#the conversation this occured in does have context but actually you guys don't get any of that

[myfairkatiecat]

Keefe: it's like there's no good decisions, sometimes I feel like I'm being backed into a wall--

Sophie: back ME into a wall

Keefe: what

Sophie: what

@permanently-stressed

[nellie-elizabeth]

Outlander: A Hundredweight of Stones (7x11)

It really is the best shit in the whole series, no joke...

Cons:

The one bigger thing I was noticing in this episode was that it was lacking a sense of time passing - it was unclear to me how long it had been since news of Jamie's death reached them - how many days between then and the wedding, how many days later are they going to that dinner party, how many days later does Jamie show up? Because it kind of feels like it happens within a week, but I remember it was a bit longer in the book. This also contributed to some strangeness of pacing in that big final scene, where Jamie shows up and clumsily explains that his luggage was on the Euturpe but he himself was not. So much of that final scene was lifted from the book entirely, and it's a great scene, don't get me wrong, but it all happened kind of choppy and strange. I think we get some time in Jamie's POV in the books or something, so we have a bit more context for why he's being chased by soldiers? But maybe I'm misremembering.

Last week they did this thing where when Claire hears the news that Jamie's dead they have her kind of dissociate and hear things repeated in her mind and out of order/choppy. It was... kind of cheesy but the strength of the acting carried it through. They repeated that technique during the John/Claire scene in a way that I did not enjoy... I didn't think seeing John on the floor embracing Claire and then cutting to him standing up saying "I will not mourn him alone tonight" was very effective. I could have used a bit more variety and less repetition and out-of-order editing in the little snippets that followed. I think you could still have captured the drunken despair without leaning so heavily on the editing tricks like that.

Small note, but it's hilarious to me that Brianna actually knocked Robert Cameron out cold with that hit. It didn't look like she connected hard enough for him to be down for the count. Also in Roger's plot thread, I feel like he and Buck should be putting together by now that maybe the reason they came to this time is because of the older Jeremiah, and that means Jem isn't here. But that doesn't seem to have occurred to Roger at all, which is strange.

Pros:

Ian and Rachel get another good outing this week. I love that Ian explains about Emily and there's a moment where of course Rachel is alarmed to learn that Ian had a wife and that she's still living, but she accepts Ian's truth with an open mind and tells him she loves him and kisses him at the end of the conversation. I loved it, very sweet!

I also just thought Ian overall was so perfect this episode, the poor guy mourning two fathers at once, basically. That scene where he goes to Claire and basically says goodbye in case she wants to go back to the future now, really made me tear up!

We get to see Brianna at last, and we get to see her realize a horrible truth: Roger is gone, and Jem isn't in the past after all. Dun dun dunn!!! I'm excited for Bree to be reunited with her son, and for her to deal with the Robert Cameron situation once and for all. Not much more to report here, but I'm glad we're seeing movement on this story. Same as with Roger and Buck, we see them getting closer to Roger's father as they track down the provenance, so to speak, of the military ID tags. It's so cool seeing Roger on a scavenger hunt, even though we know he's not getting any closer to his original goal.

Obviously saved the juiciest stuff for last - I just think both David Berry and Caitriona Balfe deserve all the awards for this episode, they both play abject despair SO well. There are too many good moments to count, from the wedding ceremony where John rushes through the part about "love and cherish" because he doesn't know how to say those words like they're the truth, to Claire taking a big pause to stare at William before she finishes her vows. To William and John's conversation, where William laments that John would sacrifice his happiness and his reputation for the widow of a "groom" who betrayed the King. John stares at his son, the son he raised, who is of Jamie's blood, and even as his face is etched in grief, tells him that he has all the happiness he could ever need. Then they hug! And it's so sweet!

We have Claire contemplate suicide and then just lie in her room positively wailing out her grief, which is so hard to watch and listen to, while downstairs John gets completely wasted and cries staring at a chessboard and the empty chair across from it, his face wet with tears... and then we get the two of them embracing in a sort of deranged drunken passion, with John burying his head in Claire's lap and then Claire thumping him on the back even as she pulls him closer...

The morning after scene was exactly what I wanted it to be. So much of this is lifted straight from the scene in the book, and they really just linger on the two of them, nothing fancy in the edit, and let them have this strangely intimate while also awkward conversation. John's speech about the deer, and his relationship to his lover, is so lovely. And the way he says "think about the deer, my dear" as he leaves her in bed is just like... okay, I know Claire is grieving Jamie and I know John is super gay, but still. If I were her I would have swooned just a lil' bit.

I also really liked the romance-framing of Claire descending the stairs in that gown, and the moment when John takes her hand and finds she's put her wedding ring back on, so that the one from Jamie and the one from John are side by side. (Point of order, in the books I think she wears Frank's ring on her left hand in Jamie's on her right, but whatever.) In a romance novel if these were the two leads, this would be a swoon-y moment where she accepts him and decides to present a united front. Here, it's so much more fraught - what must John be thinking, seeing his ring beside Jamie's, on the finger of a woman the have both married and now shared a bed with? Talk about a mind fuck.

The Richardson stuff was never my favorite story-line in the books but I do love the indulgent trope-i-ness of Claire and Richardson discussing treason during a dance, and Claire's parting line of saying she won't betray his secret because they are on the same side... even while she also affirms she will not spy on her husband's family. You go, Claire. I'm sure this won't come back to bite you at all. I also loved William and Claire getting a bit of bonding time at the party, as well. Fun fact, in the book William calls her "Mother Claire" after her marriage to John, and it's very sweet.

So that ending scene: you've got the great moment when Jamie's voice calls out "Claire!" and John and Claire turn their heads in unison towards the noise, disbelieving - you've got Claire running into his arms, you've got the look of resplendent joy and shock on John's face. One adaptive change I really loved was that John says "your son is due here any minute" and William overhears it and that's what triggers the big reveal. In the book, it's simply that the physical resemblance between them is so striking that once an adult William Ransom is staring James Fraser in the face, there's simply no way for him to doubt the truth. Since they can't actually pull that off here, having John say "your son" was a wonderful alternative. Because it makes sense that John would be indulgent in that moment, that he would look at Jamie and forget to be circumspect. That he would take the rare moment of calling William "your son", almost as a way of saying "our son." I mean, that's my head-canon anyway. John's not really in his right mind in that moment, and it costs him big time.

Big kudos for the William performance here too, the hushed way he says "god damn you, sir" and then the look on both their faces when he shoves the rosary into Jamie's hands... oof. William feels, for understandable reasons, like his entire life is effectively over now, and I got the sense of how huge a problem this is for everyone just in those scant few moments.

I could go on... this half of the season is pushing me closer towards doing a whole big Outlander series re-read, which I totally do not have time to do... but this is the good stuff, it's so juicy! I'm so pleased with the amount of time we're spending on this portion of the story, I feel like getting the full sixteen episodes this season has really helped out the pacing issues that had been happening in some other recent seasons.

8.5/10

[nonbinarygamzee]

equius definitely has a lot of issues with how he treats people ( *gestures also to aradia, etc* ), but the way he died kind of comes across as more like letting him have some fun one last time before putting him down like the puppet said to do than very effective revenge. (either way, not sure this was really a good way to play out a murder scene between two kids:S)

arguably it did more to harm gamzee than equius, since now they gotta deal with being even more socially isolated, and getting chased into hiding in the vents and/or locked in a fridge, all because a guy was too into getting choked. meanwhile, equius gets to bother a bunch of nepeta and aradiabot ghosts

sure, gamzee doesn't have to deal with him on the meteor anymore, but they probably could've also accomplished that by going "with the powers invested in me as a subjuggulator or whatever, i order you to never speak to me or pull that weird shit with anybody else again. go sit in your room for 100 sweeps. bye" and then nepeta doesn't have to get traumatized and dead

i'm not sure if gamzee's actually bothered by equius's weird shit, though? they talked to each other on a daily basis and it didn't seem to occur to gamzee to ignore his messages or tell him to cut it out. is it like a "well i don't really return his feelings, but we all gotta get a kismesis someday" thing?

metatextually, i think their dynamic and the culmination of it in murderstuck might be reflective of hussie's (at least then, circa act 5?) attitudes about mlm, in a similar way to gamzee kissing tavros's head and expressing an interest in doing the same to dave's. attraction from one boy to another is treated as gross and ridiculous, esp. with one of the parties racialized as they are. see also bro strider's handcuffed mr t and chuck norris puppets

i mean i dont entirely disagree, i think there was not canon intention of Equius' death being a revenge narrative. that's why it's in perenthesis and is a very short section, i was joking more than anything on that particular post. though it is how i like to read it. for uh. reasons.

and whether it was really effective as revenge imo just isnt relevent. there was far too much happening, and too much awareness on gamzee's end regarding the lot of them being characters/knowing what was 'destined' to go down that i think there is not much reason to... not? when your only friend is dead and basically everyone else left in the world has in no uncertain terms basically spent every conversation youve ever had with them telling you they hate you and think youre stupid and a failure.

similarly i think gamzees feelings about equius and what he does, especially what we gleam about this PRIOR to murderetuck, arent actually all that relevent because gamzee doesnt "mind" any of the abuses thrown their way up to that point. there are times during the convos with equius that gamzee is imo pretty explicitly uncomfortable (lots of 'UuUhHhHh's, their little 'woah what' when equius tell gamzee to use people for gratification, etc.) but gamzee's whole Thing is passivity and not thinking about stuff that upsets them.

and wrt the homophobia, youre absolutely spot on. gamzee is the first troll to actually show explicit mlm attraction, the first character in general to do so without it being a joke in context, i believe. trolls dont have a concept of heterosexuality but metatextually theyre still expected to enact and uphold it, and punished for not doing so.

[stxleslyds]

MY TOUGHTS ON PART ONE OF RED HOOD BY CHIP ZDARSKY :)

Finally I have read part one of the Red Hood story in Batman: Urban Legends!

This story is very interesting, we start with the Red Hood looking for the people who are providing Gotham with a new drug. This drug “Cheerdrops” has been passed around for weeks at this point and it has had devastating results among it's users. If you know Jason you understand that drugs are a big issue for him and one that he treats very carefully and seriously. 

As he interrogates people he arrives to the building where one of the dealers of this drug is supposed to be, there he finds a horrific scene, a boy is desperately trying to wake up his mother who appears to have overdosed in her bed. Jason is quick to call an ambulance and get in contact with Oracle in order to find the boy's father who is (as he finds out later) the man that he was looking for. 

Jason sees this scene and can't help but compare it to the time he went through this situation with his mom all those years ago, so he takes the boy with him so he can take him to his father, who Jason is hoping is a good man that had to sell drugs in order to help his family.

That's basically the premise of this first part of the story but now i will write about my thoughts on the specifics of the story.

The story begins with Jason giving a speech about fear and how it's used, 

"Fear. Its a tool, it's his tool. I never really adopted it, maybe because he kept that fear all to himself." Then he continues with "Never had to rely on it, had to work harder to take out the bad guys, had to be...more direct." he finishes that thought with "Rubber Bullets. So that fear doesn't get turned around on me."

I for one really liked this Fear speech, it does really sum up what the Batman does, he relies on the Fear that he imposes on Gotham's criminals and such while Robin on the other hand was never meant to work with fear, which is true.

It did remind me of the speech that Alfred gave in issue #10 of Under the Red Hood about how Batman works with fear and Jason had some thoughts on it, here is some of it, 

"Master Jason had a condescending practice of referring to the costumed criminals elements as 'dress ups'. He also noted that such individuals did not fear the Batman the way street thugs and mafioso did. The 'dress ups' did not believe he was a monster." "...the boy did say something to me that chilled me to the bone...even then. 'They all know he won't kill them.'"

Anyway let's go back to the actual comic I am talking about...

Jason speaks from his position as Red Hood in current time and says that he uses rubber bullets in order to keep the Bat at bay, the fear that the Bat uses against other criminals cannot be used against him if he plays within the Bat's rules.

As he was doing that he was actually trying to get info about who is making the drug but all he was able to get was who was selling it to the person he was interrogating. This drug is dangerous and Jason has to work fast. 

Here is where we see the first flashback scene, we see Jason in the cave before he was able to go out as Robin and he is not to happy about it. The art is very beautiful but sadly in these panels i found my first problem with the context of Jason becoming Robin and how Zdarsky seems to set Jason's feelings on the first Robin.

It seems that Zdarsky is going for the “Jason believed Dick was the perfect Robin and no matter what he did he would never be as good as him” route, which fine ok, that's your right but, is it really necessary? I must admit i am a little tired of this particular thing because i adore the fact that when Dick and Jason first met they were fine with one another (even if a little wary at the very start). And the whole competitive and “i will never be as good as X person” is really tiring in the Robin/Batfamily fandom.

That problem is not as significant as the next one though.

Jason not thinking that Robin was “badass”. Well this is not only a bad take but it's completely OOC for Jason, no matter how you see it. From his first appearance as Robin to the flashbacks in Winick's UtRH and even through both of Lobdell's runs Jason has always loved the concept and the mantle of Robin as a child. 

Batman v1, #385.

So that whole take is wrong, i don't like it and also who on this or any universe would rather call themselves Batboy? Honestly i hope this is never brought up again or i will cry. ((((Also in this house Robin will always be the name that Mary gave Dick and then he used as his hero name so it hurts a lot more))))

Also at the end of this first flashback Jason discovers a room full of firearms and is obviously surprised because Batman hates those so he asks why he has them, B responds that he has to understand how they work for his detective work, but that's not all he says, he also says this “...Guns are a coward's weapon, and we will not be cowards.”

Alright Mr. Zdarsky i see the irony... i also see the Daredevil / Punisher thingie right there.

Anyway we are now back to the present where we see Batman seeing the effects of the drug in one of its victims, after saving that person he takes some samples of the drug. We also get to see two police officers with different views on the “masks”, that's a nice way to set the story after the Joker War and before the Magistrate. 

Back to Jason, he seems to be struggling, he can't find the people making/providing the drugs in Gotham and is also doubting his skills, he tells a man that if the information that he gave him is incorrect he “will find him” followed with another internal speech full of self doubt, “...sure thing Red Hood, right now you can't even find a street drug. Half of Gotham's teenagers could find it no problem. You never were the best detective.”

Alright, so Jason feels insecure about his skills now? First you have pre-Robin Jason not feeling like he could be able to keep up with the first Robin and now, Jason as a grown man has doubts about the skills that he has used for a long while now? I mean, press X for DOUBT because UtRH showed us how much of a badass and extremely skilled he is. This man planed everything in order to turn the Bat's world upside down (and this story has references to UtRH so it definitely happened) and now he feels like he is not that good? 

Shit. i know where this is going, first the insecurities that he has already worked out... I can see it coming, the next big thing will be Daddy issues. Wonderful i hate it and i hope i am wrong because those “issues” are more than resolved, i know that's the only trope DC throws at Jason but honestly how different will it be this time?

Fine, lets move on. Jason finds himself in one of the apartments and what he sees is horrifying. Lying on a bed there is a woman completely catatonic with a horrible smile on her face and right next to her a terrified little boy.

Here is the best take on Jason's character so far. 

Realizing that the child is scared of the situation and the masked man that just came into his home Jason takes off his mask and reassures the kid that he is there to help, it's quickly made obvious that the woman has overdosed on Cheerdrops, he makes sure to call an ambulance for her stating that she seems to be in a  drug-related coma.

Its important to note that Jason is doing this as he is having troubling thoughts about how much this scene reminds him of the time he was in this little boy's (Tyler) shoes. Its hard for him but he soon realizes that he needs to make sure Tyler is safe. 

He asks Tyler if he has another parent, he does and his name is Andy, after taking a look around the house Jason deduces that maybe the father is also taking drugs so if the police comes they will surely take Tyler and put him in the system, this idea is not one Jason is fond of so he calls Oracle, he asks if she can locate Tyler's dad's phone, when she asks about the kid Jason says that he will be the one keeping him safe.

Now we find ourselves back with Batman where he is investigating the components of Cheerdrops, he finds out that the drug is a modified version of Scarecrow's fear gas that gives the victim a sense of extreme happiness instead of fear.

Here we get confirmation of when in the timeline this story occurs, which is after the events of Infinite Frontier (where there was an attack on Arkham and many patients/prisoners were killed or escaped).

B suggests to Oracle that maybe Crane didn't die there and that he might be behind this drug, he will be on the job right away! To this Oracle is like well shit, so she tells B that Jason is also working this case...and here comes a funny yet confusing interaction. 

Barbara says “I know you two aren't exactly friends right now but...” before she finishes Batman interrupts her by saying “He is a killer Barbara. I will do this alone.”

OH BOY is this interaction confusing! First of all may i point out how different this conversation is from the one in Three Jokers where the roles were basically reversed??? Please tell me that i am not the only one who finds that funny! Anyway that story doesn't matter here, but Red Hood Outlaw from Rebirth does, right?

Here is the thing, the last person that Jason “killed” in rebirth was Penguin and he actually didn't do it, he had him trapped in a panic room in his own Casino. Batman already beat the living shit out of Jason in RHatO #25 for it...and some time has passed, B surely found out that Jason didn't kill Penguin by now, i mean isn't he like the best detective to ever detective in the history of the universe??

Not only that but Jason has been using rubber bullets for a while and even at the start he mentions that, he basically implies that he is playing by the Bat's rules to keep him off his back. Maybe B hasn't let go of the duffel bag full of heads or any of the shitty people Jason killed during UtRH??? If B still holds that against Jason then why would he try to make Jason part of his Bat clan at the beginning of RHatO Rebirth? 

Maybe he still thinks that Jason killed the penguin...but even then isn't B working with Harley and Ghost-Maker? You know, people who have killed? Why is Jason different? Did Jason kill someone recently that we don't know about? Jason only kills a very distinct set of people (that are very not nice) so i guess i don't see the logic...

Anyway second flashback, and this time we have a look at what was going on in the Batcave with B and Alfred during the events of UtRH! Nothing that wasn't explored in UtRH is said here but we do see Alfred explicitly telling Bruce how much they failed Jason. There is a heavy insinuation that the fact that Batman keeps sending the Joker to Arkham only for him to escape and kill more people actually makes B responsible for those deaths and i love that. Thank you. 

Back to Jason and Tyler we get to see some very adorable scenes between the two. Jason gives the lower half of his mask to Tyler to protect his identity like a superhero and we have a really sweet moment in which Tyler chooses the Blue Hood as his name because he likes the colour blue (same Tyler).

After he leaves Tyler in a place where he will be safe he goes to the building where Andy should be and let me tell you the more Jason sees the less hopeful he becomes about Andy being just one of the people selling the drug... He does some shooting and incapacitating and then follows the man that is trying to escape and here is when shit hits the fan. 

Andy is a disgusting human being. He hates Tyler's mother and doesn't care that she might be dead and the piece of shit hates his son so much that he gave a barely 10 year old drugs. 

Yeah. BANG BANG BANG MOTHERFUKER. 

If you think that this leads to Jason being a little more like his UtRH self, you know the guy that said that people who gave drugs to kids will get killed without a thought...yeah that's not happening, here comes the guilt!

I get it he just killed a man, but, did you read what that man said?

Anyway that's how the first part of this story ends. 

The story is good. it has things that don't make much sense but i think it's because Zdarsky is a Batman fan and not a Red Hood fan in the sense that he doesnt know much about Jason's character and that this is his first ever DC work.

I cant wait to see where this story goes, while i hope “unresolved daddy issues” doesn't become a theme yet again in a Red Hood story i believe it's where we are headed. I will keep on reading because i am invested in Jason and Tyler's relationship and what is going to happen now that Jason killed Andy.

Let me know what you thought about the issue and my post if you want! Bye!

[gayregis]

What do you think Regis and Ciri's relationship would be like? I was always a little upset that Geralt said he wanted Ciri to meet Zoltan and Reinart but he didn't say that about Regis or anyone from the Hansa. Do you think he wanted Ciri to meet Regis? What do you think their relationship would be like? I didn't understand why Regis was so impressed by Citi in Stigga, if she was obviously scared and they had like 5 min to talk. I don't like that all the characters are thrilled with Ciri at first sight. I also afraid that Ciri won't overcome her dislike of vampires as a witcher, and she and Regis won't have become friends :( What your thoughts on it?

this is such a good series of questions!!

i think that geralt did want ciri to meet the hansa, and i suppose she did - she mentions that they buried the bodies of geralt’s comrades outside of stygga when they left - though in the case of regis, of course, there was nothing left to bury. but i imagine that, in these moments, geralt told ciri about each member, their memories “living on” through story, which, in the witcher, is a form of immortality after death. but i think he specifically mentions wanting ciri to meet reynart and zoltan specifically because he thought (incorrectly, in reynart’s case :( ) that they were still alive, as opposed to the hansa, who he all saw either die in front of him or their corpses later when they buried them.

specifically for regis, i think geralt would have wanted ciri to meet him as they did become close and also regis helped a lot in terms of being geralt’s confidant during the quest to save ciri. but i also think that geralt would be still concious of how bizarre his and regis’ friendship is, and would think about it before any introductions - then again, the witcher seems to have less of these “planned introductions” and rather more of “by the seat of your pants introductions,” like when dandelion first meets ciri, it was both somewhat expected as (iirc?) they knew they were going to meet up with the other party (geralt and dandelion, yennefer and ciri), but how they actually meet up is a different story, because nothing in the witcher can ever be a calm summer afternoon, of course. so i believe that “the best” circumstances would be something like a formal introduction of ciri to all of the hansa members, geralt would simply introduce them all at the same time, because they’re each equally important in relation to him and ciri. i don’t thnk it would make sense for geralt to introduce regis separately from the rest of the hansa, because it would just take his character out of context (unless, of course, they were in some situation where the rest of the hansa wasn’t around). (and besides the point, but i think the most awkward formal introduction would be between cahir and ciri, because, it wouldn’t be an introduction at all, rather a third meeting. and canonically, cahir had dreams of ciri, so it would be even weirder since he’s already seen her a bunch and she hasn’t seen him at all.)

i think, honestly, a formal introduction between regis and ciri would go well, i don’t think too much would occur, even if only because of having questions but feeling that it’s not the right place or time to ask them -- like in a class, when a teacher asks, “any questions?...” and the entire class holds their breath because everyone is confused but no one knows exactly what to say -- i think it would be like that, because regis and ciri are BOTH very very naturally curious! regis would want to ask, so this is the child of destiny, this is your daughter, etc, etc, and ciri would want to ask pretty much everything about him to understand who he is. but i think both would understand, through experience, that a first introduction isn’t the time to ask every single question you have about a person. so it would be kind, but maybe overly formal becase of that awkwardness.

 i of course have all these headcanons and such about regis becoming a parental and mentor figure to angouleme, so i’m inclined to compare their relationship to that with ciri, but i think that would be a mistake. because angouleme and ciri are similar in build and appearance, and some traits and experiences of course, but they’re still different in my opinion, and their difference is exponential when you consider the differences of how angouleme and regis met VS how ciri and regis met, and that angouleme had no one else in her life VS ciri already has parents she loves. so instead of being more parental and advice-giving, i think regis would be kind to ciri of course, but i don’t think they would ever spend a lot of time together because ciri already has parents to spend time with, so regis would be still a sort of avuncular figure, good for advice and to listen, but not the main source of support. which is fine, i think. i think that the thing that ciri would most rely upon regis for would be dealing with her actions from when she was a rat, i think both regis and ciri have come out of a period where they have been the source of a lot of violence, and ciri may struggle with this and need advice from someone who’s been through it already.

i feel like regis also wasn’t overly impressed with ciri when he met her, his reaction seems more like dandelion’s to me, where she just appears as some young girl, the young girl that she is. i think only the observant or the close to ciri will understand that she is powerful (geralt, yennefer, milva (observant), cahir (half and half, i think he only understands it later)). regis and dandelion are observant in that they are intelligent and academics, but they often miss the background, the “fabric of reality” as i’ve referred to it -- things like the horseprints in the snow, regis was very willing to explain away as being somthing mundane, not considering it could have been something else. i think this logicalness of his character and unintentional insensitivity to the “powers that be” would make him more stumped than astute with ciri, unable to really figure her out despire having experiences in common with her. another trait that ciri and regis both share is being mysterious and a little closed-off if one doesn’t pry, and since they have no real reason to pry, i don’t think they’d be as close as characters that are more opposite to one another in this respect.

although regis did frighten ciri when they first met in stygga, i feel like they would totally get over that after a while. although dandelion aphoristically says in a little sacrifice that there’s never a second chance to make a good first impression, i think to how geralt and ciri got off on the wrong foot, as did yennefer and ciri -- and even though it was a more severe misunderstanding with yennefer, she ultimately became closer to yennefer than anyone else. so i don’t think that regis’s first impression to ciri would affect their friendship down the line that much, since ciri seems to have a knack for getting into poor first impressions with adults. but i do think it would influence how she sees him, because of course it would. everyone else met regis as he is normally, the pinnacle of kindness and thoughtfulness -- ciri saw him basically turn an entire room into hellish chaos and rip a guy’s throat out! it’s comical to us as the readers because we know regis and his very mild-mannered side, but to ciri, this would have been terrifying, of course demonstrated by her clenching her jaw so her teeth wouldn’t chatter. i don’t think that there’s any reason that they couldn’t eventually get over this, but i think it would definitely influence how ciri sees regis overall -- i think that even geralt sometimes forgets about what regis is capable of, like in lady of the lake when he vehemently defends regis’s right to be present in a coversation, when regis can actually just overhear the entire conversation although he walked away. to sort of summarize the situation, if your friend, who is a normal guy to you, had epic powers that you saw a couple of times, but he never really used them around you that much, you might not think of him as some kind of force VS, when you met your friend for the first time he was demonstrating his epic powers in full force... you would be way more aware of his power. but, these friendships may not have been super different at heart, because there’s still the same people involved in them. this is what i think, that ciri would just be the one who’s most aware that regis is a vampire, because she’ll never forget the first meeting -- but that does not necessarily mean she would end up trusting or liking him less at all!

i feel with the context of ciri being a witcher, it’s interesting because by the time regis appears in the series, the term of “witcher” is beginning to be unraveled with its threads examined for the readers. regis is part of this, and cahir is as well -- though regis is a monster, geralt has no desire to kill him, and yet cahir is a man, and geralt has a desire to kill him. the term of “monster” is questioned to hell and back throughout the entire series, but especially in regards to i think to these characters: geralt, regis, cahir, ciri, vilgefortz, and bonhart. each is a “monster” in some respect, either being labelled as one or doing monstrous things, or both. in ciri’s case, it becomes way more about “good” and “evil” than it does for geralt, who is more concerned with the original exploration of “human” and “monster.” for ciri, she actually became evil, she was a monster. but through many things, she learned her lesson and becomes something much more vague than just “good” or “evil” in the end. this is a lot like regis, who transversed the dichotomy of “evil monster” and “good human” to become something that’s neither of each (well, regis strives to be a good human, but just because he strives for it does not mean he 100% is that). so i think that because they have that similiarity, they would be more understanding of one another. especially with time as ciri begins to understand herself and the concept of evil more (as she had difficulty with vysogota -- the paradox is that she herself became evil, but then of course has her famous “repay evil” speech -- by that logic, she would want to exterminate herself, her ethical logic being clouded by self-preservation... but i think by the end she comes to realize that her evil was wrong as well, that she is not innocent, and even though this is true, she can still work against evil).

tldr ciri and regis are very similar characters, they would be friends due to this mutual understanding, but he would not be the most important figure in her life. they would likely bond over their shared struggles with good & evil, and also likely bond over making fun of geralt (as everyone does in this series)

[wilder-fangirl]

Hey there wise people of Tumblr! I have a problem and if anyone knows what to do in this kind of situation would you please lend me some insight?

My friend won't stop sending me memes and screenshots from fandoms that I know nothing about and that I'm not going to get into. I want to ask him to stop because I never know what to say and it's annoying when I think he wants to talk but he's actually just sending me this stuff. I haven't asked him to stop yet because don't want to hurt his feelings. I don't know how I would ask him to stop without hurting his feelings.

He's a pretty lonely guy from what I can tell. He just moved away to college and I asked him if he has any friends and he said he has like 1 acquaintance. I'd be fine with talking to him about life or things we're both interested in so he doesn't feel so lonely but whenever he texts me it's all this out of context stuff from fandoms that I'm not in.

I thought he had a bunch of online friends that he shared these interests with. But now I wonder if he does because he keeps sending me this stuff and it puts me in a weird place.

I don't do this to him. I only send him stuff about interests that we share. When I want to talk about hyperfixations that he isn't into, I talk to my friends in that fandom. It just doesn't occur to me to do to him what he does to me - I feel like if I bombarded him with stuff he doesn't like that would be rude. So why does he feel like he can do that to me all the time?

I get that he's probably lonely and maybe wants to start a conversation but I can't have a conversation about something I literally know nothing about.

Like, for example here's a couple of the things he's sent me recently:

Slashers scare me so I don't watch them, I'm not a furry and I don't watch any anime.

He sent me that last one with zero context. Like cool that's your reaction to that thing you like but I didn't text you my reaction when my OTP nearly kissed in a show that I know you know nothing about.

It's just really annoying but I don't want to hurt his feelings if I ask him to stop.

Sorry this was so long but if anyone could help I'd appreciate it a lot. I do care about him but I just can't stand it when he does this.

[paceywittergayboatman]

Jess is the Gay Subtext Gilmores Gay Meta

Jess within the Gilmores Gay subtext is Rory’s mirror.  He has a lot in common with Rory: a negligent father who left, a mother who relies emotionally on him or isn't able to deal with her trauma and can't express love in an entirely healthy way, who are both into reading as an escape and a career path, both of there parents get remarried and have another kid and there are also legally cousins. He's also gay in the subtext(link at the bottom for my mini post on that.)

I’m gonna talk about episode 6.8. In which Rory and Jess talk and he essentially awakens something in Rory that brings back a part of herself that she lost. He also meets Logan but that for later on.

In the scene Jess and Rory talk after not seeing each other for awhile:

JESS: Yeah, and I didn't think you'd believe it if I didn't show it to you in person. (takes out a book and give it to her)

RORY: Well, colour me curious. A book. (reading the cover) "'The Subsect'...written by Jess Mariano."

JESS: It's no misprint.

RORY: You wrote a book?

JESS: A short novel.

RORY: You wrote a book?!

JESS: And through a fluke, I got it to these guys that have a small press, and they read it. I don't know if they were high or something, but they decided to publish it.

RORY: You wrote a book.

Subsect sounds a lot like subtext huh? By this time in the show he's already kind of admitted he's gay.(ill put a link at the end of this for that) So he does reflect her.

But then he goes to leave and lo and behold they run into Logan. We already know that Logan is gay given other things(link down at the bottom) So we know all the people in this scene are gay so put that into context makes this make sense. I’m gonna link the clip here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnTsSPKyzG0.  Logan and Jess to put it plainly are eye fucking and Rory looks very umcomfortable:

RORY: No. Hey. When did you get back?

LOGAN: Couple hours ago.

RORY: Oh, I...I thought you were getting back tomorrow.

LOGAN: I thought I'd surprise you, Ace.

RORY: Well, I'm glad you did 'cause you get to meet my old friend, Jess. This is Logan, my boyfriend. Logan, this is Jess. He's in from out of town. (uncomfortable silence) Wow. That sounded so grown-up. We're at the age now where we say things like "in from out of town" and "old friend", 'cause when you're young, all your friends are new, and you have to get old to have old friends. (uncomfortable chuckling from Rory. Logan extends his hand to Jess)

LOGAN: How you doing? (they shake)

JESS: Okay.

RORY: We were just gonna go grab a bite to eat.

LOGAN: Great. Well, how about if we all go together. Is that okay?

JESS: Okay by me.

LOGAN: Good

RORY: All right. Good. We were actually at a loss for where to go, so you actually saved us.

LOGAN: Call me superman. (at Jess) Why don't you follow us.

JESS: Sure. (Logan puts his arm around Rory's shoulders and stears her to the passenger side of his car. Rory is a bit uncomfortable with the gesture)

Two things to note, Rory refers to jess as her friend, and Rory is in the script said to be uncomfortable. Which confirms my earlier theory.

They got to dinner and this shit gets gayer:

GAN: So...what do you do, Jess?

JESS: Oh, this and that.

LOGAN: Describe the "this". Describe the "that".

RORY: He writes.

LOGAN: You write? Impressive. What do you write?

JESS: Nothing important.

RORY: He wrote a book.

LOGAN: Oh, you penned the great American novel, Jess?

JESS: Wasn't quite that ambitious.

LOGAN: So, what are we talking here? Short novel? Kafka length or longer? Dos Passos, Tolstoy? Or longer? Robert Musil? Proust? I'm not throwing you with these names, am I?

JESS: You seem very obsessed with length.

LOGAN: I'm just trying to get a picture in my head, that's all.

RORY: It's a short novel.

The use of length is homoerotic. Despite Logan being classist Jess is still flirting with him.

More:

LOGAN: (at Rory) Any good?

RORY: I haven't read it yet.

LOGAN: Yet? Well, at least you'll have one reader. That's something.

JESS: Yeah.

LOGAN: You know, I should just write down all my random thoughts and stuff that happens to me and conversations I have and just add a bunch of "he said, she said"-'s, and get it published. You got a copy on you?

JESS: No.

LOGAN: You should send me a copy.

JESS: Sure. And where do I send it? The blond dick at Yale?

Ok so again the use of dick is very homoerotic. 

Jess is upset of course:

RORY: Jess, wait. (he stops and turns to look at her) Jess, I'm sorry.

JESS: We shouldn't have done this.

RORY: He's just in a bad way lately.

JESS: He's a jerk.

RORY: He was. In there, definitely. I'm so sorry.

JESS: I read that guy the second I saw him. I should have begged off.

RORY: Well, I didn't want you to.

So he read him, implies that Jess know Logan’s gay. He’s figured him out sexuality wise.

Theres more:

JESS: No, no. I mean with you. What's going on with you?

RORY: What do you mean?

JESS: You know what I mean. I know you better than anyone. This isn't you.

RORY: I don't know.

JESS: What are you doing? Living at your grandparents' place, being in the DAR, no Yale...why did you drop out of Yale?!

RORY: It's complicated.

JESS: It's not! It's not complicated.

RORY: You don't know.

JESS: This isn't you. This, you going out with this jerk, with the Porsche. We made fun of guys like this.

RORY: You caught him on a bad night.

JESS: This isn't about him. Okay, screw him. What's going on with you? This isn't you, Rory. You know it isn't. What's going on?

RORY: I don't know. I don't know.

So Jess being her mirror is acknowledged when he says he's knows her better than anyone.

Jess leaves and Rory and Logan fight:

LOGAN: Look, I'm sorry I came back early. I really messed things up here.

RORY: Jess wrote a book. He wrote a book, and you mocked him.

LOGAN: I did not mock him.

RORY: He's doing something.

LOGAN: Good. Fine. He's doing something. Everybody in the world's doing something. More power to him.

RORY: I'm not. I mean, what am I doing? I'm living with my grandparents.

LOGAN: That's temporary. Have a drink.

RORY: Temporary can turn into forever.

LOGAN: You're not living with the Gilmore’s forever.

RORY: I'm palling with my grandmother and being waited on by a maid. I come home, and my shoes are magically shined. My clothes are magically clean, ironed, and laid out. My bed is magically turned down. I'm in the DAR? I'm going to meetings and teas and cocktail parties?

Rory is having realization about her life because of what jess said to her. The fights not over yet:

LOGAN: Again, temporary. Have a drink.

RORY: And wasting my time partying and drinking, just hanging out doing nothing.

LOGAN: Whoa, whoa, whoa. (he gets up) Don't pull me into this.

RORY: I didn't say anything about you.

LOGAN: Yes, you did. Don't make me feel guilty for your drinking and partying. That's your choice. I'm not forcing you. When I ask you out, you can say no

RORY: It's all we do.

LOGAN: It's not all we do.

RORY: It's all you do.

LOGAN: Well, it's my prerogative, you know. You're damn straight. I'm gonna party. I'm gonna do it while I have the chance because come June, my life is over.

RORY: Oh, yes, your horrible life. Let's hear about it.

LOGAN: Got a week?

RORY: You have every door open to you. You have opportunities that anyone would kill for, including me.

LOGAN: No one's stopping you from making whatever you want happen. Go into journalism. Go into politics. Be a doctor. Be a clown. Do whatever you want.

RORY: It's not as easy when it's not handed to you.

LOGAN: Really? It's all so easy for me? (getting upset) I don't want that life. It's forced on me. You talk about all these doors being open? All I see is one door, and I'm being pushed through it. I have no choice. You try living without options.

Logan is stuck within a heterosexual playboy idea of himself that isn’t him. And so he parties to cope.

RORY: How hard are you fighting it?

LOGAN: I didn't tell you to quit Yale. You did that. I gave you one month, you went beyond that month, and it had nothing to do with me. It was all you. Now, you want to change? Change it, but don't blame me. Don't you dare blame me. You know what? Why don't you go off with John, Jack, whatever his name is?

He's not claiming responsibility because he's an asshole, but also he doesn't know how to be a boyfriend because he's gay. He's uncomfortable with Rory relying on him emotionally because he's viewing it as romantic and the gay guy in him doesn't like that. Rory's comment about him fighting is the text is noting his struggle with compulsory heterosexuality. Rory leaves and as we know she does break up with him and jess comments to her bring her back to herself. 

my other links 

https://jessandroryaregayfightme.tumblr.com/post/635171090892783616/doyle-paris-and-logan-and-the-milk-metaphor

https://jessandroryaregayfightme.tumblr.com/post/634824232687255552/yale-gay-subtext-in-gilmore-girls

https://jessandroryaregayfightme.tumblr.com/post/633010606083112960/logan-huntzberger-isnt-just-a-lazy-straight-man

https://jessandroryaregayfightme.tumblr.com/post/632166174651727872/so-its-time-for-another-homosexual-gilmore-girls

https://lupineluke.tumblr.com/post/634255134572036096/wait-but-youre-forgetting-the-most-important-part

[thebreakfastgenie]

@marley-manson I'm pretty sure it's not an intentional set up to BJ cheating later. Mike Farrell loved that BJ was faithful, but when that line came up where he says he's never even been tempted, Mike felt that wasn't realistic and said so, and Hanky Panky was written in response. I do think it works as being there to be proven wrong, but I think it's a lot more interesting if it's completely true at at the time that he says it, and then being in situations he never anticipated causes him to do things he never thought he'd do. I don't find BJ interesting if his clean cut American image isn't genuine at the start. His story, which is compelling to me, is America eating her young. They send this guy who's always happy to do whatever is asked of him to a war and this is what happens to him.

Otherwise with The More I See you, I very much agree with @mashbrainrot that his main objection is Hawkeye getting into a messy situation that he knows is not going to end well. That entire conversation about fidelity happens in the context of Hawkeye trying to justify pursuing a relationship with a married woman.

I do not think BJ is unreadable to Sidney. I think that's a pretty blatant over interpretation of a line that within context has a much more limited scope. Sidney says he hasn't figured BJ out, which I think is because he hasn't known BJ for very long (and on a meta level is definitely Alan Alda figuring out BJ as a writer) but he specifically says he doesn't know how BJ remains calm under the circumstances. The question is, what is BJ's outlet for stress? And that question is answered within the episode when Sidney (and the audience) find out that BJ is the practical joker. I do not think that line suggest any underlying or ongoing mystery to BJ. It can be interpreted that way, but I strongly feel that was not intentional.

Fudging the time of death was Hawkeye's idea. I think it's significant that BJ's solution is to actually keep the guy alive until midnight, allowing him to produce an honest death certificate that says December 26th. Even when Hawkeye finally says it's time to stop, BJ wants to keep going. The only one who thinks of falsifying the records is Hawkeye. In serious situations, BJ is the one most uncomfortable with dishonesty, while Hawkeye is more the ends justify the means; that's more or less the conflict in Preventative Medicine.

I guess I just don't see BJ's sense of humor as evidence of him being a "lying liar who lies." You can see him that way, but I don't. In most of those case, the joke basically hinges on everyone knowing he's lying, or he tells a short term lie for the bit, which may not be distinct from "lying liar" to everyone but it is to me. That's also something everyone does, because it's part of the humor of the show, so it is not a BJ personality trait in my mind. That guessing game bit is just him being silly and cheating at a guessing game.

I do see a certain level of denial in him that increases as the show goes on, because he's in denial about the effect the war is having on him. But I don't see lying in his character and I don't see the denial as being an especially defining part of him, at least until closer to the end.

I do not see

“Did you mean what you said last night? “Course not, it was a pack of lies, what did I say?”

as a joke about him being a liar. It's just... a joke. He doesn't know exactly what Hawkeye is referring to, so it's a funny way to ask for clarification. It's something I might say in real life. Again, you're free to add meaning to it, but I simply do not read the show that way and it would not occur to me to do so.

Swearing on someone's grave and then admitting that person is still alive is a pretty standard comedy payoff. Especially when someone is pestering you about if you're telling the truth and you're annoyed about it. Lying to your friend's date to ruin it is just... such a classic comedy trope I wouldn't think twice about it. I don't think I can think of a sitcom that hasn't used it as a one off joke. In an early episode, Hawkeye implies to Trapper's date that Trapper has an STD, which is not true, because he's jealous that she's going out with Trapper. Hawkeye himself told three nurses he had a wife and kids in Ceasefire. Because the show is structured as a comedy, that feels like normal and expected behavior to me. I think that probably explains why most of the "liar BJ" moments are nothing to me. It may not be normal behavior in real life, but it is in the world the characters live in. I guess I can see the fun in taking those comedy tropes and finding meaningful characterization in them, but at least in this case it's not for me.

Thanks to both of you, I so understand a little better where this comes from, but I still don't agree with the conclusion. I also don't think any of this suggests BJ would casually lie about what he had for breakfast and expect to be believed. I could see a conversation where someone asks what he had and he says "eggs benedict with fresh hollandaise" because the joke there is that both parties know he did not have that. But that doesn't make him a liar. To me, if he were a liar, he would be trying to convince someone of something that was untrue. Saying something blatantly untrue that everyone knows is untrue is just a particular style of humor.

@cardamumms I don’t think BJ would lie about what he had for breakfast! I don’t get the BJ lying thing, he doesn’t do it in the show and it’s not a headcanon I vibe with. I could see him deadpanning that he had something fancy and nice like when he describes the sandwiches in GFA but in that case the joke comes from whoever he’s talking to knowing damn well what the actual food was.

[gayregis]

if you've read season of storms is it any good? i read a sample and was kind of bored but i don't want to spend money on it if it's going to be like,,,,,,,,,lady of the lake

reading this i was like “wait lady of the lake was good though,” then i paused to actually think about it as a cohesive narrative for a bit, and went “actually wait never mind :/...” it was good thematically, and there were a lot of great scenes, but like as a whole book... if you could only read that book on its own... it would be very long and confusing. i just think lotl’s good because i do the uncivilized thing of skipping around to the parts i like and then i don’t read the parts i dislike

but luckily i have already ranted about season of storms before, and i’ll post that rant here now. for context, i actually read season of storms from cover to cover... yeah.

overall, it's a disorganized and aimless plot. it's set inbetween tlw and sod, so there's no quest to find ciri, because geralt hasnt met ciri yet, he's still our free bachelor geralt. which means hes still quite directionless and when it comes to his personal life it's mostly preoccupied with romance. but more importantly it means the plot is incredibly aimless and NOT PERSONAL to geralt, like all the stories in TLW and SOD and all the saga books revolve around events and people super meaningful to him. what happens in the plot is a whole JUMBLE of things that feel like sidequests from the witcher games, not a story from the witcher books. nothing really means anything for geralt's character development, and it suffers from being so long because there's like a lot of different settings and characters and everything just seems completely thrown together, mashed up, and not coordinated. 

i will admit that baptism of fire & tower of the swallow followed a style of “random encounters” in which geralt and the company traverse on and just interact with whatever they happen to find, but it felt like they were accruing knowledge (and also. members of the company) as they travelled on. in season of storms, it feels like geralt starts over and the entire book resets itself every time there is a new scene. none of the plotlines fit together, so it is just a super confusing and exhausting reading experience, unlike in bof & tos, where you can follow the action quite easily and it’s very pleasant to read because it’s all one continuous storyline.

in addition, all of these mashed up stories are pointless, because they dont END with the reader learning anything about the universe the characters live in or their relationships with each other. we might learn that sorcerers are power-hungry, but we already knew that. we might learn that people are violent and corrupt, but we already knew that. we might learn that geralt loves yennefer, but we already knew that. in the short stories, you learn so much about the world and geralts relationships (for example: we learn so much about the situations surrounding the elves in edge of the world, so it’s worth reading because otherwise you will not understand anything when the scoia’tael show up in blood of elves and later in the saga). and in the saga, this continues and more worldbuilding/relationship building occurs (geralt and ciri’s relationship grows from a question of price and then becomes crazy right around baptism of fire when they’re super linked by destiny). it really doesnt in season of storms. you don’t learn anything meaningful about the world or the characters like in the other witcher books.

another large flaw is that in the stories and saga, sapkowski was really good at creating likeable, enigmatic characters no matter how few pages he had to create them. they were deep and almost lifelike and also usually told a larger message. the NPCs- sorry, "characters" in season of storms are SUPER flat and uninteresting.

coral is h*rny for geralt and jealous of yennefer, like every sorceress ever to exist, pratt is a dick and corrupt, degerlund is corrupt and evil, mosaik is timid, the werewolf guy is JUST THERE, the auguara isn’t super interesting despite being cool, nimue feels flatter as a character than usual, even dandelion- okay actually jk i liked dandelion he was the sunny part of this book AS ALWAYS ... ofc he felt one-dimensional but he usually does so you know, EVEN GERALT feels a little one-dimensional and not his typical introspective self

one of the worst things sapkowski did was [SPOILERS] make the major villain character of the book gay and feminine... like its mentioned SO many times that "ohhhh this is a man that looks like a woman WOW HOW EVIL!" and he literally does the worst things like rip ppl to shreds and want to kill geralt painfully by torture with syringes, also he uses his sexuality to ?? seduce an older sorcerer to be his favorite so he can keep his job as a sorcerer?? 

and OK vilgefortz and bonhart arent complex villains. but theyre despicable and it feels a little deeper bc vilgefortz has that backstory and hunger for power, and bonhart is just terrifying and the embodiment of wretched evil, this guy from season of storms is just annoying and anime villainy like “OOHOHOH watch how i kill you now >:)” also theres a lot of crass humor like fart jokes and villains that are described as really super ugly like omg wow never saw that one coming!!! it just feels super bland and basic and almost like the antithesis of The Witcher as short stories and a saga, super out of place with the rest of the series. [END SPOILERS]

in my opinion, the BIGGEST FLAW with season of storms is that since the plot is so all over the place, and since the characters are so flimsy, the entire book feels meaningless. it feels like it would appease games or netflix fans who just want to read about geralt going on some crazy adventures, and it does serve that purpose, but it is NOT a “book belonging to the witcher series.” it has no depth where there should be... i do not feel like sapkowski is trying to tell me something as a reader about human nature, or the nature of parent-child relationships, or society, or violence and war... 

it just feels like geralt is doing all of this shit just because sapkowski had some remaining ideas and wanted to get all of them out into the world all in the same book, like sewing a vest out of fabric scraps. it was not refined like the witcher saga, because none of them were really meant to fit together anyways, and because they weren’t meant to fit together, there is a distinct lack of message and substance to it.

TLDR: no cohesive narrative and a confusing plot, no deeper underlying message or arguments about humanity or society or nature being made by the author, cheap new side & background characters, no ciri and no yennefer so geralt is quite directionless and stupid

other remarks that are just my personal preferences and comments:

geralt & dandelion:

geralt mostly works alone in this book... which is... not my favorite. this is why i got bored with tw3 after i read the witcher books, because i can’t stand geralt being alone, the world feels so... lonely! although he meets up with dandelion and has an affair with coral in season of storms, most of the book is him waffling about with side and background characters that i couldn’t care less about because sapkowski put no effort into developing them to be enigmatic or at least lifelike and likable (unlike some really minor characters in the witcher saga that, although they were so minor, were incredibly likable: for example, applegatt and toruviel i quite like). 

of course, i also have a preference for when geralt hangs out with dandelion, because it usually creates more of a lighter tone for the scenes and a more humorous nature overall, plus geralt changes his personality to be not in such a bad mood and we get to see him being kind and friendly. so it annoys me that although dandelion has some scenes with geralt, they never really have deep conversations like they do in a little sacrifice, or witty remarks & banter like in the edge of the world... i feel like dandelion was quite in-character for the whole book, which is good, but also, he’s dandelion so he’s pretty easy to get in character. he’s just easy-going, arrogant, preoccupied with earthly delights, cowardly, and friendly to geralt. but it annoyed me that their scenes together were both not very deep, and that they didn’t get as much interaction as i think they deserved. usually in a witcher book or story in which geralt and dandelion have met, they stay by each other’s side for like, the whole book or story, lmao... 

that being said, they do have some fun moments in this book and dandelion has some funny lines which i quite enjoy. like. they are eating at an inn, and the innkeeper asks them “how are you finding the pork?” and dandelion replies, “we’re finding it among the kasha. from time to time. not as often as we’d like to.” and somehow i just find that line so fucking funny... i think it’s just because it’s really relatable

sorcery:

coral is SOOOOO one-dimensional, she really is just like the same character as fringilla vigo or some other sorceress that’s jealous of yennefer for getting to bang geralt, and this lack of characterization is super transparent. people laugh about how many affairs geralt has had, but they never discuss how all of them have been super uneasy and unfulfilling.

already said that i hate degerlund as a character and all of the sorcerers being morally wack is predictable if you’ve read like, anything from the saga about the sorcerer/esses. also geralt talking with sorcerers is like, interesting if the sorcerer in question is vilgefortz, but everyone else is just super boring

other:

i didn’t really like ferrant de lettenhove until the very end of the book (which i won’t spoil) but because of this end, i wished that he got more backstory/development

NIMUE I LOVE YOU and it was nice that nimue got some more backstory in this.

i do enjoy the end of the book. not to say “my favorite part is when it ended,” but it’s true, because the ending in kerack is interesting and full of drama, the moments in the inn are alright if a little void of substance, the ending with geralt and dandelion on horseback is beautiful, and the epilogue with nimue is wistful and beautiful as well.

sheer pettiness:

oh my GOD why are the CHAPTERS so SHORT? it’s like, 20 chapters plus a bunch of interludes and an epilogue, and the book is only 357 pages long. it feels like as soon as i was getting into a scene, it switched to another chapter. i mean, idk whether i prefer this, or the haphhazard long as fuck chapters from baptism of fire where i’m not quite sure when a chapter begins or ends because i memorized the scenes and not when a chapter occurs. 

i dislike how coral is on the cover of it, even though it’s fitting, because if there was a work about... oh idk... the hansa... then angouleme could have been on the cover... and then i could have had geralt + yennefer + ciri + dandelion + the hansa on the covers... like wow that would be cool...

this book would have functioned much better as a series of short stories... i think sapkowski has talent for the short story medium, but novel-length books are more desirable by publishers, but this is literally just a guess, i don’t have anything to back this up

my recommendation: don’t buy it if you are just looking to read the witcher books as in, get a feel for the book canon world and characters. it’s pretty unnecessary for that. do buy it if you are a completionist like me / the witcher is something you’ve been into for years and you’re about to buy all the books as a set and it would feel weird to not have all eight books on your shelf and it’s only like $5 more to buy the set of 8 as compared to the set of 7. don’t read it and expect perfection, it’s basically like “drabbles” but canon from the author. there are like 2 or 3 nice gerlion moments if you care about that.