antagonizes, and yes, endangers him. If we look at the facts, we see that Enjolras is very tolerant of him, all things considered. I think one of his blind spots is his love for his friends, putting that even above the cause, and that extends to Grantaire as well. 

I’ve also seen so many fics wherein les amis threaten to abandon Enjolras, or threaten him with harm, or don’t listen to his side of the story, or yes, physically assault him, and it’s framed as good. It drives me up the wall! Les amis love Enjolras just as much as he loves them! They mess with him, sure, but they obviously love him a lot, and they would never treat him that way. If he was actually cruel or abusive, yes, I could see them being harsher with him, but that’s a moot point, because he would never. In the original French, he shows his anger with Javert by switching from “vous” to “tu.” He cries, he sits around quietly and listens to his friends talk, he even goes so far as to give the title of leader to Marius. He’s an angel, that’s what he is, and he would never act in the ways that these fics portray. And his friends know that, and it’s obvious that they do, because they feel comfortable following him even to the death. He’s not the conditional member; Grantaire is. Grantaire is the one whose beliefs don’t mesh with theirs; whose ideology can be summarized as “belligerently contrarian”; whose very personality is abrasive and crude. He’s the one who’s only tolerated because of his good humor; Enjolras is there because they adore him, and share the same beliefs that he does. I think it’s a disservice to les amis to see them as any less passionate and earnest as Enjolras, and to portray them as anything less than loving towards one of their dear friends. Think of the controversy if they all were written to turn on Jehan or Joly. There would be a public outcry! The fic writer would be anathematized! So it doesn’t make any more sense for them to turn on Enjolras like that. 

Am I saying that everything has to be a fluffy, happy coffeeshop AU? No, definitely not. I think that mode of thinking is very disturbing, actually. Conflict is good, and characters should do problematic and downright shitty things. But when those shitty things are framed by the narrative as good, then it becomes a lot more suspicious. It’s bad writing, is what it is, and I know that I, who am also a bad writer, have no point from which to speak, but I can recognize poor characterization, at least, and this fandom is full of it. 

Anyway, I’m sorry that I went on so long! I got a little heated. You put it much better than I did, but in short, I agree with you, and I don’t read a lot of fic these days either, unless it’s by a Trusted Source, or by me. Thank you for sending me this! I’m always down to talk about Les Mis or Enjolras or anything at all, really! I hope you have a fantastic day!!! 

p.s. I think you might be interested in this fic by (my girlfriend!!) @amiedelabaisse 😊 

[a-curious-wednesday]

Today! On Unpopular Opinions: Destiny 2, Warmind

Destiny 2′s newest DLC, Warmind is borderline trash.  Now, when I pre-ordered it, I, initially, went through the usual rigmarole.  Foolishly placing my hopes and expectations that this $20 DLC would right all the wrongs that have plagued D2 since its outset, and then coming to the cold realization that by the time Bungie was willing to entertain listening to its Destiny fanbase, Warmind was likely all-but completed.  Meaning that it would either be the same as DLC1, Fall of Osiris or negligibly better.

I realize there’s a lot of reasons for this.  Bungie agreed to a ridiculous content schedule with Activision, where they were forced to pump out new content and games on a schedule that disallows for proper development and growth.  That, the new direction of Destiny is Call of Duty w/Space Losers.  That, because, for the second time, Bungie changed D2′s game direction in the eleventh hour; brought in new people who did not understand the lore or what the game was supposed to be, etc, etc, etc.

And yet, here we are.

The campaign Warmind is alright.  And I mean that in the loosest of senses of the term ‘alright.’  I have many problems with its story direction. Some of them, a lot of you have previously heard before: silent protagonist, uptight, kiss-ass ghost, stiff character development.  There are other issues I take up, however. Issues that just left me scratching my fucking head in a general mystified and annoyed manner. (Note: there be spoilers)

1)  Once again your Guardian follows along with some half-assed plan to save the universe. (Which, if I’m being honest, the Universe never felt threatened during Warmind.  It’s more of a, “hey, can you help me get rid of these guys who’re crashing my place? They smell bad, eat all my food, don’t clean up after themselves and are generally ungrateful jerks.”)  This plan, borders the epitome of asinine, mind you. It amounts to:

Zavala: “Hey, let's take a piece of the Traveller and bait this giant-ass snake-god thing.”

Ghost/Guardian: “...”

Ana: “Then, what?” (Ana, who is suddenly an expert in the Hive asks curiously.  Meanwhile, your ghost, who should have wised up and remembered that you fought ORYX, the Black Garden, Skolas, SIVA (which, were, generally betterish plans) should have had concerns.)

Zavala: “We wing it.”

Ghost/Guardian: “...”  (Both of you should have protested, citing how we winged it with the Almighty and Ghaul and that didn’t really work out.  The Almighty is still slowly destroying Mercury, but NOBODY mentions that.  The next time you’re on Mercury, stop what you’re doing and look around.  The planet is still being ripped to chunks and pulled into the Almighty.)

Ana: “What?  We could use Rasputin--”

Zavala: “No! Absolutely not.”

We use Rasputin.  

How?  His “relic weapon” a super-heated/conductive spear that we literally chuck at a god.  I mean, why not, right?  We took down Oryx who was (pre-”established D1 canon is hearsay and folklore and not fact”) literally the strongest God we’ve fought since the quasi-para-casual tentacle thing that was supposed to represent the Darkness embodied.  At least, in the Black Garden, they had the good sense to have us beat the damn god by proxy.  Defeating Xol was just lazy writing. He’s a fucking Worm God!  You know, the thing, Auresh/Oryx took/consumed to become the taken King and literally lead the Hive out of the Fundament/Deep.

But, hey, it’s cool in the end. After all, Xol was the weakest, puniest Worm God of the bunch.  It's not like it/he had power only rivaled by the OTHER WORM GODS. Let’s chuck a nuclear spear at it.  That’ll kill it. Because science!!

2)  Your Guardian is sent to the Deep/Fundament by a fucking God.  Xol literally transports you to another plane of existence, cutting you off from the Traveller’s Light (because your plan is so asinine) in order to kill you slowly.  Mind you, this place is a horror show of horror shows. The Deep makes Hell look like a vacation to Mazatlan. There are things there that preyed on the Krill/Hive, things that we, humans and guardians could not comprehend without the Books of Sorrow/Toland.

Do you understand the wasted potential for story this was? It was monumental.  Monumental! Me, an Exo, was transported to the Hell of Hells by a literal God, because I wasn’t worth its time.  I’m there, floating around for, I don’t know, minutes? My annoying ghost is freaking out. Meanwhile, Xol has had enough of our shit.  He’s gone to destroy Rasputin (which, he might have done anyway, but hey, nothing like 3rd party intervention to up the timetable). With the Warmind removed from the gameboard, Xol has a clearer line to solar conquest.  Why? Dunno, it's never mentioned why a God would wish to conquer Sol. It never really seemed to care that the Traveller slept above Earth before it awoke.

It didn’t seem to care that the Traveller had.

Meanwhile, my Exo titan is floating in something that vaguely looks like blood.  There’s some weird stills of probably torture? Good thing, I’m an Exo. Don’t feel pain, because robot.  Don’t need to breathe or eat, because robot. Don’t get tired, because robot. And, then, miraculously, my guardian climbs up from a crevasse, obviously drained and near death.  My ghost is quick with the first aid and I’m good to go.

...Seriously?  Okay.  Okay. I can kind of see how that works if your guardian is an Exo.  Because robot.  But, human?  Awoken?  How?  Just how?  You were in literal mortal danger *again*.  Presumably, you needed to figure out what the Hellscape the Deep was and how to navigate it. You would need a way back to your native dimension, which would require you to seek aid from the natives.  Except, the natives have never seen your kind and they all want to kill you. And this would take time. Somehow, against all odds, you find someone who’ll help you escape and you make the journey together, because let's be realistic: there’s always that one person who knows the way, but was too chickenshit to go it alone.  That person dies getting you to the “portal” which’ll take you back to your dimension. By the way, you’ve got no Ghost. No Light. Limited ammo. No food. Nothing to repair your weapons and armor. No oxygen to breathe.

Somehow, you climb your way out, just like the Kratos climbed out of Hades.  Or, from an actual literary standpoint how Orpheus and Eurydice.  Dante and Virgil.

Except, not, because you get treated to a 30 second cut-scene of flashing images and your guardian clawing their way up a crevasse.

Kudos, Bungie.  Good job.  If the fanbase of Mass Effect could flip shit over the ending of ME3 to such a degree that they had the game’s actual ending redone (via post-production patch that was FREE) to better please them and work with the meta of the MEU, what do you think the fanbase of Destiny will do?  Don’t answer.  I know its buy shit from Eververse.

3)  Rasputin.  The titular reason we’re even on Mars.  The whole reason Anastasia Bray (Clever, Bungie.  Clever.  Rasputin and Anastasia.) has gone to the Hellas Basin.  She didn’t go there to go home. Not really. She went there to connect to a thing that she built that transcended all known laws and bounds.  It was alive, but alive in a Godly sense. Not bound by the constructs of Human morality.  Oh no.   Ana might not initially know for sure why she was drawn to Clovis Bray.  Sure, she awoke to her second life with her name badge on her person. And then was summarily told not to investigate her past. As if she were an Exo or concerned about DER.  She might not have consciously known she was seeking Rasputin, but she always was.

Meanwhile, Rasputin is a God, created by man to protect Us All.  Given sovereign to do so as he saw fit. Think about that. Think about Humanity as a whole currently.  In what universe would all of Humanity greenlight the creation of something like this? Never mind that, think about Humanity collectively since the dawn of science fiction writing.  When has it ever benefited Humanity to place their safety in the hands of others? My Skynet senses are tingling. But, wait, it's okay guys. Moon X/the Traveller is here! None of us understand what it is, but let’s go meet it.  While they’re doing that, let’s sanction a civilian company to build a guardian that thinks for itself, learns independently, is prudent, wise and plays the long game. Let’s make it so its not bound by Human morality so it can make the hard choices, us Humans would flinch at.  Nobody knows how a Moon is moving on its own or terraforming whole planets!  But, we’ll put our faith in a machine.

By the way, none of us truly understands or can comprehend this thing that we’ve built.  Oh, and there’s no way for is to. All of which, happened during the Golden Age, before the Collapse.  Interestingly GA mankind already knew of the Vex, so most likely reverse engineered Vex tech went into the creation of Rasputin.

Oh, and it's just Rasputin.  Whose always been on Mars. Sure, they retcon/bungiesplain it away well enough, but still.  Where the hell is Charlemagne, Jys or Virgil? It was established that Charlemagne was the Warmind of Mars, but now its a submind.  They’re all Submind. In other words, the children of Rasputin.  Story potential!

...Never mind, that’s not D2’s development team’s prerogative.

Fast forward to the present and Rasputin has become active because the Traveller has awoken.  His old foe, his biggest threat. The one thing Rasputin still doesn’t comprehend. Its awake/alive again.  Its parasites (guardians) have been doing a terrible job of policing Sol and protecting Humanity. Not their fault, their still human.  Rasputin was fine with letting the parasites struggle. It could focus on (presumably) the triangle ships, holding back the Red Legion, Eliksni colony convoys, Tomb convoys and other nightmares.  It was smart, cunning. Playing a very real and deadly game of chess. He couldn’t reveal too much of his might or himself, that would draw unwanted attention. Then the Traveller awoke and the rules changed.  So, he throws off his disguise and swings into full production/activity. Warsats activate that have been dormant for centuries. Orbital strikes occur all throughout Sol, hammering the Legion, Hive, Vex, Fallen, Taken.  And Xol thaws.

Yet, still, Rasputin is incomprehensible to us.  And we, “the” guardian, aid a shortsighted, single-minded Doctor in unshackling it. Yup, we did that.  Nearly killed him in the process, but we did the damn thing.  Doesn’t matter, though, in the end, right?  Because Rasputin is a machine, built for us.  Except, not.  No.  He’s more than that now.  Now, Rasputin is completely Free and he proclaims that he’s going to protect his ants.  Yeah. Good job, Ana.  Oh, and Zavala still has complete faith and trust in us.  Despite!  Despite having solid reservations in utilizing Rasputin.  Despite the fact that we ignored our Commander and leader.  It’s cool, though, right?  We’re celebrity status.  We’ve taken down 2, count ‘em, 2 Gods.  Crota was a Demigod at best.  (But, he got his own Raid... Nokris.)

Does Anastasia know this?  Nope.  She never mentions it. Never mentions Oryx or Crota or the Black Garden or how we did what no one else could.  And we did it with no plan and 3 to six other insane guardians with annoying, uptight ghosts.  To her, we’re just a guardian with a ghost that has a stick up its USB port.  Weird, right?  We’re Iron Lords for crying out loud!  Young Wolves. Bounty Hunters for the Reef Queen.  Prison of Elder gaolers.  Emissaries of the Cult of Osiris and now the Nine.  Oh, and some of us are Faction Heralds.  Standard Bearers for Dead Orbit, Future War Cult or New Monarchy.  If you got the exotic class item from DO, FWC or NM in D1, youse a Herald and Standard Bearer.

Is there ever mention of this?  Nope.

4)  The Hive finally gets snipers/sharpshooters and shield-wielding swordsman.  Both of which seem like obvious no-brainers to have always been incorporated.  Except!   That goes against the Sword Logic. So, sincerely, you get a plus for adding them to the heretical, “cowardly” faction of the Hive. 

Question for you, though. Why would you knowingly (God, I hope it was knowingly) honor previous canon in this instance, but not with others? Like, where Xol is concerned?  Or the Deep/Fundament? Or Rasputin? Why the cherry picking?

5)  Why even bother naming yellow-bar area and mission bosses or units if you won’t bother explaining who they are, what they do and what they want?   Because, I honestly, lost interest in reading the named enemies once I realized there was no information about them in or out of the game.

From a Gameplay standpoint, it's what you’d expect from Destiny 2.  Up-tempoed action with moments of intensity and hopeful triumph.  If you play smartly, it rewards you. If you overextend yourself, prepare to get ganked.  Horribly. Progression is more inline with its predecessor, which might make the casuals pause.  Thankfully, it isn’t like Day 1, Vanilla Destiny, where it was impossible to reach Light Level Cap solo and without completing Raid/Nightfalls.  Except, no one would take you if you didn’t have G-horn or Icebreaker. Ah, the Good ol’ days of the Grind and the Loot Caves.  My point? The action is more reminiscent to that feel, just with all the current bells and whistles, which is a good thing.

Exotic weapons finally feel fucking worthwhile.  I played the whole Warmind Campaign with the combination of Sweet Business and Actium War Rig and I absolutely love it!  Add the Galliard-42 or the Kibou AR3 for some added fun and thrills. Pairing the Tractor Cannon with Sentinel is immensely satisfying.  That punk, Nokris didn’t stand a chance. And neither did his minions. Melts the opposition. Plus, its just really satisfying to watch 5 charging Knights (with sword and/or shield) get punted halfway across the room or into a wall or over a ledge.  I finally feel like how those damned Taken Phalanxes must feel. The Borealis is a fun choice, too. Although, I haven’t spent much time with it. The payoff for matching damage types and busting shields is well worth it.

The added cosmetic gear is neat.  My new favorite jumpship, hands down, is Currus Gloriae XLII.  As a Titan, having a spaceship that looks like it can go to war and do some damage is a welcomed plus.  The sparrow, Azure Azazyel looks really awesome. Even though it doesn’t have an interesting contrail effect, it still is fun to ride.  It feel like it belongs in Akira or Bladerunner and I dig it.  What I’ve seen from the new emblems, they’re decent.  

The updated effects of the new guns is much needed. Dragonfly on an autorifle?  Yes, please. Rampage on a Handcannon that you don’t have to grind for? I’ll take it.  The new Ghost shells are blase at best. The emote wheel is a nice touch, but seems a bit late.

Hoo boy, Override Frequencies and Memory Fragments.  Gotta hand it to you there, Bungie. I could not figure out how to get those until you unlocked them.  And those Fragments? I didn’t even figure out how to unlock them. Or I did, but it didn’t work?  Don’t try shooting them until after you unlock Hellas Basin.  Found that out by accident.  Thank you, random Guardian who was just shooting at a ledge!

So, like I said on the outset: Warmind, as an expansion is alright bordering on trash.  It is entirely redeemed in its Gameplay, but woefully drops the ball where the story is concerned.  Is it worth the $20? Eh. You’d probably still be better off waiting for the comet expansion to drop and for Bungie/Activision to repackage and re-release Destiny 2 this fall/winter.  There will be some that will find it a $20 well spent and others who won’t, who’ll swear off the franchise completely.  As for me? Its an investment. Like investing in Roseart and hoping they turn into Crayola. One day, they just might.

[nerobombs]

Writing Romance

(Want more? Check out my Writing tag!)

There is the rather prevalent idea among writers that writing romance is hard. And for some people, maybe it is, but I would argue that it’s not difficult to write as much as it is easy to misinterpret.

In real life, relationships don’t have many straightforward rules besides a few obvious ones like “Trust is important” and “Don’t kill your spouse” and “99% of men are dense idiots who wouldn’t know how to read a signal if you tied them to a post and bashed them over the head with a rock, so just try asking him out on a date already”.

In the words of Tom Clancy, the difference between fiction and reality is that fiction has to make sense. What that essentially means is that writing fictional romance does have a few cut-and-dry rules, and that you can substitute “experience” with “logic” and get away with it, so you don’t need any prior relationship experience to understand how to write a decent romance. It can certainly help, but real life romance has a lot of factors that just wouldn’t fly in fiction.

1). “Love” does not equal “chemistry”

This is probably my biggest bugbear with any romance: “love” is not a magic adhesive that is capable of forcing two incompatible characters together. And if you think it is, you’re using it wrong.

You can’t have two characters fall in love when they refuse to empathise with one another, constantly have arguments based on annoyance rather than attraction, and consistently fail to compromise. You cannot portray these characters as completely incompatible, then suddenly up and declare that “they’re in WUV!”

Look, “opposites attract” does have some merit, but if you’re going to try to push the “tense romance” thing forward, your characters have to like each other. Full stop.

There needs to be chemistry. And if you’re wondering what chemistry is, it means that each character needs to have traits or aspects that the other character finds attractive or admirable. It means that they have to have a desire to be around one another, repressed or not.

Plenty of couples were started or ran more on lust and antagonistic attraction than on the traditional fluffy romance. Han Solo and Princess Leia, Ron and Hermione, Edward and Winry, and so on. You can have couples or potential-couples arguing every time they’re in a scene together and still make it believable for them to get together, if belligerent sexual tension is something you’re going for.

But that doesn’t mean you can have them say, constantly insulting each other’s beliefs and ideals. You can’t have their arguments be shallow, you can’t have them dislike being around each other.

Characters who are constantly at odds at each other need to find the other character attractive somehow. They need to engage in the occasional compromise and eventually realise their differences. These characters should possess certain traits or aspects that complement the traits of the other character.

Maybe two characters argue because one is carefree while the other is really uptight. They can have chemistry because the Carefree Character helps the Uptight Character learn how to have fun, while the Uptight Character’s sense of organization and discipline is admired by the Carefree Character. They’re complete opposites, yes, but they are attracted to each other because of what they lack, not despite it. 

2). Long-term romance requires ups and downs

Usually when a romance is solidified, the writer(s) wave it off as some kind of “and they lived happily ever after”. After a hundred scenes of arguing and hating each other, the characters have their love epiphany of “but they really loved each other all along!”, and then they encounter literally no conflict in the course of their relationship. All of the flaws are scrubbed away so that the author can gush about how “in love” they are with cutesy scenes and giggling.

If you remove all conflict or tension from a relationship, then any possibility of that relationship being more interesting gets taken away. Sweet patches or moments of soft intimacy are nice, yes, but I guarantee that if that’s all you read, you would eventually get sick of “how perfect” these characters are for each other.

Perfect romances can be nice for a while, yes, but there comes a point where the characters stop being people and instead become one-dimensional caricatures that only serve as vehicles for the author to fantasise about storybook romance.

Long-term romance that have believable spots of conflict are interesting because they give further dimension to the characters. They provide an avenue to discover a character’s discomfort or pain, and they are intriguing because they can show that characters are in love with each other because of their flaws, not despite them (sensing a theme here?).

 A romance that has survived numerous conflicts is far more admirable than a romance that has literally never hit a bump in its entire course.

3). Do not use the phrase “real me” or any variations of it. Ever.

Oh fuck me, I hate this one.

It’s utterly baffling to me whenever this comes up. The hero(ine) falls in love, and after a few incredibly out-of-character moments, promptly declares that their partner is the first one “to see the real me”.

Here’s the reason as to why it’s completely asinine: people are complex. Sometimes they act happy to avoid displaying that they’re sad, sometimes they deflect questions about their personal life with humour, whatever.

When you throw in the phrase “real me”, what you’re essentially doing is boiling down a character to something that’s completely binary and one-dimensional. People who feel compelled to defend themselves with personas or half-truths never create completely false personalities unless they have some kind of mental disorder or some idiotic plot device like amnesia or memory-rewriting is employed. 

And I hate this phrase because it’s completely self-absorbed. It reeks of a character “choosing” to fall in love just to show off their scars or so they can humblebrag about how tortured and deep they are for having an arbitrary impulse to inexplicably lie about how they actually want to act.

This is especially annoying when it’s something like a social or cultural barrier. You know, the uptight princess who has to act all courtly in front of the King but then falls in love with the peasant and goes on a night on the town on a drunken rampage, promptly declaring that the alcoholic is the “real me”.

Look, I get that social constraints can demand things like politeness or etiquette or a certain form of behaviour. What I don’t get is how a character’s resistance to such strict social constraints is to become either the world’s best actor or a complete pathological liar. People are not capable of masking their personalities to the point where the “real me” phrase can ever be used in any believable fashion.

The only people who use the phrase “real me”, or any variation of it, are people looking for a pity party. Don’t use it. Just don’t. 

4). Love does not stop characterisation. 

Or, putting it another way, love requires loose ends.

Somehow, “love” is seen as the apex of evolution and when two characters fall in love, they stop growing and developing as people because THEY’RE IN WUV.

No.

People change. People grow. People lose interest in some things and gain interest in other things. People encounter situations that force them to re-evaluate their morals.

When “love” is reached, characters do not spend the rest of eternity having flawless communication. They don’t inexplicably become interested in everything because “we’re doing it together”. A couple who has “nothing left to wish for BECAUSE I HAVE YOU” is utterly boring. You might as well just tick a box and never mention the characters ever again. If these characters aren’t interested in advancing in any way, why should I as a reader care about them?

5). All parts of a romance should have equal investment.

It doesn’t matter if it’s a simple monogamous relationship, or a love triangle, or a love pentagon or love dodecahedron. All characters in a romance should feel like people, not plot devices.

If you’re writing a romance such that the readers only care about a minority of the characters involved (for example: only caring about one character in a monogamous relationship, or only caring about two characters in a love triangle and not caring about the third), then it is highly likely that the other character(s) was written as nothing but a plot device.

Do not designate a character as a Love Interest and leave them dangling on a string for our protagonist to chase. Don’t try to induce a love triangle by having a third intruder step into the romance just to create angst and ham-filled melodrama.

Do not have the love interest’s life revolve entirely around the object of their affections. They’re supposed to be people. People with goals, motivations, and a life outside of the protagonist. They do not exist as indulgences.

If you have two characters in a romance, then both of them should have equal depth and effort to exploring them, otherwise who cares? The same applies if it’s three or nine or ten people in a romance.

My personal adage is this: if you can replace the love interest with a dog and nothing changes, don’t write the love interest. If all you want is to indulge your protagonist with a paper-thin Prince or Princess Charming who only exists as a contrived love-giving robot, then don’t bother.