#thank you for reading this essay

[alltflyter]

I think I wouldn't mind most of these under the workers' state. Like most of the awfulness of work and the terrible working conditions associated with some of these fields is caused by capitalism, the further we develop society on the path towards socialism the better work would become for everyone.

I definitely wouldn't want to work in:

Mining. Spending significant amount of time underground would depress me. Maybe working above ground with something related to mining, but not as a miner myself, at most.

Engineering. Just seems miserable to me IDEK why LOL

Soldier or police. There isn't going to be a standing army as such or even a police-force in the same way that we talk about police today, at least not once the workers' rule has become firmly established. *1

"Party worker". Because I'm assuming that's a euphemism for bureaucrat, and they wouldn't exist in a healthy workers' state either. *2

But the rest would be fine. I think I'd like to work in a few different fields throughout my life, actually. Maybe. Probably the top ones I would want to work in here would be:

"Customer service". I quite like working the front of the house in restaurants for example, and without the pressures of capitalism and the accompanying devaluation of customer service workers I think that'd be pretty nice work. I like talking to people and being nice to strangers. Maybe working in a communal caféteria could be cool.

Childcare. This is where most of my actual work experience is, and I find the work both fun and enormously gratifying. It's a lot but you get a lot back. Under the workers' state it'd definitely be highly valued work and working conditions which right now are quite difficult in this field would be better then.

But I'd like to try farmwork, logistics, or factorywork, too. All critical fields for society obviously, and I think ideally it would be good for a person to at least have some experience in one of them. Again with better working conditions associated with the rule of the working class over society I think it'd be good enough.

Maybe later on when I'm more grown I could undertake university studies in some field or another. Astronomy is a childhood dream of mine, that'd be cool if you'll allow me to dream. I'm interested in linguistics, too. That might be cool, but I probably wouldn't want to be a linguist. I've thought about speech therapist as a potential future profession, combining my liking for phonology with helping people.

*1: State and Revolution, V.I. Lenin (1917). Ch. III: Experience of the Paris Commune of 1871. Marx's Analysis, s. 2: What is to Replace the Smashed State Machine? Link

*2: State and Revolution, V.I. Lenin (1917). Ch. VI: The Vulgarisation of Marxism by Opportunists, s. 2: Kautsky's Controversy with the Opportunists. Link

[aceissomunster]

discowing + jaybin ! press for quality

txtless + ref under the cut

ignore my horrible art please i drew this on ibis paint x with my finger and the soft felt tip pen brush. and my crappy penmanship.

[rayroseu]

I really appreciate the beauty of Malleus New Year's card. But most importantly, other than its gorgeousness, I also appreciate how it pays so much homage to his status and character, from the flowers, the clothes, and the setting. 🥹

We know that wisterias were prevalent in his Dorm Groovy SSR, this time its another flower which is the red plum blossom here😭❤️

In Chinese philosophy, the Plum tree’s blossom is a symbol of winter ending and a herald of spring. The tree’s pale pink blossoms are cherished because they bloom vibrantly and so bravely amidst the winter chill. They symbolise perseverance and hope, as well as, beauty thriving in adverse circumstances.

The way this flower's meaning is so matched with Malleus' character is so precious. We know he's "the herald of spring" because his birth brought forth a hope that the Draconias(or the faes in general) won't die out just yet (the ending of winter) and the fact that this flower blooms even in winter probably symbolizes the fact that when he was an egg, he was still perservering to live. This also applies to his life as he grows up. With the way even if his life is riddled with loneliness and exclusion, he makes an effort to go out and adjust himself with others, he doesn't give up even if his reality consistently places him in situation where his goals can never be achieved (that is, him being accepted socially and him being ignorant of human culture but still makes an effort to understand it), he just continues to be hopeful that someone/ some place will invite him, therefore his ability to thrive in adverse circumstances.

The way he slowly rises in this card makes me feel like it symbolizes how slow paced Malleus is "in going out/getting used to outside of his comfort zone", actually lol. He described his admission to NRC as him being nervous because its an unknown place but still hopeful for the experiences that he might get(acccording to the vignette of his GloMas SSR), just like him here rising from the snow and the way he lifts the veil which makes me think he wants to see the world outside of his country's point of view with his own eyes.

Japanese tradition holds that the Plum (or ‘ume’) is celebrated as a protective charm against evil, so the ume is traditionally planted in the northeast of the garden, the direction from which evil is believed to come.

I also read this symbolism which makes me tear up lmaooo 😭Because we know in Book 7, Briarland was invaded from northeast where the Silver Owls originated from 💀 The fact that the plum blossom is a protection flower and he's surrounded with it in this card makes me think that it symbolizes how protected he was during Briarland's era 😭and another thing to dissect from his slow rise from the snow with the fact the plum blossom signifies protection is probably the fact that he took so long to hatch despite many people caring for him.

Side note that in Malleus Bloom Birthday Groovy, it implied that he was born in daytime during a snowfall, and he was happy experiencing the winter, just like in this New Years card where he's smiling against the heavy snowfall 🥹

In Japan, plum blossoms symbolize good fortune, an auspicious flower, along with pine and bamboo, and the arrival of early spring. They are often used as the design for New Year’s greeting cards and other celebratory occasions. (And maybe this is just the likely reason why this flower is here in Malleus' card and I'm overthinking it above lol

Next thing I want to mention is his clothes, that attire reminds me of the formal outfit of a Japanese Emperor (From what I searched, its called sokutai, but what Malleus wears is much more simpler I guess, its a outfit derived from it which is called ikan.) This post is a great overview about these two outfits.

Ikan is the work clothes of nobles and government officials in the Imperial Court after the Heian period. Sokutai is a formal costume for those from the Emperor to the court nobles in and after Heian period (Heian costume). Ikan is called 'tonoi (nighttime) costume', whereas sokutai is called 'hino (daytime) costume'. (which probably references the fact that he's a night fae)

The point is, what Malleus wears in this card is a very traditional garment that only high ranking Japanese officials can wear. But what he wears isn't the clothes of an emperor yet, but just for a high ranking official, which is accurate to his status that he's still a crown prince not yet the king, because only Maleficia truly rules Briar Valley right now.

I love the decision that they made him wear such a prestigious outfit because the story of the New Years event is the characters working on customer service lol Its like his clothes is a reminder that he is still highly distinguished even if temporarily he's a worker.

Lastly the VEIL !!!!!! That's the thing that catched my eyes the most in this card lol I KNOW they're not referencing a wedding here because the veil don't look the same, but its so good not to mention that the one of the headress of a Japanese bride is called tsunokakushi and its description can be related with Malleus a lot lol.

The term is a compound of 角 (tsuno, "horn") + 隠し (kakushi, "hiding"). This derivation is listed in some sources as a reference to hiding a bride's "horns" of anger, jealousy, or other negative qualities, in order to present a more virtuous image for the wedding. However, this interpretation might be a folk etymology resulting from a shift in the reading and meaning.

The headdress and the veil aren't the same thing but I kinda feel like this is the idea they're going for considering the veil is 1) hiding his horns, 2) he's a character associated with being jealous, and most importantly, 3) only the person he is looking at can see his face (which is the point of most wedding veils/headdress, to hide the bride's face so that only her partner can see it).

But long veils, like the one Malleus is holding is also just a garment for a noble to hide their nobility. Which is this is probably the likely reason, considering he's using that veil to cover up his horns and his clothes, the most obvious features of his status.

Also, it could be just a fun reference to the fact that Maleficent in live action wore a long veil to hide her horns so that she wouldn't scare the humans lol

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

I came here for the silly haha doodles, but I've stayed for the absolutely blazing commentary in the tags. Your analysis of this story is so so so good! Thanks for all the work and thought you put into this!

I am just a silly little comics blog. I am not hiding anything in the tags, no way. Never.

[babacontainsmultitudes]

HEH. THE COMPLETE (UPDATED) HEH COMPILATION IS HERE.

Original version is here, but now the final "heh"s have been collected (sorry for the delay I was waiting for all the transcripts to be out!) and assembled in one place 😎. Enjoy!

[recent-rose]

yknowwww there is something... deeply uncomfortable about the way mel never speaks directly to viktor in the 'build hextech weapons' scene. she really only speaks to jayce. plenty of people have pointed this out already but like the one scene they actually share a meaningful interaction and she treats him like he's beneath her. all this after jayce has emphasized how important viktor is, that hextech is theirs, together. she unequivocally ices him out, there's no other way to interpret this scene. the way it's shot too - from viktor's perspective, looking up at her, as though to reinforce the same belief in him. like he doesn't even bother expecting respect from her - or anyone from the upper echelon of piltover. he's fully accustomed to being dehumanized by everyone around him at this point. sometimes even by jayce, despite the trust they clearly have in each other.

then of course after this scene is viktor experimenting on himself. it's pretty clear that he has internalized his own dehumanization. crazy.

[lurkingteapot]

Every now and then I think about how subtitles (or dubs), and thus translation choices, shape our perception of the media we consume. It's so interesting. I'd wager anyone who speaks two (or more) languages knows the feeling of "yeah, that's what it literally translates to, but that's not what it means" or has answered a question like "how do you say _____ in (language)?" with "you don't, it's just … not a thing, we don't say that."

I've had my fair share of "[SHIP] are [married/soulmates/fated/FANCY TERM], it's text!" "[CHARACTER A] calls [CHARACTER B] [ENDEARMENT/NICKNAME], it's text!" and every time. Every time I'm just like. Do they though. Is it though. And a lot of the time, this means seeking out alternative translations, or translation meta from fluent or native speakers, or sometimes from language learners of the language the piece of media is originally in.

Why does it matter? Maybe it doesn't. To lots of people, it doesn't. People have different interests and priorities in fiction and the way they interact with it. It's great. It matters to me because back in the early 2000s, I had dial-up internet. Video or audio media that wasn't available through my local library very much wasn't available, but fanfiction was. So I started to read English language Gundam Wing fanfic before I ever had a chance to watch the show. When I did get around to watching Gundam Wing, it was the original Japanese dub. Some of the characters were almost unrecognisable to me, and first I doubted my Japanese language ability, then, after checking some bits with friends, I wondered why even my favourite writers, writers I knew to be consistent in other things, had made these characters seem so different … until I had the chance to watch the US-English dub a few years later. Going by that adaptation, the characterisation from all those stories suddenly made a lot more sense. And the thing is, that interpretation is also valid! They just took it a direction that was a larger leap for me to make.

Loose adaptations and very free translations have become less frequent since, or maybe my taste just hasn't led me their way, but the issue at the core is still a thing: Supernatural fandom got different nuances of endings for their show depending on the language they watched it in. CQL and MDZS fandom and the never-ending discussions about 知己 vs soulmate vs Other Options. A subset of VLD fans looking at a specific clip in all the different languages to see what was being said/implied in which dub, and how different translators interpreted the same English original line. The list is pretty much endless.

And that's … idk if it's fine, but it's what happens! A lot of the time, concepts -- expressed in language -- don't translate 1:1. The larger the cultural gap, the larger the gaps between the way concepts are expressed or understood also tend to be. Other times, there is a literal translation that works but isn't very idiomatic because there's a register mismatch or worse. And that's even before cultural assumptions come in. It's normal to have those. It's also important to remember that things like "thanks I hate it" as a sentiment of praise/affection, while the words translate literally quite easily, emphatically isn't easy to translate in the sense anglophone internet users the phrase.

Every translation is, at some level, a transformative work. Sometimes expressions or concepts or even single words simply don't have an exact equivalent in the target language and need to be interpreted at the translator's discretion, especially when going from a high-context/listener-responsible source language to a low-context/speaker-responsible target language (where high-context/listener responsible roughly means a large amount of contextual information can be omitted by the speaker because it's the listener's responsibility to infer it and ask for clarification if needed, and low-context/speaker-responsible roughly means a lot of information needs to be codified in speech, i.e. the speaker is responsible for providing sufficiently explicit context and will be blamed if it's lacking).

Is this a mouse or a rat? Guess based on context clues! High-context languages can and frequently do omit entire parts of speech that lower-context/speaker-responsible languages like English regard as essential, such as the grammatical subject of a sentence: the equivalent of "Go?" - "Go." does largely the same amount of heavy lifting as "is he/she/it/are you/they/we going?" - "yes, I am/he/she/it is/we/you/they are" in several listener-responsible languages, but tends to seem clumsy or incomplete in more speaker-responsible ones. This does NOT mean the listener-responsible language is clumsy. It's arguably more efficient! And reversely, saying "Are you going?" - "I am (going)" might seem unnecessarily convoluted and clumsy in a listener-responsible language. All depending on context.

This gets tricky both when the ambiguity of the missing subject of the sentence is clearly important (is speaker A asking "are you going" or "is she going"? wait until next chapter and find out!) AND when it's important that the translator assign an explicit subject in order for the sentence to make sense in the target language. For our example, depending on context, something like "are we all going?" - "yes" or "they going, too?" might work. Context!

As a consequence of this, sometimes, translation adds things – we gain things in translation, so to speak. Sometimes, it's because the target language needs the extra information (like the subject in the examples above), sometimes it's because the target language actually differentiates between mouse and rat even though the source language doesn't. However, because in most cases translators don't have access to the original authors, or even the original authors' agencies to ask for clarification (and in most cases wouldn't get paid for the time to put in this extra work even if they did), this kind of addition is almost always an interpretation. Sometimes made with a lot of certainty, sometimes it's more of a "fuck it, I've got to put something and hope it doesn't get proven wrong next episode/chapter/ten seasons down" (especially fun when you're working on a series that's in progress).

For the vast majority of cases, several translations are valid. Some may be more far-fetched than others, and there'll always be subjectivity to whether something was translated effectively, what "effectively" even means …

ANYWAY. I think my point is … how interesting, how cool is it that engaging with media in multiple languages will always yield multiple, often equally valid but just sliiiiightly different versions of that piece of media? And that I'd love more conversations about how, the second we (as folks who don't speak the material's original language) start picking the subtitle or dub wording apart for meta, we're basically working from a secondary source, and if we're doing due diligence, to which extent do we need to check there's nothing substantial being (literally) lost -- or added! -- in translation?

[polin-erospsyche]

This post was inspired by a comment from an anon in my ask box. They mentioned that if the Queen hadn’t interrupted Polin's wedding, they could have had a beautiful wedding night (if you’re the anon and you’re reading this, hi! And also, I know this isn't everything, but I'll touch on the rest. Small disclaimer: this got long and I’m sorry).

I agree, that could have happened. But honestly, I'm really glad it didn’t. Don’t get me wrong, I would have loved to see it, but I don’t think it would have been good for them. The intimate scenes we did get tell an overarching story and serve a purpose in the narrative. We’ve been told that these intimate moments are a way for them to communicate, so let’s unpack that.

The first intimate scene is about them discovering each other in a new, intimate way, moving from friendship (which had already started to happen in the carriage) to a lover relationship. This moment is crucial for Penelope's story and character development. From this, she grows in confidence and self-awareness. She expresses this to Colin multiple times, such as when she says, “with the confidence you’ve helped me find this year,” and later, “You’ve taught me to hold my own. You have shown me I’m capable of pleasure beyond imagination.”

From that intimate scene onward, Penelope starts to come into her own power and that includes her sexual power. Colin shows her a level of love and care beyond what she ever thought possible, breaking down the belief system she built around herself. She was ready to sacrifice her dreams of being loved and held for financial stability, a mindset ingrained by Portia. Colin helps her see that this doesn’t have to be the case, chipping away at her long-held beliefs.

Let’s now move to the scene in the alleyway, which links back to anon’s comment. Anon suggests that this is the moment they start repairing their relationship post LW reveal. That following this scene they were in a good enough place to enjoy their wedding night if the Queen hadn’t crashed the party. Yes. And no. 

And oh my god how I’ve longed to discuss this scene but I never quite knew how to approach it. At this point in the show, the narrative is like a tightly wound ball of yarn with so many threads to pull at. So, let’s attempt to pull at them. 

First of all, they’ve entered a whole new playing field. And they’ve entered this playing field while being “the oldest of friends really” so they have ammunition against each other. Pen has hurt Colin by lying (hiding the truth from him time and time again) about her identity. She has let him go on and on about his despise of Lady Whistledown. About his dreams of being an author. These were things he told her in intimacy. Those were things he told his best friend and the person he fell in love with. Not the woman who hides behind her column and has done so much wrong to his family and loved ones. 

There is a separation between the two. For Colin, in that alleyway, there is still just Pen his best friend, Penelope the woman he loves and on the other side of that there is Lady Whistledown, the woman he vowed to destroy. He expresses that when he says “so then you do not need Lady Whistledown anymore”. What he fails to realise at this point, and he cannot be blamed for that, is that Lady Whistledown is an integral part of who Penelope Featherington is as a person. That her alter ego is not just a mask she wears but a crucial aspect of her identity, giving her a sense of power and agency in a world that often limits her as a woman. Something that Pen has slowly come to terms with when she says that she no longer needs to hide behind this alter ego but that does not mean there is no value in it, something that she also explains to him after the Queen has crashed their wedding breakfast. 

Now I say that he cannot be blamed for his refusal of recognizing that they are one and the same because he is still holding onto his misbelief, which is that to be loved and to have a value he must protect what he loves and be useful. Part of that is saving and avenging the people he loves from Whistledown. He has given his word to Eloise, to Marina indirectly, to himself and I’m thinking to Pen silently after what she’s written about herself. He finds himself, due to his misbelief, between a rock and a hard place: “the person he vowed to destroy is, in fact, the person he vowed to protect, and there is no separation between the two” (not me directly quoting myself lol). To this you add all the shame over his writing and his envy of her success and you have a recipe for disaster. 

So essentially, in that alleyway you have Pen who is already well along her character arc and Colin who is still gripping onto his original, unchanged self. This represents a power imbalance. What I love throughout this season, and I might write something about this one day, is that Pen and Colin are never quite on the same level both literally and figuratively. There is always one ahead of the other. This, in the long run, is another recipe for disaster because they are never quite equal. That is UNTIL that butterfly ball when they’ve gone through their character arc respectively. That is the moment they fully come together. They become a unit. They are no longer fighting against each other but with each other and for each other. 

But to arrive to this moment they need to do it separately. They need to be able to work on themselves before they can fully be able to work on their marriage. Genevieve says it well “there is no such thing as true love without first embracing your true self”. For Penelope that is becoming Penelope Bridgerton, an amalgam of the best parts of Whistledown and Penelope Featherington. For Colin that is deconstructing his hero complex and fully believing that he is enough just by being exactly who he is. And that has not happened in that alleyway. Truthfully the surface has barely been scraped in that scene because she essentially shuts down his demons for an instant by saying that she loves him. However, the issues remain. 

So yes, we can speculate all we want. If the Queen had not interrupted their wedding, they might have had a wedding night and they might have had a talk about everything afterward. However, the lack of acceptance of their true selves would have driven them up a wall at the next problem, which was how to handle Cressida.

And I think that is why Polin season is actually so beautiful. It is not just about Polin. It is about marriage and how hard it can get, and how you have to work on yourself to fit around the person you love without sacrificing yourself in the process. It is about choosing each other every day, through the ugly as well as the beautiful, through the hard parts as well as the easy ones. It’s choosing to have faith that you’ll work and figure it out without an assurance that it actually will, but if the love is there, then it just might. That is the story they chose to tell through Penelope and Colin.

First gif made by my bestie @polinsated 💕

[iridescentmirrorsgenshin]

This is an analysis of Kaveh and Alhaitham’s argument posted on the Port Ormos bulletin board!! Because it is crazy actually!!

I think this exchange of theirs out of the three posted throughout Sumeru is particularly interesting, and this is due Alhaitham openly expressing that Kaveh does not understand what Alhaitham is really trying to say to him: “I have never denied what you meant, but you don’t understand what I am saying to you at all.”

This exchange is relevant in various ways in exploring the motif of communication. As according to their usual rapport, the two disagree over their differing philosophies, as in sensibility versus rationality, however, Alhaitham’s particular concerns in Kaveh spending his money on “nonsense” highlights the underlying reason for this exchange. From this comment, the argument is recontextualised through Alhaitham’s intention for getting involved, as Kaveh prompts the workmen to take his money in order to help them out.

When Alhaitham states that this is a meaningless action due to the inevitability of people rising or falling on their own accord, rather than solely critiquing Kaveh’s “impulsiv[e]” altruism, as Kaveh interprets, Alhaitham is directly contradicting his own comment – as he is interfering on Kaveh’s decisions.

As concern is evidently the intention behind his interference, Kaveh cannot perceive this, and instead attempts to critique Alhaitham’s perspective in return, although Alhaitham states: “Make no mistake. I have never denied what you meant…” This response asserts that Alhaitham does not deny, but rather agrees with, Kaveh’s statement of “mutual assistance, fairness, and righteous anger” driving the world.

In lieu of this, rather than continuing the argument, Alhaitham claims that there is no point to it, as Kaveh does not understand what he is saying, as in, Kaveh does not understand that his intentions in interfering are out of concern. He follows this up, regardless, by criticising Kaveh’s handling of his budget, as, evidently, Kaveh has offered to give his own money to these workmen, and refuses to pay for Kaveh’s drinks for that month.

For Alhaitham, Kaveh’s lack of self-prioritisation leads him to impulsive altruistic acts which serve to jeopardise his own position, particularly regarding money. If Kaveh can afford to give away money, he can afford to pay his own tabs, is the takeaway from this exchange. Although, similarly to the exchange between them posted in Puspa’s Café, this applies to one particular month, insinuating that Alhaitham will continue to pay for next month’s tabs of his own accord.

The main argument, as well as the disagreement over the speaker of Kaveh’s quote, serves as a humorous exchange, but as a motif for communication it acquires a new meaning. The two hold perspectives which contrast the other which puts them on unequal footing, demonstrated within the argument over the speaker of Kaveh’s quote. Although it is not disclosed who is actually in the right, both are convinced of their respective viewpoint. There is an element missing here, a potential solution to this problem, and it lies within the idea of “correctness” established within A Parade of Providence.

The omission of there being an objective, correct answer to this particular debate serves as a parallel to their conflicting viewpoints, with the basis of their exchange being to “prove” to the other their “correctness” – here, it is in regard to Kaveh.

However, “correctness” being the basis of their exchange, and thus, relationship, is challenged with Alhaitham shutting down the initial debate due to Kaveh’s misunderstanding of his meaning. Correctness, then, and its importance, is called into question within this exchange, with Kaveh being the one to chase it; his last message being that he would “prove” himself to be right.

At the core of this bulletin board exchange is the idea that Alhaitham harbours an alternative ‘meaning’ than the one that Kaveh assigns to him: “… you don’t understand what I’m saying to you at all.” This is a meaning which Kaveh cannot perceive due to his current understanding of Alhaitham. This represents the standing of their current relationship, where Kaveh believes Alhaitham holds him in disdain, although this belief is incongruous with Alhaitham’s actions which show his care for Kaveh.

In these instances of communication through the Bulletin Boards, it is interesting to note that Kaveh is revealed to have been drunk and “scribbling” on these notice boards, and hopes that Alhaitham does not know.

Although this is a humorous detail, it adds another layer to the unreliability of their method of communication, as Kaveh has no recollection of these exchanges with Alhaitham, and therefore could not have properly interpreted Alhaitham due to an altered state of mind. It is uncertain whether Alhaitham is aware of Kaveh’s being drunk whilst responding to him, or whether he is believed to have been lucid, which creates another element of unreliability in their exchanges.

Alhaitham understands Kaveh’s thinking and the reasons for why he acts as he does, but he cannot articulate his concern in a way that Kaveh will understand, both out of Kaveh’s incapability of receiving goodwill, but also due to his logical manner of expression. Kaveh perceives Alhaitham’s concealed expressions of concern as personal gripes and criticisms of his beliefs, and therefore believes that their relationship is based on the scholarly principle of proving the validity of one’s philosophies.

The Port Ormos Bulletin Board reinforces the core essence of their relationship: Alhaitham is invested in a personal regard, whereas Kaveh cannot see this due to his perception of Alhaitham and Alhaitham’s inability to communicate in a way Kaveh would understand.

(Update: For more analyses like this, the essay this is taken from is now uploaded! It can be accessed here and here as as a pdf <3)

[i-like-forcefem]

Hey so uh I wanted to ask about that candy bar you gave me at the Halloween party last night, I ate it before bed (it tasted really good) but when I woke up I started to notice some things. My voice sounds kinda softer and higher pitched than before, my body feels tingly and kinda soft, my hair looks a lot longer and fuller than I remember it being, and every time I look in the mirror I think I look thinner than before...my clothes feel uncomfortable...people have been saying I look and sound cute and every time they compliment me I start blushing...n-not that I'm in any pain, don't worry, it's just...uh...w-where did you get that candy bar from again?

Awwww, well cutie the bars are ones I make by with plenty of love, specially for Halloween and a secret recipe I can’t just share with anyone

But since you seem to enjoy them so much let’s make a little deal!

I’ll let you Trick or Treat everyday! Just come here with a new fun outfit everyday and you’ll never run out of candy bars!

That said the bars work the best if you eat them everyday (and they can have quite some withdrawal symptoms) and I only have you the first bar because your costume was so so adorable and cute and feminine, and just so you know you’ve set the standard now cutie!

If you want more candy bars you better come back in an even cuter outfit, and also make sure to walk here in broad daylight where everyone can see! No cars allowed, most of the fun from Halloween is that anyone can see your costume, so you do need the show off phase

Got it cutie? Good Girl! Now take one more bar as a free-bee and I expect you here in much more appropriate clothing tomorrow, if you want another bar of course

[cuddlytogas]

there was some Twitter madness recently where someone left a comment on someone's art to the effect of, "Ed shouldn't wear a dress, he's a man!" which I do disagree with on principle, but unfortunately, it brought out one of my least favourite trends in the fandom

so, naturally, I had to write a twitter essay about it. and I already largely argued this in a post here, but the thread is clearer and better structured, so I thought I'd cross-post for those not on the Hellsite (derogatory). edited for formatting/structure's sake, since I no longer have to keep to tweet lengths, and incorporating a couple of points other people brought up in the replies

so

I want to point out that the wedding cake toppers in OFMD s2 aren't evidence that Ed wants to wear dresses. Gender is fake, men can wear skirts, play with these dolls how you like, but it's not canon, and that scene especially Doesn't Mean That.

People cite it often: 'He put himself in a dress by painting the bride as himself! It's what he wants!' But that fundamentally misunderstands the scene, and the series' framing of weddings as a whole. I'd argue that Ed paints the figure not from desire, but from self-hatred; it's not what he wants, but what he thinks he should, and has failed to, be.

(Yes, I am slightly biased by my rampant anti-marriage opinions, but bear with me here, because it is relevant to the interpretation of the scene, and season two as a whole.)

The show is not subtle. It keeps telling us that the institution of marriage is a prison that suffocates everyone involved. Ed's parents' cycle of abuse is passed to their son in both the violence he witnesses then enacts on his father, and the self-repression his mother teaches, despite her good intentions ("It's not up to us, is it? It's up to God. ... We're just not those kind of people. We never will be."). Stede and Mary are both oppressed by their arranged marriage, with 1x04 blunty titled Discomfort in a Married State. The Barbados widows revel in their freedom ("We're alive. They're dead. Now is your time").

But even without this context, the particular wedding crashed in 2x01 is COMICALLY evil. The scene is introduced with this speech from the priest:

"The natural condition of humanity is base and vile. It is the obligation of people of standing ... to elevate the common human rabble through the sacred transaction of matrimony."

It's upper class, all-white, and religiously sanctioned. "Vile natural conditions" include queerness, sexual freedom, and family structures outside the cisheteropatriarchal capitalist unit. "The obligation of people of standing" invokes ideas like the white man's burden, innate class hierarchy, religious missions, and conversion therapy. Matrimony is presented as both "sacred" (endorsed by the ruling religious body), and a "transaction" (business performed to transfer property and people-as-property, regardless of their desires), a tool of the oppressive society that pirates escape and destroy. That is where the figurines come from.

When Ed, in a drunk, depressive spiral, paints himself onto the bride, he's not yearning for a pretty dress. He's sort of yearning for a wedding, but that's not framed as positive. What he's doing is projecting himself into an 'ideal' image of marriage because he believes that: a) that's what Stede (and everyone) wants; b) he can never live up to that ideal because he's unlovable and broken (brown, queer, lower-class, violent, abused, etc); c) that's why Stede left. He tries to make himself fit into the social ideal by painting himself onto the closest match - long-haired, partner to Stede/groom, but a demure, white woman, a frozen, porcelain miniature - because, if he could just shrink himself down and squeeze into that box, maybe Stede would love him and he'd live happily ever after. But he can't. So he won't.

The fantasy fails: Ed is morose, turns away from the figurines, then tips them into the sea, a lost cause. He knows he won't ever fulfil that bride's role, but he sees that as a failure in himself, not the role. It's not just that "Stede left, so Ed will never have a dream wedding and might as well die." Stede left when Ed was honest and vulnerable, "proving" what his trauma and depression tell him: there's one image of love (of personhood), and he'll never live up to it because he's fundamentally deficient. So he might as well die.

This hit me from my very first viewing. The scene is devastating, because Ed is wrong, and we know it! He doesn't need to change or reduce himself to fit an image and be accepted (as, eg, Izzy demanded). Stede knows and loves him exactly as he is; it's the main thread and theme of season two!

(@/everyonegetcake suggested that Ed's yearning in these scenes includes his broader desire for the vulnerability and safety Stede offered, literalised through unattainable "fine" things like the status of gentleman in s1, or the figurine's blue dress. I'd argue, though, that these scenes don't incorporate this beyond a general knowledge of Ed's character. Ed is always pining for both literal and emotional softness, but the significance of the figurines specifically, to both Ed and the audience, is poisoned by their origin and context: there is no positive fantasy in the bride figure, only Ed's perceived deficiency.

Further, assuming that a desire for vulnerability necessarily corresponds with an explicit desire for femininity, dresses, etc, kind of contradicts the major themes of the show. OFMD asserts that there is nothing wrong with men assuming femininity (through drag, self-care, nurturing, emotional vulnerability, etc), but also that many of these traits are, in fact, genderless, and should be available to men without affecting their perceived or actual masculinity. It thematically invokes the potential for cross-gender expression in Ed's desires, especially through the transgender echoes in his relieved disposal, then comfortable reincorporation, of the Blackbeard leathers/identity. It's a rich, valuable area of analysis and exploration. But it remains a suggestion, not a canon or on-screen trait.)

Importantly, the groom figure doesn't fit Stede, either. Not just in dress: it's stiff and formal, and marriage nearly killed him. He's shabbier now, yes, but also shedding his privilege and property, embracing his queerness, and trying to take responsibility for his community. In a s1 flashback, Stede hesitantly says, "I thought that, when I did marry, it could be for love," but he would never find love in marriage. Not just because he's gay, but because marriage in OFMD is an oppressive, transactional institution that precludes love altogether. All formal marriages in OFMD are loveless.

So, he becomes a pirate, where they reject society altogether and have matelotages instead. Lucius and Pete's "mateys" ceremony is shot and framed not like a wedding, but as an honest, personal bond, willingly conducted in community (in a circle; no presiding authority, procession, or transaction).

That is how Stede and Ed can find love, companionship, and happiness: by rejecting those figurines and their oppressive exchange of property, overseen by a church that enables colonialism and abuse. Ed is loved, and deserves happiness, as he is, no paint or projection required.

ALL OF THIS IS TO SAY: draw Ed in dresses! Write him getting gender euphoria in skirts! Write trans/nb Ed, draw men being feminine! Gender is fake, the show invites exploration, that's what 'transformative works' means! But please, stop citing the cake toppers as evidence it's canon. Stop citing a scene where a depressed Māori man gets drunk and projects himself onto a rich, white, silent bride because he thinks he's innately unlovable and only people like her can find happiness, shortly before deciding to kill himself, as canon evidence it's what he wants.

(Also, please don't come in here with "lmao we're just having fun," I know, I get it. Unfortunately, I'm an academiapilled researchmaxxer, and some of youse need to remember that the word "canon" has meaning. NOW GO HAVE FUN PUTTING THAT MAN IN A PRETTY DRESS!! 💖💖)

[bleue-flora]

Tbh Im just thinking of something that im really curious and doesnt let me asleep. What was cdream planing to do once he was inside the prison? Bc if it was just contain the revival book then...why he had the plan to not stay too long in there? cpunz kinda implies the plan was meeting soon after cdream was imprisionated when they reunited post prison break. So what was his plan? the little we see of cdream in prison before he kills ctommy was him just passing around the cell and getting bored and starting to be starved by csam. Was it a plan to united the server, stay imprisoned a few weeks and then come out acting as if he changed? well that'd make sense, also could explain why he insisted so much in that he changed or leave forever even with people he and everyone knew wouldnt buy that at all like ctommy or csam after ctechno escape. But that stills makes me uneasy bc he didnt try that much. He didnt try to act like he was "reformed"(meaning as what the server expected to him to act if he reformed not in a way saying imprisoment is a was okay or acceptable way to help someone), he tells ctommy he burned the books when ctommy asked him to write novels as a way to say sorry.

Im just thinking what was he planned to do inside the prison? just stay there and rot for an indeterminaded amount of time? idk if the "contain the revival book" as his only motive fits bc then why he seemed to have planned with cpunz to meet soon and also planned that cranboo explodes tnt to trap a visitor with him? And the "trying to act as if he changed" while it makes more sense to me, it also doesnt convince me 100% for what I just said. Maybe a combination of the two? it could be, a person can have multiple reasons to do something. But idk, what do you think was cdream plan once he was inside the prison?

-Cleo

That is The question isn’t it -Why put himself in prison?

And the thing is I can’t really give you a definitive answer because we just don’t know. There are lots of variables and we just don’t have enough data to determine the answer, especially when we don’t even get his pov or get to see 80% of his lore. The best I can give you is my theory on why I personally think he did it, which I have talked about [here], based on the information we do have and assuming he’s not completely crazy, and is following some form of logical plan, however flawed…

For starters, one of the things we do reasonably know based on the amount of times it comes up including the finale is his larger desire and motivation - "Always the goal has just been that it's all one united server, that everybody follows the same rules, there's no countries there's no, you know, any of this it's just one giant like family." [clip], “I want everyone to live and be happy together” forever [clip], (after spending time in Dream’s head we get Tommy saying) “You just want things to be simple.” [clip] and then of course -> “I just don’t want to ever be alone.” [clip]

That’s the base line - Dream does not want to be alone, he craves community and family, a world where everyone is happy and together.

So keeping that in mind, for starters I don’t think he did it to “contain the revival book” and honestly I’m not even sure where that reasoning came from, I don’t think I’ve ever seen it and it really doesn’t even work as you point out, one reason being that Dream’s stay was meant to be temporary.

I also don’t think the reasoning of uniting the server works either because for starters the whole server isn’t even present for his arrest and the ones who are there weren’t necessarily big enemies before that. Besides technically he already did a better job uniting people against him during Doomsday. Now maybe that was a side bonus or goal but I don’t think it’s the main reasoning.

But yes, I do think it was a means to be seen as reformed or less of a threat by the server. I go into some of that reasoning in my other post. I think it was about providing a pathway to him not being enemy number 1 anymore. Because people had been rallying against him even in a time of mostly peace with the biggest example being L’manberg planning to assassinate him in cold blood in the Green Festival. Everyone was against him, even his friends and everyone lived in such fear and hatred of him no one would even hear him out. I mean I think the dethronement conversation is a great example of this (I provide a good bit of transcript in this [post]). Everything he said was seen as unreasonable and malicious and he was left alone with no way to mend these relationships. Everyone wanted him dead, but he didn’t want to die and while he could just leave to protect himself, we know he didn’t want to be alone, so instead his made a plan to a path of him being redeemed in the eyes of the server.

That was the plan right. Everyone defeats their villain, gets their revenge, but instead of him ending up dead like they wanted he is alive in prison and now that he’s stripped of his power, fear is more removed allowing for relationships. No longer is he this unstoppable evil overseer but just a person. Or so was I think his intention. They would keep him in there for a bit, realize not everything is his fault, that he isn’t this big evil tyrant, get their satisfied comeuppance and then people would let him out. Consider Bad’s reaction to visiting Dream [post] - he’s done bad things but he deserves better than to suffer - that is a whole different reaction than the person willing to have him murdered completely - dead forever - by Tommy a few days prior.

Anyways, if that was his goal, then why didn’t he try to act reformed upon his escape? Well… that was his original plan. By the time he escapes he has spent months being starved, isolated, and tortured, his mental stability ain’t exactly top notch at that point and based on those things even happening in the first place, his belief that people would think he’s reformed or allow him back into society has likely been squashed. Clearly, he didn’t think his previous friends would torture, starve, threaten to kill him if he ever leaves, even try to kill him when he’s already locked up. He underestimated their hatred and fear of him, so I doubt he had much faith at all for them to even let him have a chance to be “reformed” or just not wanna kill him at that point, since again most of the people he’s interacted with up until he escaped wanted him dead or promised to kill him.

However, I do think there was still that underlying hope. You can hear that hope bleed out of his voice in his conversation with Sapnap as he goes from trying to reason with Sapnap as an old friend even with the offer to start over, to sounding just as insane and malevolent as he did with Tommy [clip] -> [clip] -> [clip]. He tries so hard to avoid the fight that Sapnap is setting him up for, he tries so hard for them just to not be enemies. But him escaping prison is evidence for Sapnap that Dream is still hostile and even the torture is not a good enough reasoning for that escape to be anything but proof of his violent ways. And you can hear the switch in his voice the moment he realizes the only way people listen to him is if he’s the villain they see him as, if he finds their weakness and exploits it, threatening to destroy something they love (sound familiar doesn’t it?…)

As for his encounter with Tommy, after spending time with him in prison and then Tommy trying to kill him while he was in prison, I don’t think he thought there was any world where they weren’t enemies. Tommy already proved himself to be hostile and he, despite his fear of Dream, even came to get the weapons and confront Dream in the exile area, knowing Dream was going there, proving to still be an active threat. And what does a rattle snake do when a threat appears? They rattle, they rattle make themselves appear big, they make the threat afraid and send the threat away. And that is what I believe Dream is doing with Tommy in that confrontation. He’s making him afraid, so Tommy will be too scared to come after him. I don’t think he ever intended to make good on his threats, because honestly, there are other people on his priority list to get revenge and make suffer. And he’s saying the same things he said in the finale, we know was staged, about how he’s targeting Tommy specifically and Tommy being the main fun to torment on the server.

Now this plan does end up backfiring a bit because the moment Tommy returns home he immediately starts to form a group to go after and kill Dream, fortifying Tubbo’s house to serve as a base and gathering gear… etc. It’s because of that, that I think he leaves the creepy disc in Tommy’s basement, to make him more afraid so he’s too scared to come after him… so to me I’m not sure we can say he didn’t try to act reformed, I don’t think he was given the chance. Even with people like Foolish, who doesn’t even know him, he’s on rocky terms with. It doesn’t seem to matter what he does after prison, he can mind his own business - lock himself away and not bother anyone for months or go through with his threats and they’ll still wait outside his door to kill him and sneak into his house in the middle of the night to slit his throat. Hell even if he had done as Techno had and built a cottage in the middle of nowhere, I bet people still would have come after him. He’s Dream after all…

So Dream is clearly dancing on the edges of insanity and unable to gain any credit of change from people after prison, but as you point out, what about in prison. He sure didn’t seem to go out of his way to act reformed in prison and that was before the torture so does that mean this theory of him trying to be “reformed” in the eyes of the server isn’t his goal? Well no, not necessarily. As I’ve already mentioned, we can see the way he acts with Bad is very pitiful and making himself seem small and unthreatening to be let out, and we see him apologize to Tommy in his first visit and such. This though doesn’t appear to last long, but I think that is because he was experiencing lots of isolation, and not isolation that can be distracted from with like watching a movie or something (because he has nothing) - isolation without really anything to quell it. If you’ve watched videos relating to isolation or know much about it then you’ll know that it tanks mental health real fast. Therefore Dream’s insanity sets in fast. Leading to his desperation for human contact, so then instead of acting all good and getting reformed and paying for his crimes and being remorseful and such, he starts acting out like throwing himself into lava and burning the clocks just so Sam has to come visit him. His misbehavior then I think is a symptom and consequence of the prison conditions not necessarily part of his plan. He also calls it a prank so he probably didn’t think it’d go that much against his plans of seeming better, but clearly Sam doesn’t seem to appreciate his pranks and starts becoming more hostile and such, which shouldn’t suprise us given Sam’s behavior in the prison even early on. In addition, even Sam’s response to Ponk in the tour of the prison and what he says to Bad later about using food as a means to get information, I’d say it’s fair to assume that Sam’s intense demeanor likely started early on, meaning I think Dream’s food was being withheld early on, before the dropper was added. And that’s besides the fact that going from eating steak to a few raw potato’s would be a huge food reduction and cause issues anyways. So even before things get real bad, Dream’s mental stability is dropping real fast and you can see it from each visit he gets. There is genuine mental decline there even if Dream does also seem to use it to his advantage. I mean who knows what Sam did for Dream to stop talking altogether in protest in Sapnap’s visit… bare in mind too, if we look at the timelines Exile only lasted 9 days, countries only last a month or two, things went really fast so it’s not unreasonable for Dream to think his sentence would be short. But then “forever” is being thrown around even by his own friend and that’s when he probably realizes his plan is falling apart.

So by the time, Tommy visits again Dream is not in an optimistic and good mental state. Plus if I remember right, I believe Tommy said he’d visit a lot and even suggested being his like “therapist” but then didn’t come back until a month later on Feb 21st. So maybe Dream wrote the books but in his frustrating of being left alone and Tommy not coming back, ended up burning them.

In other words, I think originally the plan was for people to come visit and talk to him and see that he’s not such a bad guy and that his punishment has been sufficient to then be let out. But things fall apart fast. Isolation and boredom starts to set in, food starts to be limited, and people don’t visit. He just didn’t want to be alone -> and now is left entirely alone.

Then his plan to trap Tommy happens likely way later then it was supposed to because I doubt he expected it to be a month before Tommy returns, and he aims to make some form of amends however minuscule or least have them learn to cohabitate, but that doesn’t go to plan at all, in fact Tommy calls him names and bickers and whines the whole time and 9 days later after Dream expresses his love for the cat, Tommy kills it as well as starts doubting the existence of the Revive Book (the only reason they left him alive in the first place). So after spending weeks in boredom, isolation with low levels of food, and after over the week that was supposed to happen (based on the prison waiver signed) of listening to Tommy bitch and dealing with his punching and calling him names, and even while experiencing the terrible conditions still being adamant that Dream deserves this, Dream beats his head in in a fit of mania. And that I doubt was planned either, and certainly helps ruin his bigger plan.

So what was he planning to do in prison? I think be visited. I think write notes and letters to people and such. I don’t think it was about being reformed or redeemed per say or that Dream believed he needed that (though a fair argument could be made that that was part of it) but about just not being enemies. In an ideal situation he’d become friends again with people, but I think he’d have settled for just being seen as some guy again and not having everyone trying to kill him. Like how Bad didn’t become his friend during prison or after but isn’t necessarily actively seeking him out to kill him. Dream just didn’t want to be alone and I personally think the only way he saw a way to not be was to put himself in prison to be let out by the server when they were ready to not want to just kill him… but as it turns out they never stopped wanting to kill him, they were only held back by the knowledge of a book he had. And instead of going from big bad villain to just some guy, he became nothing more than a book instead. Instead of gaining friends to not be alone, his friends became his enemies and he was left to rot completely alone… and after almost an entire year of suffering, he’s still enemy number 1, he’s still hunted down like a dog, they still want to kill him. Only this time, instead of stabbing him in the back at a festival, they make a deal with god just to kill him and break into his house in the night to kill him. In the end, if his plan was to be let out and let back into society as no longer the enemy, then his plan failed so spectacularly. And whether there was a moment specifically in prison or out where his plan became no longer feasible or whether it was unrealistic from the very start remains unclear. Though you could make an argument for each, I’d say both are probably true… I think it was perhaps the only option at least in Dream’s mind to have his family back and yet I also think it was probably damned to fail from its very conception…

[rbtlvr]

AND ANOTHER THING. i know that on a meta level this is literally just How Video Game Bosses Work. but also with how well the game mechanics work into the story in many other cases i don't think it's unreasonable to look at it from an in universe perspective

SO

i think it really says something that loop only uses their stronger attacks in their second phase. i think it really says something that you have to bring them down to 0hp four (4) times, attacking them repeatedly + proving that you are willing to genuinely hurt/kill them, before they'll use their most powerful attacks on siffrin

[starfallkaz]

More Selwyn Kane Thoughts

Back on my Legendborn bullshit — I already made a post talking about how Selwyn’s love language is canonically physical touch (I don’t make the rules). And how it all stems from the fact that for as long as he’s known, his touch has been something intrinsically tied to power and violence. It was never seen as something that could be given out of affection and care for one another, only as a display of power and as a threat. Likewise his use of aether was always in violent necessity. I’m rereading Bloodmarked and there’s a scene in Volition where Lu allows Sel to use the aether on the grounds that got me thinking and hurting (a lot).

Sel looks between us, a bright light in his eyes that I don’t expect. I’ve never seen him cast something just because. From the look on his face, I don't know if he ever has. "Thank you, Lu," Sel says.

…

When he rotates his wrists, light rises around us overhead, stretching wide like a cloud — and then bursts, raining down like blue embers. Tiny freworks sparking and exploding into nothing before they hit the ground.

Lu claps. "Impressive light show. And I thought Merlins were only good at making weapons."

Sel’s head is tilted back, a slow smile on his face as the aether falls round him, "So did I."

Did I cry rereading this? Absolutely. This is the first time we see Sel realising and experiencing his power not in the context of fear and violence. It’s the beginning of him understanding that he could use his power for joy - for something as simple and loving as entertaining the girl he likes. It felt like a big, yet understated, moment for him.

And I think in a way, that permission from Lu and Bree meant more to Sel than allowing him to use aether in that specific moment. It was also the acknowledgement and encouragement that he could use aether for self-fulfilment and pleasure - that he could allow himself that. Sel was always constrained by his role as Kingsmage or his own self-imposed standards brought about by a crippling fear of not being enough, but this felt like a liberating experience for him.

[prolibytherium]

I never touched it but I feel like i only ever hear positive things said about song of achilles.. in (rough strokes at least) what makes it dogshit to you?

Okay it's been a while since I actually read it so some of this might not be spot on accurate. Sorry if at any point I say 'the book never does xyz' and it actually does once or twice but I think my underlying criticisms are accurate

-Patroclus is made into like this soft gentle tender quivering little yaoi boy. In the source text, he's shown as compassionate and moved by the suffering of his own men (and apparently having some medical skill, tending to the wounded in the camp), but very much invested n combat and very, very good at it (pages worth of descriptions of the guys he's killing left and right). In this, the arguably more complex character from this 8th century BC text is flattened into Being A Healer, he doesn't want to go to war he just wants to help people, he only goes because Achilles has to but he doesn't want to fight he's a HEALER he's a gentle lover NOT A FIGHTER who just wants to help he just wants to help everyone around him he HEALS while Achilles is a doomed warrior who is so good at fighting and KILLING its a DICHOTOMY GUYS!!!LIKE THE BEAUTIFUL SUN AND MOON DOOMED LOVERS SO SAD patocluse HEALER . (I Think he's specifically characterized as being BAD at fighting but might be misremembering)

-I don't remember much about Achilles' characterization I think it just makes him less of a jackass while not adding anything of interest and levels out into being mad boring.

-Not getting into the literal millenias old debate whether the mythological characters Achilles and Patroclus were being characterized as some type of lover by the original oral sources of the Iliad or its Homeric writers. We will never know. We don't even know what (if any) culturally accepted conventions of male homosexuality existed in bronze age Greece (we know much more about their descendants). But there are some interesting elements of their characterization in this direction, with how unconventional their relationship is WITHIN the text itself- Patroclus is described as cooking for Achilles and his guests (very specifically a woman/wife's job), Achilles chides Patroclus like a father, but there's also scene where Achilles' mourning of him directly echoes a passage of Hector's wife mourning her husband, Patroclus is explicitly stated to Achilles' elder, and is overall treated as his equal or near-equal, closest confidant and most beloved friend (to the point that pederastic classical Greeks would debate over who was erastes (older authority figure lover) and who was eromenos (adolescent 'beloved')- many took it as a given that this text depicted their present-day cultural norms of homosexual behavior but it existed so Outside of these norms that it had to be debated who was who). Their relationship is non-standard both within the text and to the descendants of the civilization that wrote them.

Basically what I'm saying is this book had opportunities to like, explore the unconventionality of the relationship (being presented here as explicitly lovers), explore the dynamics of why Patroclus wants to do 'women's work' (besides being a tenderhearted softboy), the weird dynamics where they take on paternal roles to each other but also roles of wives, how they feel about being this way, and just kind of Doesn't. Which I guess isn't an intrinsic fault (because it omits much of what I just talked about to begin with). it's just like.... Lame. This book takes jsut abandons everything interesting about the source text in favor of flattening it into bland Doomed Yaoi.

-The conflict that sets off the core story of the Iliad is Achilles and Agamemnon fighting over Briseis, an enslaved Trojan woman taken by Achilles as a war-trophy, Achilles spends most of the story moping because he was dishonored by his 'trophy' being taken. Achilles and Patroclus and everyone else are raping their captives, all the women in the story are either captured Trojans (or in the case of the free women within the walls of Troy, soon to be enslaved, and are slave owners themselves). Slavery as an institution and extreme patriarchal conventions are innate to the text and reflective of the context in which it was developed. You cannot avoid it.

But obviously you can't have your soft yaoi boys doing this, so the author has them capturing women to Protect Them from the other men. Their slaves are UNDER THEIR PROTECTION and VERY SAFE (and they might even Like And Befriend Them but I might be misremembering that. Briseis does though). Our heroes have apparently absorbed none of the ideals of the culture they exist in and the author seems to think "they're gay and aren't sexually attracted to their captives" would translate to them being outright benevolent (also as if wartime sexual violence is just about attraction and not part of a wider spectrum of violent acts to dehumanize and brutalize an accepted 'enemy')

In the source text, Briseis mourns Patroclus as being the kindest to her of her captors, who tried to get her a slightly better outcome by getting her married to Achilles (which probably would be the Least Bad of all possible outcomes for a woman in that situation, becoming a legal wife instead of a slave), and wonders what will happen to her now that he's gone. This is a really really sad, horrible, and compelling dynamic which could be fleshed out in very interesting ways but is instead is tossed entirely aside in favor of them being Besties. Like brother and sister.

All of the above pisses me off so much. If you don't want to engage in the icky parts of ancient/bronze age Greece then don't write a retelling of a story taking place in bronze age Greece. I'm not gonna get mad at children's adaptations of Greek myths or silly fun stories loosely based on them for omitting the rape and slavery but it is SO fundamental to the Iliad. If you're not willing to handle it, either fully omit it or better yet set your Iliad inspired yaoi in an invented swords-and-sandals setting where you can have all your heartbreaking tragic doomed lovers plot beats and not have to clumsily write around the women they're brutalizing.

-The author didn't seem to know what to do with Thetis and she made her just like, Achilles bitch mother who spends most of the story trying to separate our Yaoi Boys (iirc her disguising Achilles as a girl and hiding him on Scyros is made to be more about getting him away from Patroclus than trying to save her son from his prophesied doom in the Trojan War) until she sees how much they loooove each other and I think helps Patroclus' spirit get to the afterlife or something in the end?

-This is more of a personal taste gripe but it has that writing style I loathe where the prose feels less like a story and more like an attempt to string together Deep Beautiful Hard Hitting Poetic Lines that will look great as excerpts on booktok (might predate booktok but same vibe). It's all very Pretty and Haunting and Deep but feels devoid of real substance.

I really like The Iliad and The Odyssey in of themselves. They're fascinating historical texts that give a window into how 8th century BC Greeks told their stories, saw their world, interpreted their ancestors, etc. And genuinely I think these texts have 'good' characters, there's a lot of complexity and humanity to it.

WRT the Iliad- all of the main Achaeans are pretty fascinating, the one singular part where Briseis Gets To Talk and laments her situation is great, Achilles fantasizing that all of the Trojans AND the Achaeans die so he and Patroclus alone can have the glory of conquering Troy (wild), Achilles asking to embrace Patroclus' shade and reaching out for him but it's immaterial (and the shade being sucked back underground with a 'squeak' (the squeak kinda gets me it's disturbing and sad)), Hecuba talking about wanting to tear out Achilles' liver and eat it in a (taboo, exceptioally pointed) expression of rage and grief for his mutilation of her son's corpse, just one tiny line where the enslaved women performing ritual wailing for their dead captors are described as using it as an outlet to 'grieve for their own troubles' is heartrending, etc. A lot of grappling with anger and grief and the inevitability of death, a lot of groundwork laid for characters that could be very interesting when expanded upon in the framework of a conventional novel.

And Song Of Achilles really doesn't do much with all that. I know a lot of my gripes here are kind of just "It's different from the Iliad", I would have thought of it as mostly mediocre and forgettable rather than infuriating if it wasn't a retelling (and I DEFINITELY have strong biases here). But I think the ways in which it is different are less just a product of a retelling (of course there's going to be omissions and differences) and more a complete and utter disinterest in vast majority of its own subject matter, to the book's detriment. I think a retelling has a point when it EXPANDS on the source, or provides a NEW ANGLE to the source. This book doesn't Really do either, it just shaves off the complexity of its source material, renders the characters into a really boring archetype of a gay relationship, and gives very little else. Its content boils down to a middling tragic romance that has been inserted into the hollowed out defleshed skeleton of the Iliad.

Bottom line: I definitely would not be as mad about it if I wasn't familiar with the source material but I think it's fair to expect a retelling to Engage with/expand on its source, and I also think it's weak purely on its own merits. This book was set up to disappoint Me specifically.

[cryinginthedeep]

matthew tkachuk - all your life, did you know, you'd be picked like a rose?

something..something...tying your skates like your dad used to but also, outgrowing the shoes you're expected to fill