#the grain

[brantheblessed]

There's two ways to succumb to the grain.

[ckarlova]

It’s time for a new champion to rise…

[justinempire]

The Grain

[machasstation]

Drawing this scene from Gem's hermitcraft s10 episode 2 !!

Full credit @wormtime123 for gem's amazing design and IB @zhukzucraft for the composition 🫶🏻🫶🏻

[aethersea]

another thing fantasy writers should keep track of is how much of their worldbuilding is aesthetic-based. it's not unlike the sci-fi hardness scale, which measures how closely a story holds to known, real principles of science. The Martian is extremely hard sci-fi, with nearly every detail being grounded in realistic fact as we know it; Star Trek is extremely soft sci-fi, with a vaguely plausible "space travel and no resource scarcity" premise used as a foundation for the wildest ideas the writers' room could come up with. and much as Star Trek fuckin rules, there's nothing wrong with aesthetic-based fantasy worldbuilding!

(sidenote we're not calling this 'soft fantasy' bc there's already a hard/soft divide in fantasy: hard magic follows consistent rules, like "earthbenders can always and only bend earth", and soft magic follows vague rules that often just ~feel right~, like the Force. this frankly kinda maps, but I'm not talking about just the magic, I'm talking about the worldbuilding as a whole.

actually for the purposes of this post we're calling it grounded vs airy fantasy, bc that's succinct and sounds cool.)

a great example of grounded fantasy is Dungeon Meshi: the dungeon ecosystem is meticulously thought out, the plot is driven by the very realistic need to eat well while adventuring, the story touches on both social and psychological effects of the whole 'no one dies forever down here' situation, the list goes on. the worldbuilding wants to be engaged with on a mechanical level and it rewards that engagement.

deliberately airy fantasy is less common, because in a funny way it's much harder to do. people tend to like explanations. it takes skill to pull off "the world is this way because I said so." Narnia manages: these kids fall into a magic world through the back of a wardrobe, befriend talking beavers who drink tea, get weapons from Santa Claus, dance with Bacchus and his maenads, and sail to the edge of the world, without ever breaking suspension of disbelief. it works because every new thing that happens fits the vibes. it's all just vibes! engaging with the worldbuilding on a mechanical level wouldn't just be futile, it'd be missing the point entirely.

the reason I started off calling this aesthetic-based is that an airy story will usually lean hard on an existing aesthetic, ideally one that's widely known by the target audience. Lewis was drawing on fables, fairy tales, myths, children's stories, and the vague idea of ~medieval europe~ that is to this day our most generic fantasy setting. when a prince falls in love with a fallen star, when there are giants who welcome lost children warmly and fatten them up for the feast, it all fits because these are things we'd expect to find in this story. none of this jars against what we've already seen.

and the point of it is to be wondrous and whimsical, to set the tone for the story Lewis wants to tell. and it does a great job! the airy worldbuilding serves the purposes of the story, and it's no less elegant than Ryōko Kui's elaborately grounded dungeon. neither kind of worldbuilding is better than the other.

however.

you do have to know which one you're doing.

the whole reason I'm writing this is that I saw yet another long, entertaining post dragging GRRM for absolute filth. asoiaf is a fun one because on some axes it's pretty grounded (political fuck-around-and-find-out, rumors spread farther than fact, fastest way to lose a war is to let your people starve, etc), but on others it's entirely airy (some people have magic Just Cause, the various peoples are each based on an aesthetic/stereotype/cliché with no real thought to how they influence each other as neighbors, the super-long seasons have no effect on ecology, etc).

and again! none of this is actually bad! (well ok some of those stereotypes are quite bigoted. but other than that this isn't bad.) there's nothing wrong with the season thing being there to highlight how the nobles are focused on short-sighted wars for power instead of storing up resources for the extremely dangerous and inevitable winter, that's a nice allegory, and the looming threat of many harsh years set the narrative tone. and you can always mix and match airy and grounded worldbuilding – everyone does it, frankly it's a necessity, because sooner or later the answer to every worldbuilding question is "because the author wanted it to be that way." the only completely grounded writing is nonfiction.

the problem is when you pretend that your entirely airy worldbuilding is actually super duper grounded. like, for instance, claiming that your vibes-based depiction of Medieval Europe (Gritty Edition) is completely historical, and then never even showing anyone spinning. or sniffing dismissively at Tolkien for not detailing Aragorn's tax policy, and then never addressing how a pre-industrial grain-based agricultural society is going years without harvesting any crops. (stored grain goes bad! you can't even mouse-proof your silos, how are you going to deal with mold?) and the list goes on.

the man went up on national television and invited us to engage with his worldbuilding mechanically, and then if you actually do that, it shatters like spun sugar under the pressure. doesn't he realize that's not the part of the story that's load-bearing! he should've directed our focus to the political machinations and extensive trope deconstruction, not the handwavey bit.

point is, as a fantasy writer there will always be some amount of your worldbuilding that boils down to 'because I said so,' and there's nothing wrong with that. nor is there anything wrong with making that your whole thing – airy worldbuilding can be beautiful and inspiring. but you have to be aware of what you're doing, because if you ask your readers to engage with the worldbuilding in gritty mechanical detail, you had better have some actual mechanics to show them.

[mamath]

🐉 🌳 Happy New Year! 🌳 🐉 It's finally the Year of the Wood Dragon so here is a Royal Poinciana Kirin inspired by the big poinciana tree I can see from my window.

[d0not-disturb]

The poo poo or something

[honeyrosepetals]

abandoned barn

[pawwlick]

This has been haunting my mind for weeks, now after drawing it I can finally be free.

[yuriinadress]

I'M GONNA BITE SOMEONE

Info

[rookflower]

that jayfeather guy

[jsheios]

So Hilda season 3. (This post has nothing to do with hilda season 3)

[kimtaegis]

SMERALDO GARDEN MARCHING BAND JIMIN (2024)

[paradoxicalloopy]

I (tried) copying @cherrifire s art style and this is what came out (:D)

[vyva-melinkolya]

Columbia River, border of Oregon and Washington

[pwippy]

sua's such an under analyzed character but her mentality and presentation is really interesting!! to others (besides mizi), she appears reserved (very demure. very mindful) / cold but she's genuinely going through constant inner turmoil.

growing up, she was literally used as a commodity by her guardian. she's bullied by her sisters for being the guardian nigeh's favorite, but it's really only because she makes the most money. even after death, her guardian doesn't care that sua's gone, they're more concerned with the popularity and revenue that her fandom brings.

to the segyein, sua's essentially a doll and an ideal pet human. she's a top student at anakt, aka she sticks to a routine and acts easily brainwashed. when asked about her study habits, she just says "it's not really that hard... you just have to memorize what they teach you."

her objectification by others strips her of her identity and livelihood. it definitely plagues her perception of self worth/value, and manifests in her behavior (being quiet/not taking up much space, jealousy, apologizing often, being defensive - more on that later)

^ i think this whisper sums up her situation pretty well. her circumstances and the way she presents herself affects her relationships in anakt a ton if that makes sense ?

when sua meets mizi, such a vibrant, lively, and loving person, her focus and dare i say will to live completely shifts to mizi. in mizi's eyes, sua is seen as mizi's soulmate, someone she'll be with forever. someone who's always there for her. synergyyyy

although sua's feelings are mutual, she carries a level of self doubt and anxiety with her. sua believed her love for mizi would harm her in the end. she's stated before (EXPLICITLY) that she would die for mizi, and she does end up doing this in the form of sacrifice in round 1.

it's almost as if sua feels guilty for loving mizi. she knows they're doomed, and with their limited time, why should she be focused on? is it selfish of her to not tell mizi of their inevitable fate to live in their dream a little longer?

^ the lyrics of sweet dream can also serve as her mentality and point of view leading up to alien stage. she knows the idyllic world she's in is temporary, knowing her end is imminent yet praying to be saved.

although mizi views sua in a tinted lens, the other characters do not. at least, not in the affectionate sense. to till, sua's demeanor is offputting and uncomfortable

to ivan, he sees straight through to suas actions and (maybe unintentionally but i doubt it) exacerbates her doubts. he has his own events going on and genuinely does seem to want to be close to sua (graduation message + human relationship rating) but interacts in a way that makes her feel threatened. (in addition "he keeps crossing the line" in the relationship chart)

to the outside viewer its interesting to note sua often pulls mizi away from people. she pulls mizi away from ivan, and pulls mizi's attention from till to her in a short act of jealousy.