#the inevitable end of everything

[gametourism]

Outer Wilds, Timber Hearth, Youngbark Crater, tw flashing lights

[VD : a video showing the end cycle of the sun passing the bramble seed on the ground. as it reaches the left side of the screen, the sun collapses and explodes in a blue flash, expanding until the screen turns white /End VD]

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Let the revenge games begin.

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[valtsv]

i'm not that worried about tumblr becoming unusable just yet but if/when it does die i am going to be genuinely sad because i've found and developed a community on here and have a place where i can be honest and feel like i belong even when there's nowhere and no one else i feel i can turn to, and i've spent so much time on here that it will, for better or for worse, leave a hole (lol) where it once was when i finally have to pack my things and go. even if i archive my blog, it'll be the end of a period of my life that i put a lot of effort into and got a lot of joy out of, and which shaped some of the ways i've grown and changed and discovered myself as a person. even if there are new communities in my future, both online and irl - which i'm sure there will be - i'll still miss the time i spent here and the people i spent that time with.

[autisticaradiamegido]

day 169

this is it, the dynamic

[gingermintpepper]

One of my biggest pet peeves is the assumption that something has to be sad for it to be tragic.

I've always been a big believer of the 'Apollo has an awful love life'/'Apollo is plain unlucky with love' line of thinking but it does bother me that the general reasoning for that statement is given to the concept of 'Apollo is somehow undesireable and thus rejected' (Cassandra/Daphne/Marpessa) or 'his lovers die young and thus their love is unfulfilled' (Cyparissus/Hyacinthus/Coronis). I personally think that's a very unfortunate way of looking at things - not only because it neglects the many perfectly cordial entanglements and affairs Apollo has had, both mortal and divine - but because it presents a very shallow interpretation of the concepts of love and loss and how loss affects people.

Apollo can still grieve lovers that have a long, healthy life. The inherent tragedy of an immortal who knows his lovers and children will die and cannot stop it does not stop being tragic simply because those lovers and children live long, fulfilled lives. The inherent tragedy of loss does not stop being tragic simply because someone knows better than to mourn something that was always going to end.

What is tragic is not that Apollo loves and loses but that loss itself follows him. Apollo does not love with the distance of an immortal, he does not have affairs and then leaves never to listen to their prayers again. He does not have offspring and then abandon them to their trials only to appear when it is time to lead them to their destinies. He raises his young, he protects the mothers of his children, he blesses the households that have his favour and multiplies their flocks that they may never go hungry. He educates his sons, he adorns his daughters and even in wrath he is quick to come to his senses and regret the punishments he doles out.

Apollo loves. And like mortals, there will always be some part of him that wishes to protect the objects of his affections. Apollo, however, is also an emissary of Fate. He knows that the fate of all mortal things is death. He knows that to love a mortal is to accept that eventually he will have to bury them. There is no illusion of forever, there is no fantasy where he fights against the nature of living things and shields his beloveds from death. Apollo loves and because of that love, he also accepts.

And that, while beautiful, is also tragic.

[butwhatifidothis]

it annoys me so much when people say "edel had no other choice" as a thought terminating cliche. like even IF that were true, how one goes about that is still a characterful thing that gets minimized to "so it's not her fault stop being mean to her she just did what she had to". like. does she feel regret? does she apologize ot the people she's hurting? does she view it as righteous? who knows, becuase the argument is only ever used as a "stop being mean to my wife" line and not a character thing.

Yeah cuz like. Okay so let's say that starting the war was absolutely not her fault because xyz circumstance robs her of any substantial say in the matter.

What about using Demonic Beasts? What about her siccing her army and different set of Demonic Beasts on her own "friends" so that she could make more Demonic Beasts? Stealing from a gravesite to do so? What about starving her citizens, and being the only lord TO starve her citizens in their route? What about killing Judith as she ran away from her? Hell, invading the neutral Alliance in the first place? What about helping the Death Knight get away with stealing Flayn if 25 turns pass? What about saying nothing about Kronya even after Solon reveals himself at Remire? What about giving Jeritza a hunting ground to enable his bloodlust and not, like. Professional help?

She couldn't even mention a means she's working on to do anything about her starving citizens? Did she have to blame Claude (and everyone really) not immediately bowing down to her as to why the Alliance was violently invaded, and not her violent invasion being the reason it was violently invaded? What about persecuting Church followers who didn't do shit to anybody, did she have to do that shit too? Never freeing Brigid and instead stationing her men there on her route and sending Hubert there off of it; that was forced on her too? Taking Byleth's credit during the siege instead of letting them get the recognition they deserve - what, just, fate forcing her hand once again?

Are we really going to sit here and say because the war "needed" to happen, Edelgard was forced to do literally all of that (and more)? That because Edelgard was "forced" into war, she was also forced to do literally anything involving the war?

Like you said, her stans saying that she "had no choice" but to start the war does nothing to say anything about her as a character, because they also reject everything else she did regarding her war as having anything to do with her agency. They treat "she had to do this" as a means to protect the moral purity they want her character to have so they don't feel bad rooting for the villain to win, not as something that goes on to mean anything for her.

And I'm not asking for her to save literally every single person ever from any harm ever to prove her care about not going to war exists, I'm asking for LITERALLY ANYTHING. Because she quite literally does nothing to mitigate harm from anybody in this war, and regardless of whether the war was "forced" on her hands or not she absolutely could have done something to make sure her people suffered as minimally as possible. Which damn sure isn't seen in her hiding behind them as she sits in her throne room (a thing Dimitri and Claude absolutely don't do, with either similar or less time to prepare to protect their people). Or starves them, a thing uniquely said about her route (as literally all the other ones have the army go with lacking food supplies). Or allows Thales to conscript them under threat of death. Or openly saying that she thinks weak people would only stay weak after her war because they're "too used to relying on others" - because when her war takes everything away from people, it'd be THEIR fault for staying weak, which is *chef's kiss* so kind and caring amiright guys. Definitely shows off that she understands and/or cares about the ramifications of her war onto the people, and not that she has her head shoved squarely and firmly up her ass.

What does it meaningfully mean for the war to not be Edelgard's fault, if she's not going to do anything to indicate that she cares about other people enough to want to not force war on them? Hell, when she very explicitly shows she doesn't particularly care about how it'd affect people, if it affects people in a way that doesn't align with her beliefs? When she very explicitly says she's perfectly willing to sacrifice her people for her higher cause, and then goes on to sacrifice her people for her higher cause? If she doesn't even try to help others because the war was forced on her, that at best makes her one of powerless victim or uncaring defeatist - neither of which fit the resolute caring ambitious revolutionary they paradoxically also want her to be. So, again, what does it actually mean for the war to not be a result of Edelgard's agency, if she regardless of that still shows callous indifference to those harmed by the war?

It's a question no one who posits this about Edelgard is able to answer, because as you said, it's not meant to be anything more than a shallow defense against her own actions. Letting Edelgard have even the slightest smidgen of agency in her own actions means accepting that she is a massive fucking penis. A huge gaping asshole. A plain ol' jerk. Which again! Is INFINITELY more engaging to watch than this marionette strung along by literally everyone around her into "looking" like a villain, only being her "true" self when she's feeding kittens and dwawing her cwush and burping her googoo gaga babyass girlfriend they also tend to make (f!)Byleth over her shoulder

[croissantk]

The thing abt people trying to assign mei and mk into the 'hero and warrior' dynamic and comparing them to eclipse duo's relationship saying history will repeat itself and stuff 🖐STOP. THINK for a second. I love the idea of tragedies as much as the next guy but. That will just not happen with those two. Like do you remember the samadhi fire scene? And the way mei tried so hard to reach out to mk in the same way in s4?? Yes yes they DO parallel eclipseduo and they do have the potential even more soo well but lest not ignore that they are much better than that okay?

So to conclude this debate. In my most opinion☝️ it is essentially that; mei is a hero pushed into the role of the warrior and mk is a warrior pushed into the role of the hero. Does anyone understand me

[dykedvonte]

Ulysses obsession with the Courier is a special type of sad to me cause the Courier’s part was so important but so unwitting. They had no idea what was in the package they delivered and neither did he. Neither had an idea of what it could’ve done and the Courier was only caring out their job (mind you the Courier could be killed via notes in the express contract if they don’t). To them it was just another regular delivery to the divide and one that they likely thought would help, just like all the ones before.

It’s so tragic for Ulysses to hold so much ire to the Courier when it really was the case of it could’ve been anyone. Anyone could have delivered that package but they did and so he focused the blame on them and it destroys what he is trying to instill in the courier on a fundamental level.

[fumifooms]

"The immortal x mortal relationship dynamic [is about] loving something you know will die. It is about vulnerability, vulnerability in the face of centuries of pain, centuries’ worth of trauma, centuries of experience jading someone. And the strength and vulnerability and hope that it takes to love something after that, when you already know how it is going to end.

That’s the metaphor, right, like we have terrible experiences, we have terrible relationships and you go into a relationship thinking you know how this is going to end but you have to do it anyway and that’s really hard. And the [immortal creature] take on that is pushing it to its extremes, it’s telling a story about someone who has unthinkable level of bad experiences and traumas, who knows for a fact how it’s going to end, even if it goes perfectly by human standards: there is an expiration date. And you have to choose to do it anyway."

Biz Barclay, When Allegory Fails, 3:22:00

[lale-txt]

i knew Soft Launch reached the right audience when the comments about the wlw dating being deeply relatable piled up lmao

[user2718273]

Having big feelings abt her again

[adrift-in-thyme]

Odysseus was always going to choose Penelope. That’s the tragedy of it all. His character in both EPIC and the myths is centered around his family and his love for them. That’s why he fights so relentlessly and ruthlessly in the war. That’s why he kills Palamedes. That’s why he keeps going even when the whole world stands against him in his way home.

…that’s why he throws an infant off the walls of Troy.

He never wanted to make the decisions he has had to. He never wanted to become the monster, especially not to his men. But the world is dark, the gods uncaring, the ruthlessness is mercy.

His choice was inevitable. Deep down he’s just a man who would trade the world to see his son and wife.

[parasitoidism]

btw before this steam sale ends I feel the need to formally shill for nocturne on here too for just 14.99 you can experience an incredible rpg with one of the most unique and striking atmospheres and overall presentation of all time. Also if you've heard anything about it it's probably about its "crushing difficulty" and I will say that it's not a cakewalk or anything but I would hardly call it relentlessly unfair or anything so if it's your first smt game as long as you pay attention to the mechanics the game is communicating to you (BUFFS/DEBUFS ARE VERY IMPORTANT UNLIKE A LOT OF OTHER RPGS) you won't have too bad of a time playing on normal. Also, make sure you start a new game in the chronicle (or maniax if you feel like paying extra for dante) version to get all the extra content with the fiends and the true demon ending if you buy it. OK BYE

[eggwishing]

[shippersonfire]

snowbaird is soooo romantic. i don’t know how anyone could read it as anything but, but that’s just me.

[my-chemical-rot]

Florida!!! by Florence + the Machine and Taylor Swift, Daytona Sand by Orville Peck, Spanish Moss by Against Me!, White Crosses by Against Me! //Pictures: map, surfers, post card, fountain of youth; plus my own photography // The Truman Show (1998) // Sunny Side Up by Jennifer L. Holm and Matthew Holm // Wikipedia