#stranger things writing criticism

[local-redhead-bookworm]

One of my favorite things to do for fun is watch videos breaking down certain media tropes. And I was watching one about the heart of a group. A poorly written “heart” character can be written with the intention to be lovable but are actually annoying sometimes. A character that is written solely with the purpose of being lovable can be really frustrating, especially if every other character adores the heart when the audience realizes that there’s no real justification for that.

Now let’s see if y’all can guess which characters I’m thinking about that fall into this poor writing category.

[the-lark-ascending69]

I'm sorry but I have a very real problem with Vickie as a character. A fan-favorite character is revealed to be queer in the previous season and gets a love interest shaped appendix with no plot relevance or personality, created only to be Robin's trophy girlfriend, in a way that is so painfully and obviously different from how they did it when they tried to make a new character entirely to give her a love story with an already existing main character.

I'm talking about Robin herself, and how, despite not having the deepest character arc in S3, she still had some meat on her bones. She still had some stuff to work with. She was actually important and involved with the plot and had real chemistry with her would-be love interest, Steve. Making her a lesbian at last second pretty much saved both her and Steve's characters and made the Scoops subplot, the only redeemable subplot of S3, actually salvageable. By recontextualizing Stobin with that revelation, you go from a forced, heteronormative/amatonormative "love story" with mysoginistic undertones (because what are frmale characters if not trophy wives for male characters!) and 1) you give Robin actual stuff in her life that has nothing to do with Steve, turning her into a real character on her own, yet also shows why their friendship is so valuable to her, giving her a mini-arc in the process about overcoming isolation, alienation and loneliness, and 2) you wrap up Steve's arc the way his character clearly needs to be wrapped up - by moving on from his immature pursuits of women as romantic/sexual fulfillment and his highschool persona constructed on that, and embracing maturity by working on himself with the help of the people who challenge him the most, his platonic bonds (Dustin and Robin). Like I'm being 100% serious when I say making Robin a lesbian somewhat saved season 3.

But you can tell the brilliance of that move did NOT come from the Duffers' mastermind because they couldn't even attempt to replicate their unexpected success with Robin and Vickie. Because even before Robin was made into a lesbian, she still had SOMETHING. Vickie has nothing. She's a non-character. And it's interesting to note the difference in treatment when it comes to straight male characters vs. queer female characters. You can make the case that Max's introduction in S2 followed a similar pattern to beta!Stobin - new character paired up with pre-existing character. But you wouldn't say Max was added just to give Lucas a girlfriend, because even if her plot relevance in S2 was rather lackluster, she still had... so much more than even Robin in S3, and she's simply uncomparable to Vickie. She feels like her own person right from the start. We know the Duffers like to add wayy to many characters, making the show feel crowded and inevitably leaving a few characters behind, but when they add new characters in a given season, they're actually pretty good at making us fall in love with them quickly. Max, Robin, Eddie, hell even Billy if you're into that - like I said before, there's always some work that goes into them that makes you care about them.

Sure, there are less important characters that don't get half the effort put into them - Heather, Benny, idk, Barb's parents? And many others I can't remember right now. Not every character needs to be a fan-favorite.

But none of these guys were a main character's love interest. Not even for like, a second-row main character like Robin. Lucas gets a girl and she gets proper character development. Steve was originally intended to get a girl and she gets plot relevance, screentime and charisma (and a bit of character development pre-coming out too). Robin gets a girl and... it seems like Robin and her girl don't matter that much.

Which makes me question, why give Robin a love interest at all if they weren't going to do anything about it. My guess is that, well, she's a lesbian, so of course she gets to kiss girls. Character arc? What is that? Just watch her gush over a girl without last name and not care about anything else for most of the season. The writers just didn't know what to do with her now that she's no longer gonna be Steve's trophy girlfriend. Just throw in a poorly put together gay subplot, because everyone knows gay people only get to kiss other gay people and there's nothing else about the lesbian experience worth talking about (like, idk, the loneliness? The alienation?). I'm of the belief that, if you're gonna half-ass it, don't write a romantic subplot at all, regardless of the characters' genders and sexuality. But what bothers me isn't a shitty romantic subplot. It's the difference in treatment that the queer characters get vs. their straight counterparts.

And it bothers me because it could have been fixed SO easily! You get three options:

Give Robin a character arc that's not a romantic subplot. That doesn't mean she doesn't get to have a crush, but it should be in the background. My idea would be to make it about her, Nancy and Barb, and their old friendship + Robin's sense of alienation. Robin learning the truth about Barb's death, and her and Nancy helping each other heal. Robin and Nancy becoming friends through long conversations about their feelings, through which Nancy gets a sort of "second chance" at having a friend again and Robin gets to connect with someone who initially hated her in her own special way. The point is to not make r0vickie obviously endgame, EVEN if it turns out to be that way next season, because if it's obviously endgame it suddenly begs for a deeper development and the lack of it becomes a problem. An easy solution would be to give Robin multiple crushes, to signal at how unserious they all are at the moment.

Give Robin a love story with a newly introduced main character. And the obvious option is *rolls drums" genderbent Eddie! Or Vickie in Eddie's place. Best and easiest solution imo. It may sound weird but if you think about it, it all makes sense - plot relevance, character development... only problem would be killing your gays if you squint, though Robin would be alive and ready for a new character arc next season, as a changed person. Sad, angry, possibly seeking revenge and seeking to assert herself as a threat after hiding and running her entire life. Robin's feelings are suddenly plot relevant now. I'm picking Eddie here (or rather, his role) because he's the most important one out if all the new S4 characters, and the one that spends time with the group the most. It's clean, minimalistic and practical.

Give Robin a love story with a pre-existing main character, i.e Nancy. As a ronance shipper, I maintain that pairing up Nancy and Robin would have been original and unexpected in the best way. I feel like I don't even need to explain why this would have been a good idea - tons of people already have. Mostly, I want to lament the impossibility of this option, which links directly to the point I'm trying to make.

Robin was never going to be paired with a main-main character, old or new, because queer relationships on-screen need to be pushed to the sides as to not interfere with or threaten the straight main characters. Nancy, as the main girl, was never going to get a romance with a girl. Vickie was never going to get the centrality that Eddie got. Straight relationships get to be taken seriously, even if they're writen stupidly, like whatever the fuck happened with stancy and jancy in S4. Queer relationships don't get to be more than silly forgettable subplots. Queer characters like Robin need to be inobtrusive. She could never fall in love with Nancy, even if one-sided-ly, because that would create a conflict straight audiences don't want to see.

And if a queer character DOES fall in love with a main straight character, like Will, it's all meant for pointless suffering. Not the kind of suffering that's vital for a character arc, or the kind that gives depth to a character. It's not a kind of suffering that leads them to change, to take any given decisions that they wouldn't otherwise have taken. It's not a suffering that could possibly interfere with the straight main couple's happiness. It's not a pain that causes conflict. Queer love and pain doesn't get to be part of the conflict in straight-dominated stories. So Robin can never fall in love with someone from the front-row sphere and Will suffers pointlessly, even though that pain has no real effect on him.

[stevethehairington]

really fucking sick and tired of people who really fucking love the eddie book jumping on people who don't like or are even remotely critical of it's posts and like crusading their opinions around from the top of their high horses and shoving it down our throats.

if you like the book, great! that's awesome! love that for you! i am genuinely glad that you were able to find good in it and enjoy it!!

but not everyone did, and not everyone is going to agree with you. so, instead of going on some grand crusade where you find every single post that includes anything even remotely negative or negative adjacent or even neutrally critical and spending ALL this time and effort trying to provide unwanted rebuttals to every single thing, maybe you should just stay in your lane and find people who DO like the book and chat about it with them.

because i can PROMISE YOU, none of us appreciate it when you come onto our posts and start accusing us of "hating on" the author or "being rude" about her and her work and RIDICULOUS shit like that.

being critical of something and pointing out it's flaws is NOT inherently hating on it. i, frankly, do not know where people got that notion, but it's not fucking true so can we fucking quit assuming it is? and, critiquing something is also NOT the same as saying this is shit and it sucks and the author is a piece of garbage. again, where the fuck that came from is beyond me. you can be critical of something and still enjoy it. as soooo many of you love to point out, it's not perfect, why should it be perfect? so D U H. of course that means criticism can and should arise???

also. hot take (by which i mean ice fucking cold because it's NOT a fucking hot take), but going around toting FALSE facts as part of your "defense" does not make you or your argument look good. you, like the author, should maybe do a basic fact check first. 🙃

tldr, if you like the book, that's genuinely great, but stay in your fucking lane and stop seeking out posts from people who didn't like it to start shit in the notes.

[scoobydoodean]

I want to point out something in 1.16 “Shadow” regarding Dean’s resourcefulness and the derision with which his contributions are treated within the writing. In “Shadow”, multiple shots are taken at Dean’s methods of earning money and working cases as well as his intelligence level.

It starts with another small squabble about money that clearly frames Dean as still, at this point, the sole person supporting him and Sam financially through credit card scams, gambling, and hustling pool.

Yet again we have a jab at the ways Dean earns money. I wouldn’t make a big deal about this one at all if not for the outside context—the three previous episodes where Sam (while happy to benefit from Dean’s ill-gotten gains and provide no financial support to their two-man team) criticizes or is dismissive toward the work involved in how Dean earns money for them (1.01, 1.05, 1.08). Dean deserving to have his contributions dismissed is explicit in the text, but Sam's failure to actually assist with finances is implicit.

Next, it's how Dean gets information. He flirts with a cop and a bartender:

In the case of the cop, he gets information that is valuable to the case—unreleased details. In the case of the bartender, he doesn't, but he learns there's nothing to learn. But because Dean was also having fun, his actions are reduced down to him thinking with his dick, when he is actually intentionally using charm and even (see below) offering sexual favors in exchange for information:

Additionally, Sam (despite having seen Dean research just fine on his own multiple times) questions how Dean was able to do research on his own, which—you do you, Kripke, I guess? But we get "Haha name the last book you read" in a similar vein to 1.03 "Dead In the Water" (and just as Sam demands that Dean name one child he knows and Dean can't but it means nothing because Dean actually does like kids, Dean also does read—as established multiple times throughout the series.)

But also—if Dean called Caleb, why does that matter? Is talking to people to get the information you need, somehow inferior to finding some old tome and finding it in there? No. But it's treated that way in the framing of the episode. Weirdly like Dean took a shortcut or something and that's... "bad"...? When a shortcut in this context literally just means you're being efficient and resourceful and yeah—smart.

Then Meg jabs at Dean's intelligence as well:

What's also interesting, is that this is the first (I believe—I don't think I missed one at least) example of Dean's eye for visual patterns within the series.

So Dean, in this episode

Finances the suits Sam wanted to buy so they could sneak into the victim's apartment

Gets valuable information from a cop twice by charming her

Is able to recognize a symbol on the floor from blood spatter and is able to trace that symbol back to discover the monster they are dealing with using his hunting connections.

And all of this is treated in a dismissive way within the writing—like Dean's contributions don't matter or are earned in some way that causes them to deserve to be dismissed and even used as points against him. What's more, Dean doesn't fight back much. He leans into the very thinly-veiled suggestions of him just being dumb and horny and covers with jokes and a light jab about how the only thing valuable EITHER of them have gotten at the bar is the bartender's number (note that this is after he gets secret information from the cop and finds the symbol on the floor, which he could have pointed out but doesn't). He also leans into other narratives about himself suggested by Meg in the episode, but that's a separate post.

[thevioletcaptain]

y'all get that screenshotting fic to publicly make fun of it is straight up bully behavior, right? like. it doesn't matter if you redact the author's name. this is no different to a kid taking someone else's art off the wall in a classroom, walking out into the playground, and holding it up to say "haha look how shit this is"

[kazhan]

Let's talk about Karen

You know what, fuck it, I want to talk about Karen Wheeler.

More specifically, I’d like to talk about the Duffers’ and, as a result, the fandom’s treatment of Karen Wheeler.

What does Karen do in the show again?

First of all, let’s note that Karen appears in every episode in season 1, and in 5 episodes in season 2, 3 and 4, with very little to basically non-existent lines of dialogue in most of those episodes. 

In the first episode of season one, her first appearance is her telling the kids to end their game because it’s a school night and they can finish this weekend. Later in the episode, Will Byers has gone missing and Mike wants to go looking for him, Karen insists he needs to stay home and tells Nancy the same when she asks if she can go out, she also scolds Nancy when she gets upset because she can’t go out “just because Will is missing”.

Ted barely participates/helps, and Karen “hopes he’s enjoying his chicken”, she leaves the room, clearly upset for not getting much backup from her husband.  

In episode 2, Karen is being supportive, letting Mike stay home because he “doesn’t feel well”, she tells him he can talk to her about anything, not to hide things from her, that she’s here for him. 

When Nancy asks to go to the gathering at school for Will, she tells her to be back at 10pm. 

When Nancy gets home much later in episode 3, Karen was up and waiting for her, she is upset, worried, and says Nancy should have called, then she starts asking questions about the sweatshirt Nancy is wearing, and telling her Nancy can talk to her, “whatever happened”, Nancy insists nothing happened and it’s pretty obvious Karen doesn’t believe her and is extremely worried, she looks on the verge of tears as Nancy goes to her room.

Later, Karen visits Joyce with Holly, to bring her food. She is gentle, reassuring, she asks about Jonathan, tells her that if Joyce needs anything, they’re here for her, etc… When Joyce starts acting weird and insisting Holly tell her what she saw in the wall, Karen tries to tell her to calm down, then leaves when told to.

At the end of the episode, Will’s (fake) body is dragged out of the quarry and Mike rushes home, where he runs to Karen for comfort, thinking he just lost his friend.

Episode 4 shows Karen looking extremely saddened by the news of Will’s death, but also very worried for her son, she tries to cheer him up and help him change his mind, and lets him stay home to get some rest, reminding him to call his dad at work if he needs to. 

We then see her sitting next to Nancy while the cops interrogate her about Barb’s disappearance, Karen doesn’t say a word during that scene, but her and Nancy start arguing the moment they get home because Karen knows Nancy lied to the cops, she is visibly worried and upset Nancy did this, and the conversation moves on to what really happened that night: Nancy admits she actually slept with Steve, but it doesn’t matter because Barb is missing and no one is listening to her. Karen says she is, Nancy says “no, you’re not” and goes to her room, leaving an anguished Karen behind. 

Karen appears at Will’s funeral in episode 5, with her children and to show Joyce support.

In episode 6, Ted wonders why Nancy still hasn’t come down to eat with them, and Karen goes to check on her. After getting no answer at all, she lockpicks the door to find that Nancy is gone.

Next, in episode 7, Karen is on the phone with Steve’s parents because she knows “she and Steve have been spending some time together”, she keeps getting interrupted by Mike, but she asks if Steve is home, probably to ask him if he knows where Nancy might be. 

Later, Karen is in the basement and finds El’s little den and a piece of blond hair from her wig when the people from the lab and Brenner show up, and immediately start feeding Karen and Ted lies about how this girl their son may have been hiding in their home is dangerous (Ted laughs at the thought of Mike being around a girl, while Karen very much looks like she understood from what she found earlier than it might be true), Karen asks what this girl did, she is obviously (again) very worried for Mike, and Brenner uses this, telling her that her son is “in grave danger” but they’ll save him, if only she can tell them where he might be. 

In the next scene, Karen says they should be out there, looking for Mike, but Ted insists that they should let the government people do their job, because they’re obviously “on their side”. Karen points out that this man (Brenner) gives her the creeps, and asks if Ted thinks Nancy might be involved in all this. Ted assures her there’s no way. 

We should be out there looking for our son; Ted: they’re govt people, we need to trust them; Karen: this man (Brenner) gives me the creeps, thinks Nancy might be involved into all this; Ted: no way

In the last episode, after everything is over, Karen and Ted rush to the school, Karen clearly scared. She embraces Mike, crying, relieved. She is then seen at the hospital where they wait to hear from Will, and finally in the epilogue, where she tells Jonathan to wish Joyce a Merry Christmas.

So. What does season 1 tell us about Karen Wheeler?

Season 1 Karen is a housewife, a mother who is worried about the safety of her children (something she will keep showing throughout the entirety of the show). A child goes missing and she wants her own to stay home, her son’s best friend goes missing and is later found dead and she is shown trying to reach out, to comfort him. We also see her offering Joyce the same comfort and sympathy.

When it comes to Nancy, we are also shown a concerned mother, someone who is watching her daughter go puberty, start showing interest in boys and lying to her mother about where she’s going and what she’s doing. She is upset at times, but she is mostly worried and desperately trying to reach out, to remind Nancy that she is here for here, whatever happened. 

We can also see that Ted isn’t the most helpful husband, we always see Karen taking care of the kids while Ted is watching TV or reading the newspaper. We never see them being affectionate and it seems pretty obvious (especially after what Nancy says about her parents) that they probably got married because it was convenient, not because they were in love. 

Karen is also pretty observant: she knows when Nancy is lying at least twice, she makes the connection between the piece of hair from the wig she found and her son actually hiding El in their basement, she notices Brenner’s vibes were off, and she wonders if Nancy might be involved in the same mess Mike is (which, she is). 

In season 2, in episode 1, Karen punishes Mike for stealing from Nancy and being overall rude and misbehaving for months, she states that she knows he’s had a rough year and they’ve been patient, but enough is enough. 

We don’t really see Karen much after that, she only makes very short appearances until episode 9, where we see her relaxing in her bath while reading a romance novel when Billy shows up. She is obviously flustered by his looks, and Billy immediately starts flirting with her, stating he “didn’t know Nancy had a sister”, which flusters Karen even more. Billy says he’s been “worried sick” about his sister Max who’s been missing all day, and that he figured she might be here. Karen invites him in, gives him the Byers’ address and tells him to be careful, then very obviously ogles him as Billy leaves. 

There isn’t much to say about season 2 Karen, as she barely appears and her longest scene is the one she has in episode 9 with Billy. Before that, we only see her acting the same way she was in season 1, parenting her children—or trying to—and receiving very little help and support from her husband.

On to season 3. In episode 1, Karen is at the swimming pool, sunbathing with other moms while reading another romance novel, when they get all excited because it’s “show time”. Music starts playing, slow mo Billy comes out in his bathing suit and sunglasses, looking hot as hell, and the housewives all oggle him. He compliments Karen on her new bathing suit, which obviously pleases her.

Next, we see her swimming, and Billy’s now the one ogling her, he then approaches her, starts flirting, and ends up inviting her to meet him at a motel for “private lessons”. 

Towards the end of the episode, Karen is getting ready to meet Billy, she looks at her wedding ring, hesitates, then takes it off. She goes downstairs, where she pauses before leaving, and looks at Ted asleep on his armchair, with Holly asleep on him. It’s obvious from her expression that she will not go have an affair with Billy.

When we see Karen again in episode 2, she is back at the pool with the other housewives, but she clearly looks uncomfortable. When she sees Billy, she goes find him and tries to explain herself, the exchange goes like this:

“I… I understand if you’re angry with me. I just… I wanted to explain… why I didn’t come last night. It’s not you, it’s just… I have a family. And I can’t do anything that will hurt them. You understand that, right? But I shouldn’t have said that…” (She is interrupted as Billy has some sort of vision of himself bashing her head against a shelf) “Billy… please, will you talk to me?”

“Stay away from me Karen.”

Karen appears next in episode 4, after Nancy got fired. They have a heartfelt conversation, where Karen tells her that “it’s not easy out there Nance, people saying you can’t, shouldn’t, that you’re not smart enough, not good enough. This world, it… beats you up again and again, until most people just stop trying. But you’re not like that, you’re a fighter, you always have been.” She says she doesn’t know where Nancy got it from, Nancy jokes “Dad” and they both laugh, then Nancy says “I get it from you, Mom.” Karen is very emotional, and tells Nancy she’s proud of her for standing up for herself, and that if she believes in this story, she should finish it.  

We don’t see Karen until episode 7, where she is at the 4th of July parade/fair with Ted and Holly. Joyce and Hopper find them and ask if they know where the kids are and Karen admits she doesn’t, she doesn’t think they’re here yet. She starts listing off where the kids have been today and then says she can hardly keep track these days, and it’s summer after all. 

Finally, in episode 8, she comforts Mike after the Byers and El move out of Hawkins.

Season 3 Karen is once again trying to be a supportive mother, and we see her struggling even more with her marriage, even going as far as considering cheating on Ted with Billy before she remembers that she can’t do anything that would hurt her family. 

In season 4, Karen doesn’t appear much either, we see her in episode 1 telling Mike to be home by 9pm because he has an early flight to California the next day, we don’t see her again until episode 5 where she is making breakfast for the kids and says she thinks it’s sweet that they’re sticking together, Ted makes a rude comment about having freeloaders, to which Karen says that they’re always welcome here. 

In episode 6, Karen is horrified by Patrick’s death, she goes to the town gathering like the other parents and looks worried during Jason’s speech, she and the others rush home to look for their children who “should have been back by now” as she thought they were at the cinema. Erica says that they’ve clearly been lied to, and Karen calls the police. 

She is here in episode 7 when the cops interrogate the kids, but she doesn’t really say much, and is only shown running outside when the kids leave, looking worried. 

In the epilogue of episode 9, she is sorting clothes to give away, she doesn’t believe the whole “gate to hell” story they’re talking about on the news, and when Mike comes home, she rushes to hug him and says he’s “never going on vacation again, in fact you can forget about college”.

I feel like a broken record, but… well, season 4 Karen is once again trying to be a good mom, and worrying about her kids. 

Phew. Now that we’ve established all of Karen’s appearances and actions throughout the show, let’s finally get to the reasons why I’m writing this whole thing, yeah? 

Karen Wheeler is a good mom, actually

For the Duffers, Karen Wheeler is nothing more than a housewife and mother in a teen movie, her character doesn't exist beyond fulfilling those roles. Her children live in a horror/monster hunter movie, so do other adult characters like Joyce and Hopper, but Karen doesn’t. Her world is normal, she has normal problems: her husband is boring and unhelpful, her two oldest children are acting up and lying to her about things she can only assume are very normal. 

Karen doesn’t know about the Upside Down because the Duffers don’t want her to. She doesn’t know what her children are really going through because they are lying to her, and because the Duffers don’t want her to. 

Stranger Things only works if there are no parents to get in the way of the children’s adventures. Joyce and Hopper are busy living their own; Dustin’s mom, Lucas and Erica’s parents, Max’s mom and Neil all ignore what is really going on with their children, they are as clueless as Karen is when it comes to where the kids are and what they’re up to, we just see them less than Karen; we don’t even see Steve or Robin’s parents because they wouldn’t bring anything to the story and would only be more obstacles the Duffers would have to get rid of. 

So, considering how we’ve seen Karen behave with her children, and how the scenario is literally forbidding her from ever finding out about what is truly going on, I think it’s really, really unfair when people say she is a bad mom.

In fact, I’ll even go as far as to say that Karen is the best mom in Stranger Things. 

She’s here for her children, she comforts Mike and Nancy when they need, she has told them both multiple times that they can talk to her, she worries about them, and the whole “she doesn’t even know where they are” thing is just bullshit. This happens once, in season 3, it’s the only time where she admits she isn’t sure where they are, and even then, she lists off where she knows (or thinks she knows) they’ve been during the day. In season 2, when Dustin demands to know where Mike and Nancy are and Ted asks Karen because he has no fucking idea, Karen has an answer for both of them. 

Yes, the answers are incorrect, but it’s not her fault both her children are lying to her. 

I think it’s even more unfair—and extremely biased—when people also compare her to Joyce and make it sound like Joyce is the perfect mom while Karen is, if not the worst, not far from it. 

I love Joyce, she is an amazing character, but she is also a hot mess who is barely there for Jonathan throughout the show. Hell, when Karen asks her how Jonathan is doing in season 1—the first thing she asks her by the way—Joyce says that “he’s good at taking care of himself, always has been, you know?” which… well. Sure. He’s also sixteen and his little brother has gone missing and his mom is (in his eyes) losing her mind, you know? 

I’m not here to put Joyce on trial, like I said, I love her character and she is doing the best she can considering her situation and everything that’s happening to her, but she is also deeply flawed and tends to get tunnel vision. She is the one who asks Karen where their kids are in season 3 because she has no idea, she’s also the one who literally abandons her kids and El (who definitely needs all the support she can get) to go to Russia to save Hopper in season 4.

Again, I don’t want to pit those two characters against each other for Mom of the Year, my goal is simply to point out that Joyce, who is often described as The Perfect Mom, is far from being perfect, and Karen, who is often described as The Worst Mom, is… actually mostly doing what a mom should do? 

Yeah, yeah, I know.

But what about Billy?

Let’s go back to how the Duffers treat Karen, shall we?

The season 2, episode 9 scene with Billy is filmed in a funny, even (in my opinion) mocking way. Karen is shown reading a romance novel in her bath, and the man on the cover is very much meant to remind people of Billy: light hair, mullet, strong muscled guy. Karen is clearly flustered the moment she sees him, and we are meant to understand that it’s like this character she was just reading about (and probably fantasizing about) just materialized in front of her. And then Billy immediately starts flirting, and Karen is obviously pleased, she plays along, etc. 

Now, when I look at this scene, my first thought isn’t “ew, she’s ogling a child”, because… well, she isn’t. 

Let me explain. 

The Duffers hired a 23 years old actor to play Billy Hargrove. That is not uncommon, in fact it’s pretty much the norm in most TV shows/movies, and in Stranger Things too. 16-18yo teenagers are very rarely if ever played by actors below 20, but Billy is definitely the one that stands out the most among the teens in season 2, Joe Keery looks more like a teenager despite being older than Dacre Montgomery who has the stubble and body of a guy in his twenties. When I look at season 2 Billy Hargrove, I don’t think “this is a 17yo teenager”, and I’m ready to bet that I’m not the only one. 

Billy doesn’t look like a teenager, because the actor playing him isn’t, and that is the only reason why the Duffers were able to film this scene, and the ones later in season 3.

If Billy had been played by a 17-18yo actor who thus had looked like a 17yo teenager, they never would have been able to make this scene the way it is. They would have been forced to change the tone of the scene entirely, either to completely ridiculous because we’d have seen some kid flirting with a grown-ass woman whose only possible reaction would have been to be like “cute, alright, moving on,” and see right through him; or to indeed make it very predatory, with Karen ogling a teenage boy. 

That was not the intent behind the scene. The intent was to show bored, lonely and horny housewife Karen getting flirted with by a hot young man because they thought it’d be funny. The intent was to objectify said hot young man because they thought it’d be different from what we usually see and make them seem very smart. 

And yeah, this is making fun of Karen. It’s making fun of her loneliness, of her reading romance novels and imagining a thrilling romance for herself, a young, muscular young man showing up to save her from boredom. The Duffers didn’t give a shit about the fact that Billy is 17, so of course Karen, their character, doesn’t.

In season 3, the same intent is there, but multiply it by 100 and just make everything worse. Karen is once again reading a romance novel and her and the other housewives have such boring lives that a young hot lifeguard showing up for his shift is literally the highlight of their day, one they know the timing of; we get the slow mo, the music, the bottom lip biting, everything is there to once again objectify a man because they’re so smart and pro-women being horny, vive le féminisme! 

Anyway, Billy flirts with her, very obviously invites her to have sex with him, she agrees, then changes her mind when she realizes the consequences having an affair could have on her children.

Karen isn’t only made fun of for being a lonely, bored housewife who reads romance novels to escape the reality of her dead romantic and sex life, she is also made to give up on something that made her feel alive, desired, beautiful, to “be a good mother”. Now, I’m not saying that it would have been more “yass girl feminism won” to have her sleep with a guy twenty years younger than her, but… I just find it interesting, you know. She stops being sexual to be a good mother, and fandom decides to ignore/forget/erase all the good things she did as a mother because the way she expressed said sexuality was morally wrong.

Yeah, morally wrong. Because nothing she did was illegal. Even if she had slept with Billy in season 3, it wouldn’t have been illegal. Billy is 18 by then, he’s flirting with her, propositioning her, hell, he’s totally ogling her when she’s swimming, he was also the first one to flirt in season 2, etc. Now, yes, the morally good thing to do would have been to gently let him down in season 2, that’s what should happen in real life.

But Stranger Things isn’t real life, and neither of those scenes are meant to reflect real life. They’re the Duffers having fun, putting their own teenage fantasies of Having Sex With a Mom in their show.

“But the Duffers being a bunch of idiots doesn’t change what Karen did/almost did”. No, it doesn’t. Just like thinking the Duffers are idiots for trying to make Billy a one-dimensional villain who is racist for shock value instead of ever trying to say anything actually valuable about the racism faced by Lucas doesn’t change the fact that Billy said something racist about him to Max. 

And yet, people are quick to jump to Billy’s defense, to make up headcanons, to completely ignore canon, to write posts and posts about how it was out of worry about Max and not really against Lucas (I’m not debating this here, I’m just stating what is being done for Billy) and I see no one doing the same for Karen.

Why? Why is one character butchered by her creators’ misogyny considered an irredeemable monster, subjected to the worst vitriol from a portion of the fandom, when another character, made to say something racist and attack Lucas by his creators’ because “we need to show he’s really bad”, forgiven and rewritten to be better? 

Why is canon ignored for one, and not the other? 

I’m not saying you should be all fine and happy while watching those scenes, in fact, I think it’s good they actually upset people. What I’m asking is why are people more mad at Karen herself than they are at the Duffers’, why I never see people outraged at how her character was used and mocked in those scenes, why no one is writing fix-its for Karen and instead further mocking her and treating her like crap? 

What I’m asking is: why the double standard? 

[brionysea]

people aren't wrong that reducing lucas sinclair to "some white guy's helpful black best friend" is racist, but like. that's. it's in the show. if you analyse the text that's a very present arc for his character. this isn't an interpretation flaw it's a design flaw

[flushed-for-the-trolls]

Byler Is Toxic As Fuck And Sucks

Honestly, as of S4 Vol. 2 Byler is this toxic relationship of Will's codependency and obsession of Mike and Mike's staunch refusal to grow as a person unless led by the fucking hand (presumably by Will).

And the only other self evident fact worse than the one I just laid out is that no matter what, fans of the show will NEVER acknowledge any of this.

The fact of the matter is: If these sort of events transpired between friends, like:

(Being talked down to after your friends ignored your whole ass D&D campaign ((I don't play D&D but from what I've heard, that shit doesn't just happen on a whim and they typically take several hours to see through, so double ouchies there)).

Having your lack of a romantic/sexual desire being thrown in your face and treated as the problem when it's absolutely not,

Giving up D&D in honor of your party disbanding... Only to have them join a D&D club the second they get into High School,

Being ignored for a whole ass year,

Having your supposed best friend FORGET YOUR BIRTHDAY, then blow up at YOU at it when you're ((understandably)) upset and moody,

Having to carry the emotional burden OF said friend on 2 separate occasions, including ((and I CANNOT believe I am saying this)) giving your friend a pep-talk and painting to convince him that HIS OWN GIRLFRIEND STILL LOVES HIM

and

... Ugh... What I can only describe as the BIGGEST slap to the face. the monologue.)

You would ABSOLUTELY cut off a shitty excuse for a friend. At this point this ship is just romanticized toxicity and I've just stopped loving it.

When I see Will still simping for his deadbeat excuse of a friend I just roll my eyes. It's not cute, it's disturbing and pathetic. This isn't love, it's romanticized Stockholm Syndrome.

Will doesn't need Mike, he needs a firm sit-down on how to cut ties and move on with his life.

Will deserves someone better, and so does El, for that matter.

Anyways, this was supposed to be 100x more coherent and structured, but I switched off the tab and when I switched back to the one I was writing this on, it refreshed without my input and I lost it all, so fuck it, this is all you're getting.

Just about every ship's fandom sucks, but by God does the cake go to Byler fans, sorry but not really tbh.

I will say tho: Kinda sucks going through the Anti Byler tag, cuz it's either shipping discourse (Hell) or people being straight up homophobic (mega hell)

[notebooknonbinary]

As I promised last night, here’s a very short (and early draft) snippet from my upcoming Byler fic, All The Time in the World (posting date TBD), which is a sequel to This fic:

Dustin: “So, if you two get married, whose last name are you taking?”

Will: “What?”

Dustin: “Like when gay marriage becomes legal, are you gonna be the Wheelers, or the Byers?”

Will: “…It's a moot point, because we can’t get married.”

Dustin: “Just, hypothetically though? Because either Mike is gonna be Michael Byers, or you’re gonna be Will Wheeler.” He gasps suddenly, excited. “Or, you could be the Hoppers!!”

Will snorts. “Mike would never agree to have the same last name as Hop, Dustin.”

Dustin laughs. “Okay, that’s true. But then we’re back to the original question: Byers or Wheeler?”

Will sighs. “Byers-Wheeler.”

D: “Huh?”

W: “Byers-Wheeler. Then Mike could be Michael B. Wheeler and I could be Will Byers-Wheeler.”

D: “So you have thought about this?”

W: “Of course I have Dustin, I had a crush on him for years! I didn’t want the love of my life going around with a name that sounded like an axe murderer.”

D: “And you didn’t want the alliteration.”

W: “Of fucking course I don’t. I’d sound like a cartoon character.” A pause. “Don’t tell Max I said that.”

D, smug: “I accept bribes in the form of candy.”

[thesinglesjukebox]

DJO - END OF BEGINNING

Keeping up with TikTok pop while we still can...

[3.75]

Leah Isobel: I kind of want to be a hater about this. "Stranger Things star makes budget Ariel Pink pop about growing up, goes viral on TikTok" is an insufferable Mad Libs narrative pitch. The lyrics feel cryptic in a bad way, like Djo is aware that he's traveling well-trodden ground and straining to justify himself. And yet, his acting background comes through: his hammy Boris Pickett affectations lock him to the beat, keeping the song from feeling overly self-indulgent. It's still a little mushy, but that's not a crime. [5]

Nortey Dowuona: Djo has rightly seized on his captive audience in order to launch his pop rock career, but it thankfully hasn’t spiraled the way the Childish Gambino project did to the point where there are insufferable fans and detractors duking it out over its merits -- mainly because it’s too good to be dinged, but not good enough to be more than a popular actor’s passion project. Adam Thein’s limp drums, which have aged badly since 2022, can’t keep the overwhelming pace of the synth riffs or the lumpy bass left in the background of the mix. They support the toplines rather than drive the song, as many a baseline has done, but that then leaves the topline to hold everything up, which it constantly refuses to do. As for Joe Keery, he is no Childish Gambino before 2012. At least it’s short. [4]

Alfred Soto: The Stranger Things actor is too old by at least five years to have taken Twenty One Pilots seriously. [0]

TA Inskeep: Owl City 2024. [2]

Dave Moore: The verses are synth fetishism worthy of an awkward Stranger Things teen romance subplot (derogatory), followed by a pale imitation of a Sufjan Stevens chorus (complimentary). The ingredients sort of work on paper -- I am only human, which is to say a dork who was born in the '80s. But the song just sort of sits there, like it was designed to be vaguely apprehended floating through a pop-up beer garden. [5]

Taylor Alatorre: Are we just supposed to take these younger artists' word that their work is primarily inspired by genuine Nineteen-Eighties music, and not the phantasmal refractions of it that were being created between 2008 and 2015 (and beyond)? Because whatever points I take away for roteness and facelessness, I may give back for honesty. Anyway, check out Twin Shadow's new single "To the Top" if you get the chance. Sound of the summer. [4]

Katherine St. Asaph: This is by a Stranger Things actor and supposedly sounds like the '80s. What it actually sounds like is the driftier, understated parts of '90s alternative radio playlists. And as someone who owns the Carice van Houten album, I fully support TV folks making vanity albums that don't sound like what you'd think. [6]

Mark Sinker: He’s singing “tear to cry,” but I first heard it as “diddikai”, the Romani term for a traveler not fully Romani. Maybe you can make something of this – musician who fashions his artistic persona round not being the character he plays in a multi-season Netflix series! – but I’m not sure I sensibly can. The song is pretty and mannered and flimsy; he’s way not old enough to have the wisdom he thinks he has.  [5]

Isabel Cole: "I wave goodbye to the end of beginning" is a great line, capturing the moment when you might not feel particularly like an adult but understand, suddenly, that until recently you were very young, and now you are something else. I do remember twenty-four! Unfortunately the actual song is a plodding, soupy nothing. [0]

Will Adams: When you've got an admittedly gorgeous arrangement of languid, synth-smeared indie-rock, the last thing you want to do is sound like a try-hard; and yet, Joe Keery's delivery of clipping every syllable makes "End of Beginning" almost embarrassing to listen to. [5]

Ian Mathers: There are some choices here I kind of like (mostly around the lyrics and vocals), but the guitar tone, the chiming synth sound, and something about the production overall feels instantly dated, like I'm already looking forward to me five years from now hearing this and going "yeah, a lot of shit sounded like that in 2024." [5]

Jacob Sujin Kuppermann: An absolute nothing of a song – but I know, deep in my heart, that if I had encountered this as a college freshman it would have absolutely rocked my shit. Keery is seven years too late for me, but I'm glad this exists for those who need it. Will I still feel this warmly towards this mediocrity if I have to hear it out in the world for the next year or so? Well, that's not my problem right now. [4]

[Read, comment and vote on The Singles Jukebox]

[iminpaineland]

never not thinking about how steve and eddie’s kid would probably be an emo

[adveanture]

you   held   your   head   like   a   hero   on   a   history   book   page   .   .   .            /         multi   fandom   multi   muse,      written   by   jackie,      18+      ©  

[tellatoast]

Richard “Dick” Harrington

I firmly believe this is what he looks like. No one else can convince me otherwise.

Look at him. I dare you to tell me I’m wrong.

[tearsofperseides]

Another stranger things writing criticism post,

So much stuff in Stranger Things is so lazily executed.

I'll start with Nancy, she's supposed to be a "feminist"/"women can be strong" character of the show and they didn't fail completely with that one, but still failed. I'm glad they kept her in touch with her femininity, usually when there's supposed to be a "baddass female lead" they make her more masculine, so I'll give them that, but she's written in a very "women can be badasses too!" way, which isn't a problem, however the problem comes in when you give her a gun and constantly point out that "she's a girl who has a gun wow look feminism!". I love badass women, I genuinely do and I love Nancy, she's great, but the, let's call it, feminist writing of her character is written very lazily. Female characters shouldn't be written as female characters, but as simply characters. Another argument I have against Nancy's character writing is there was absolutely no need to give her a love triangle (even though it's not a triangle, but I digress) romance plot, what was the point? I get putting romance plots in media and I love a lot of them, but this was executed poorly and was just not needed. I'm genuinely trying to see in what way it was needed other than adding a little bit of teenage drama, which, in this show is absolutely not needed. Adding onto that, the love triangle trope was once again taken very lazily, that trope is great to explore the characters' depth, but again ST that wasn't... done? When have we seen Nancy or Steve or Jonathan struggle with this love triangle? Never, again, it was added for the teen drama aspect of the show.

Second thing is that they literally forget about half the characters they have, the show, as we all know, has an ensemble cast, but since the ensemble consists of 12 main characters (give or take) PLUS some recurring characters, the show got messy and uneven with character development really quickly. Like for example, the California plot line in s4, as much as I like it, it's obviously VERY MUCH neglected by the writers in favour of the Hawkins plot line. They also very much do something for the sake of pure shock factor, like Hopper's death, just to have him brought back in s4... never mind the logistics or lack there of of him surviving the portal closing or how genuinely unnecessary the Russia plot line was in s4. Eddie's death frustrates me and falls under the same "for the shock value" umbrella, but this is getting long and I still have some other stuff I want to focus on.

And now we get onto Billy, yes, back here again. Hi. Going back to his death once again, since I didn't express myself well enough for my liking. His death would've been fine, IF they didn't pace it the way they did. My main problem with his death is once again, is the way it's edited and El's speech intersects with the flashbacks we've already seen when El connected to them in one of the previous episodes. If they would've just cut out those flashbacks and let her describe the scene is "tell don't show" in a well executed manner. We already saw those scenes and hearing El describe the scene while seeing Billy's emotional response from her words is both telling instead of showing (Because El's literally describing the scene to him) and showing instead of telling (because of Billy's emotional response). It feels much more personal for both of the characters because, once again, you get to see their emotional responses, rather than just be bombarded with scenes of Billy's mother and being made to remember he was a happy kid once. Viewers aren't dumb, they will remember Billy's past and still feel sympathy for him. The scene of his death is just the laziest way to do so.

I still have some some things to say about the writing and everything, however this is getting long so I will leave it at what it is now. If you want me to elaborate on anything or hear any of the OTHER stuff I have problems with please send me an ask, anon or not, it's ok either way!

[marypsue]

For argyle, I can’t say much but I will say my dad is Chicano and grew up in LA area and he appreciated the Cheech and Chong references ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ IMO, I feel like his character was exciting in that it was a chance to give the Byers some interesting development, especially Jonathan, but in reality he was more an excuse for weed jokes. I also feel like sometimes the fandom in more excited to show that they can like a brown man actually, than actually giving his character depth (necessary caveat this may just be the corners in lurking on). He mainly exist for car and pizza plot points, and also deus ex machina moments where the writers clearly decided if a high person has an epiphany that coincidentally solves everything, it doesn’t count because they’re high and it’s humorous.

Apologies if you could hear me rolling my eyes over that last point from all the way over here. Everything I hear makes me more and more convinced that I made the right call dipping halfway through this last season. This show is very much no longer being made with me in the intended target audience.

(To be fair, this tendency toward stock comedic characters with cardboard personalities started with Murray back in season two, and just got fucking egregious when they decided he should be a main cast member and an important load-bearing plot element. I cannot stand the man. And yeah, season one had its share of dopey deus ex (Jonathan, why are you taking pictures in the woods in the middle of the night?), but usually it was to get the characters into Situations, not out of them.)

Like I do think it's important to be able to draw that distinction between 'this is what the author/showrunners/writers/story actually did, in our real world, where this is a fictional story that someone had to make all the choices about' and 'this is how I could explain this within the context of the story, as though it were a Thing That Happened and the people it happened to were real, and no deliberate, conscious choices shaped those facts'.

Maybe it really is just that I'm not the target audience here. Or maybe I just don't appreciate weed jokes. But it seems pretty clear to me that nobody on the writing team put in the time or the thought to give that actor much more to work with other than 'weed joke'. (Most likely because they didn't have the time to put in the thought. Or, possibly, that there was no one left on the writing team with the perspective to do so. Minirooms are bad, 'auteur theory' is bad, support the WGA.)

But I know fandom can Do Things with characters whose writers Didn't. I've done it myself! In this case, though, I can't get past how much he annoys me. Which is rough, because I agree with your point - having him there opens up a lot of really interesting possibilities for development for the Byers! It could have been really good! I just can't get there on my own. And I'm hoping somebody has the hookup for the good stuff, so that I don't have to try to sort through a lot of fics and headcanons about a character I am already irritated by for Meta Reasons, without a trusty guide.

[spaghetti-man99]

Introduction Post

Hello! I wanted to make a side blog specifically for my fic writing and art, so here we are :)) I hope you enjoy your stay, have fun! <3 

Fandoms I Write For: 

Critical Role (Campaign 2)

The Lost Boys 

The Three Musketeers 

It 

Spiderman 

Ted Lasso 

Evil Dead 

Stranger Things

Dead Poets Society

Ghost

Metalocalypse

Danger Days

(this list may be updated :33)  

Types of things I write: 

Ships 

X reader 

Character Studies 

Analysis 

Headcanons

I do also welcome asks and request, so if you have any, send ‘em my way! 

Okay, intro over, run wild kids, have fun <3