#the narrative makes it pretty clear imo

[odessa-2]

Titbits and analysis 🖖

As promised, some more titbits from the Con yesterday in Melbourne as well as my interpretations. Prior to attending yesterday, I told myself to keep an open mind and attempt to leave any biases behind (even after having seen the funeral pics). Clean slate. To try and view Sam, the event, questions, and subsequent behaviours objectively.

I'm the sort of person who feels energy and is affected by it and in some ways governed by it. The energy of people, both individually and collectively. The energy of a group. I tend to couple this with objective analysis, which forms the basis of my conclusions about people and situations.

I applied this method yesterday in attempting to understand and view Sam, the OL money 💰 machine and everything else. I also just wanted to go there and bask in the audience and enjoy myself....and....I did like it Jamie.

So first thing I noticed off the cuff was how experienced Sam was in handling questions, and the women, and tailoring his behaviour to suit their desires. He was charming, charismatic, approachable, a skilled professional. I saw the veneer. I felt the veneer. I also saw and felt that he is a pretty decent bloke under that veneer. A man with a solid work ethic, who is mild mannered and working with purpose in his life.

I observed that his handler or Convention agent or whatever he is, Steve, was in full control. He managed Sam's performance in a sense. He asked the questions and even set the directions for some answers. Sam is controlled. I didn't like Steve. I didn't get the best vibe off him. Infact, I got a bad vibe off him. I observed that everything was a performance. Scripted to a large degree. The Single Sam narrative was pushed by Steve. Hard. It was a performance. That much was clear to me.

So Sam chose to mention that he was in Austria skiing 2 weeks ago....blah blah...something about singing a Ronan Keating song. So the script tells everyone nice and early that he is NOT with Caitriona ✅️

Later on in the panel, he mentioned that he "was at the theatre in London the week earlier" watching a play. Huh? Getting his timeline confused? Interesting titbit, I thought. Who would he go to the theatre with whilst in London? Who else likes to go to the theatre? Who have we seen him go to the theatre with before? Ding ding ding!!

One of the first things he spoke about (umprompted) and imo was part of his speaking program, was that Caitriona is back home in Scotland doing prep work and will be directing this season. He said that he spoke to her recently and that she is cold and miserable back home. No one seemed to give a shit. The women were there for their Jamie. Sam read the crowd. He understood.

Sam tried to bring Cait into the conversation again saying something like "Where's Claire?....Caitriona isn't here". Again crickets from the audience.

He said that he auditioned with a lot of Claire's, but they couldn't find the right fit and that nobody was as brilliant as Caitriona.

It sounded like he genuinely missed her.

He spoke of his audition with Cait, saying they were very physical and were almost wrestling each other. He said he was sweating all over her and that his sweat was on her. The crowd still only wanted to hear about their Jamie. I think Sam relished in being cheeky in saying that she wore his sweat that day.

Someone asked about "how do you kiss and make out with a costar and then just carry-on. Isn't it awkward"? Sam responded generally initially, saying that there's lots of checking in with the person and apologising afterwards (in a joking fashion). Then that prompted him to start talking about Cait saying that he has also "snotted" all over Cait and exchanged many body fluids with her (in an acting context presumably)and that there's nothing really left to do together that they haven't already done. I was like "whoooaa wtf Sam?". Shooketh that he said that really. The silence from the crowd was palpable. They really didn't want to hear about Cait and Sam and their shared bodily fluids whilst 'acting'. He is THEIR fantasy man. Not Caitriona's. Silence from the audience. Sam already knew that the crowd were Sam onlies but he loved telling this story. Relished in it imo. He loved the double entendre. It was an unrehearsed, unscripted conversation as it resulted from an audience question. I concluded it was an act of defiance on his behalf. That's what it felt like to me.

Steve the convention agent guy, was always bringing it back to Single Sam. "I worry how are you going to get a date" said Steve. With Sam understanding the prompt ...."I worry too" says Sam. Bachelor narrative secured ✅️

Steve spruked the Bachelor narrative again to Sam's thirsty and adoring fans....."Sam you remind me of that old show where everyone has to guess which bachelor is going to come out of the mystery door". And that's when I knew with 100 percent certainty that the bachelor talk was a ruse. It was so contrived and performative. I smiled to myself. The women in the crowd were eating it up.

Another thing that stood out to me was when Sam was searching for the right terminology when talking about Cait. "My......co star" huge pause.

"I love you Claire" is the line he randomly chose to say when explaining his acting.

When asked how he has time to foster friendships and spend time with his family he talked around it. Avoided the question and kept it about his friendships saying that they are strong friendships that endure. He diverged and started talking about how he still has his core friendships that he had when he was bunking and sharing an apartment/house with them in London when he was younger. The veneer was up. Inpenetrable.

At another point in the panel Sam asked "How many Sheila's are there here"? LOL. I found that amusing.

Now this next part captured my attention the most. It had a weird feeling (energy) around it . Sam gave off a weird energy. Almost hostile. Again that's just what I felt.

Someome from the audience named Toni with an "I" was selected to ask a question. I can't remember what the question was but Sam made a really big deal about her being named Toni. "There's always a Tony have you noticed"? Why is there always a Tony"? He said. He didn't want to drop it. He placed a little too much emphasis on it. I was laughing silently but Sam's double entendre didn't go unnoticed by me. Everyone else was clueless or at least that's how it appeared to me. Was that an Easter egg dropped by Sammy?

Asked about what does he do for self care, he seemed to struggle answering that too. He talked in circles about his way points hike and how he's learning how to live in the moment. There's that wall again.

There were many other things discussed of course but I thought I'd focus on the things that shed light on his situation and that resonated with me.

So my closing Analysis? Sam is controlled. He peforms. He caters. He's intelligent and in tune with people and aims to please but is private. Sunday just reaffirmed and solidified my beliefs. Caitriona snatched up that hard working gem of a man quick smart!

[plantsjustwannahavefun]

"Izzy Canyon dwellers just want to turn him into an innocent victim who did nothing wrong!"

Actually my problem is that, in hindsight, Izzy didn't do enough wrong to justify the common interpretation of his relationship with Ed. In my book, the first time in the series he legitimately crossed over to villainous antagonist territory - someone you actually loved to hate for it even if you understood his reasons - was when he set the British Navy on the Revenge. That way he not only betrayed his integrity as a pirate by consorting with the common enemy of all pirates, but risked Ed's life too - cause, like, come on, that "plan" to send CJ to convince Ed to leave Stede was so far-fetched it barely counts as a plan. I don't buy Izzy ever looking at CJ and going "yep that seems like a smart, responsible, trustworthy man I could rely on for a delicate mind games operation like this". It was an act of sheer desperation on Izzy's part, but he still chose to do it. IMO this was actually worse than what he said to Ed in S1 finale. Although of course that was very nasty, too.

But the thing is, we don't actually have any info on what their relationship used to be like before S1. We were only ever shown, not told - and both times from Izzy's perspective: the first time in S01E04 during his resignation rant, which was very heartfelt and I'm sure a lot of it was true, but it's still one-sided, and the second time during his deathbed speech, which was, again, one-sided and this time biased in another direction - instead of airing his pent-up grievanced Izzy was putting most of the blame on himself.

Other than this, the entirety of Ed and Izzy's pre-S1 relationship gets extrapolated from one single episode, S01E04. The narrative itself seems to want us to see it as a microcosm of their usual long-standing dynamic, at least on the surface. We see Ed being depressed and suicidal, trying to open up to Izzy about it, and Izzy shutting him down and making him act like Blackbeard again. Since it's already clear that Ed and Stede are the main characters, we're primed to see Ed as the victim here and Izzy being an annoying, insensitive nag.

Except the context of those interactions changes everything. The context being that they are literally about to be attacked by the Spanish - something Ed knowingly brought on them with his decisive power as captain - and Ed is deliberately withholding crucial information from his own first mate and the rest of the crew, making them all think they're going to die and he isn't doing anything about it. Izzy wasn't just being a boring buzzkill not being excited for Ed when he showed him that ship model. He was actively panicking and trying to do his job asking Ed for orders so they don't all get slaughtered.

So, yeah, those are some very exceptional circumstances that don't say anything about their typical day to day interactions go when they're not in immediate mortal peril due to lack of communication. Was this the first time Ed ever told him about not wanting to be Blackbeard anymore? Izzy didn't seem very surprised, so probably not, but we don't know, and if Ed had confided in him before, we don't know how Izzy reacted - but I'd like to point out that this time he didn't ridicule Ed in any way, he simply pointed out that they were about to die if Ed didn't do anything. Does Izzy usually indulge Ed in the stuff he finds fun when they're not about to be killed? Again, we don't know, but Izzy's playfulness during that first confrontation with Stede in S01E02, and his whittling and jokes in S2 showed that he wasn't always as grouchy and joyless as he's made out to be. We actually saw him smile when Ed got excited about Buttons, too. Pretty sure if Izzy always shut him down about things like that, Ed would have stopped trying to share it with him long ago.

And, finally, there's one piece of this puzzle that doesn't seem to fit in with the rest at all. The show both told us and implied that Izzy couldn't let Blackbeard go because his own identity was too tied up in it, and because he idolised the glory of violent pirate lifestyle. But if that's the case, then why did he have no problem with Ed wanting to retire? Izzy literally gave him an enthusiastic thumbs up on the whole "kill Stede and steal his identity so he could live the rest of his life as a rich aristocrat" plan. If Izzy only admired Ed as a pirate, and was so hell-bent on keeping the Blackbeard persona alive, why was he ok with Ed retiring? How does this square up with the idea that Izzy had been keeping Ed chained to piracy?

I'd honestly hoped we would get some flashbacks of the two of them in S2, and then S3 before that hope died too, because there's still so much we're missing.

[project-sekai-facts]

You touched on this in your last ask about how Mizuki's first events were too detailed with their secret. I always thought that too but now I'm wondering why. Since the writers sped through the set up part then spent the last year trying to delay the payoff. I'm guessing it was either to see how people would respond or they were unsure how well the game would do (imo latter is unlikely since anything that has Miku is basically a license to print money)

Kinda makes you wonder what would have happened if most people ended up hating Mizuki.

I think in part it may have been the latter, the stories are written pretty far in advance (Haruka Ryo spent almost a year on Kashika iirc, and fawo would’ve started writing around the time they commissioned him), so at the time footprints was being written, and definitely at the time secret distance and exciting picnic were being written, the devs may have still been uncertain at how many years the game would stay popular. This is something they’ve even brought up in more recent interviews in regards to the end of the current stories and continuing them onwards. So in that regard, quickly introducing Mizuki’s arc and making it very clear what their secret is makes sense, even if she never states it outright, because the player knows by this point anyway. Like if you dragged it out for years and the game had started to lose popularity then the story isn’t going to reach people.

But also it makes sense narratively. You don’t want Mizuki being trans to be a big twist or reveal for the players, partially because it could cause uproar with unsupportive fans but also because it’s kind of important information that shouldn’t really be withheld from the reader, hence the ? in Mizuki’s official bio and the main story immediately implying that there’s something gender related going on. Also the writers always talk about how they want people to relate and connect with the stories, and you’re not gonna reach that audience if you don’t make it clear from the start.

Quickly introducing the player to Mizuki’s secret and their feelings and setting up Ena as a support makes a lot of sense. However like I said in the last post you don’t wanna speed through the other characters knowing as well, because then Mizuki’s development would go stale. Also having Ena wait contributes to her relationship with Mizuki developing too, showing how Mizuki can trust her and is willing to be patient to make her more comfortable, so again it would just stale their relationship development too if she found out in footprints. The player knowing what Mizuki’s secret is also makes their interactions with Mafuyu make a lot more sense. Mizuki is able to help Mafuyu because they’re both hiding a part of themselves. If we didn’t know about Mizuki being trans then those interactions wouldn’t work the same way.

I mean this hasn’t entirely worked there’s still a fair chunk of fans primarily on JP side who believe Mizuki is a crossdressing boy still but that’s on them for having bad media literacy.

[anghraine]

Okay, breaking my principles hiatus again for another fanfic rant despite my profound frustration w/ Tumblr currently:

I have another post and conversation on DW about this, but while pretty much my entire dash has zero patience with the overtly contemptuous Hot Fanfic Takes, I do pretty often see takes on Fanfiction's Limitations As A Form that are phrased more gently and/or academically but which rely on the same assumptions and make the same mistakes.

IMO even the gentlest, and/or most earnest, and/or most eruditely theorized takes on fanfiction as a form still suffer from one basic problem: the formal argument does not work.

I have never once seen a take on fanfiction as a form that could provide a coherent formal definition of what fanfiction is and what it is not (formal as in "related to its form" not as in "proper" or "stuffy"). Every argument I have ever seen on the strengths/weaknesses of fanfiction as a form vs original fiction relies to some extent on this lack of clarity.

Hence the inevitable "what about Shakespeare/Ovid/Wide Sargasso Sea/modern takes on ancient religious narratives/retold fairy tales/adaptation/expanded universes/etc" responses. The assumptions and assertions about fanfiction as a form in these arguments pretty much always should apply to other things based on the defining formal qualities of fanfic in these arguments ("fanfiction is fundamentally X because it re-purposes pre-existing characters and stories rather than inventing new ones" "fanfiction is fundamentally Y because it's often serialized" etc).

Yet the framing of the argument virtually always makes it clear that the generalizations about fanfic are not being applied to Real Literature. Nor can this argument account for original fics produced within a fandom context such as AO3 that are basically indistinguishable from fanfic in every way apart from lacking a canon source.

At the end of the day, I do not think fanfic is "the way it is" because of any fundamental formal qualities—after all, it shares these qualities with vast swaths of other human literature and art over thousands of years that most people would never consider fanfic. My view is that an argument about fanfic based purely on form must also apply to "non-fanfic" works that share the formal qualities brought up in the argument (these arguments never actually apply their theories to anything other than fanfic, though).

Alternately, the formal argument could provide a definition of fanfic (a formal one, not one based on judgment of merit or morality) that excludes these other kinds of works and genres. In that case, the argument would actually apply only to fanfic (as defined). But I have never seen this happen, either.

So ultimately, I think the whole formal argument about fanfic is unsalvageably flawed in practice.

Realistically, fanfiction is not the way it is because of something fundamentally derived from writing characters/settings etc you didn't originate (or serialization as some new-fangled form, lmao). Fanfiction as a category is an intrinsically modern concept resulting largely from similarly modern concepts of intellectual property and auteurship (legally and culturally) that have been so extremely normalized in many English-language media spaces (at the least) that many people do not realize these concepts are context-dependent and not universal truths.

Fanfic does not look like it does (or exist as a discrete category at all) without specifically modern legal practices (and assumptions about law that may or may not be true, like with many authorial & corporate attempts to use the possibility of legal threats to dictate terms of engagement w/ media to fandom, the Marion Zimmer Bradley myth, etc).

Fanfic does not look like it does without the broader fandom cultures and trends around it. It does not look like it does without the massive popularity of various romance genres and some very popular SF/F. It does not look like it does without any number of other social and cultural forces that are also extremely modern in the grand scheme of things.

The formal argument is just so completely ahistorical and obliviously presentist in its assumptions about art and generally incoherent that, sure, it's nicer when people present it politely, but it's still wrong.

[stressfulsloth]

In regards to your post “and now I'm. Just thinking about the loneliness that is SO pervasive through Elysium.”…

I have one thing to offer, or perhaps nitpick if you’d prefer it that way.

I don’t think it’s entirely fair to say the Sunday Friend isn’t a real friend. The Smoker On The Balcony believes him to be a real friend, even if he isn’t going to be there come Monday morn. But isn’t that enough? A friend on Sunday is still a friend, even if it makes waking up Monday all the worse.

Perhaps I’m biased though! Now that I think about it, most of my friends would fit the description. “Fair weather friend” feels to cold, but “sunday friend” is good enough.

And of course none of this is to say your post is at all wrong. It’s lovely and true. I just felt the need to quarrel publicly with that little detail.

To conclude, since I really just did not make myself very clear here; you are utterly correct to include the Sunday Friend in a post about loneliness but I take slight issue with saying he’s not a real friend. And so I wrote you a very long ask. And now as I reach it’s end I’m realising this was a very silly undertaking. But I’ve come this far so I’m going to grow a pair and hit “ask”.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, I hope it isn’t too desperately obnoxious.

Peace out ✌️

Ahh man I'm sorry anon but I'm going to have to disagree with you pretty strongly here 😅 tbh I was a little too easy on him in the original post. It's not necessarily the temporary nature of their acquaintance that makes the Sunday Friend's friendship questionable on its own, although it doesn't help.

The Sunday Friend is quite literally not a friend. "Friend" in his title is a euphemism; he's not coming to visit the Smoker because he's his friend. He's coming to visit the smoker to do a bit of poverty tourism, to admire the crumbling place that his beliefs have helped to destroy, and a bit of heavily implied sex tourism too. A "first world" tourist, a bureaucrat from the international government, visiting one of the most impoverished districts of Revachol to spend his nights with a student. He's not the Smoker's friend, he's a client. They're using 'friend' as a stand-in for his actual role, which is a) as a part of the moralist bureaucratic system repressing the revolution and keeping the city as a whole trapped in a laissez faire purgatory easily exploited by foreign capitalists and ultraliberals, while still maintaining a friendly respectable face, and b) as the Smoker's customer, exploiting the poverty of Martinaise's residents to get what he wants for cheap and using the easy mobility that his money and status give him. Imo he's intended narratively as a parallel for the moralist coalition government; he views from a distance, focused on money and *ze price stabilité* but entirely divorced from the poverty and consequence of his work. Happy to dip his toe in and make use of exploitable populations in Revachol, but always ready to leave too. When asked how he became 'friends' with the smoker, his response is literally to describe the coalition occupying Revachol.

He knows so little about the Smoker beyond him being there to study art, but what kind? "Perhaps graphic design? Printmaking? Who knows?" As to your point about the Smoker thinking he's a real friend, the Smoker is under no illusions about who the Sunday Friend is. An injection of money. Someone with power, someone with the mobility afforded to him by ownership of a non-Revacholian passport, someone content to watch the place decay and do nothing but indulge himself in pet projects and worry about bureaucracy. Someone with the freedom to leave when things get bad; a freedom that is narratively only assigned to a rare few extremely bourgeois characters. Dora, on her flight to Mirova, Joyce and her boat, Trant and his academic travels, and the Sunday Friend who will be out of Martinaise like a shot the moment things start to kick off despite being a part of the overarching structure that is responsible for Revachol's subjugation and rising political tensions. The Sunday Friend will use the Smoker's labour, use the vulnerability of Revachol's precarious situation to his advantage, then once it becomes too precarious or he gets bored, he'll withdraw. In answer to your question, no, I don't think that's enough. Again I probably oversimplified in my last post but the loneliness all throughout DE is not just an emotional state but a political one. Alienation is a major theme. As is the impossibility of building community in the face of capitalism relentlessly subsuming anything in its path, in the face of shallow relationships dictated by the need for survival. The Sunday Friend embodies that concept perfectly. He is exquisitely shallow in conversation, a perfect moralist who at all times strives to remain impartial and distant.

Anyway. Tldr; my point is that the relationship between the Smoker and the Sunday Friend is far more transactional, and far more exploitative, than you seem to believe. "Friend" is not being used literally but euphemistically. A 'fairweather friend' is better than none, sure, but that's entirely inapplicable to this situation. Sorry for the long post and I hope it's not too rambling- I'm surviving on very little sleep right now but I hope it clears up for you a bit why I referred to the Sunday friend in that way initially.

[bonefall]

Do you have a design for Bright Storm? I'm fond of the wise older figure thing you're doing with her

I do NOW

Made her, as well as a revamp of my old Thunder Storm design (I last drew him like a year ago!!) in preparation for some character summaries I plan to bang out after finishing a couple drafts, but Bright in particular gets requested so much (anon you're like the 4th person) that HERE, lady girl and her son be upon ye

I'm thinking about doing the BB!DOTC character summaries in "family" posts, so they're all grouped together the way I plan them to act in the story. Every family is telling a little mini-story of its own, in a way, from the Frost family and their inventing prowess, to the Heart family and how the kits react to Bumble's exile, to the Storm family and how they grapple with Clear Sky's influence.

I wanted to make sure Bright Storm was very large and powerful looking, but in a round, kind of "humble" way. She downplays her strength, her intelligence, and even her better judgement.

So she has these big cheeks, fluffy primordial pouch, poofy tail, keeps her head low-ish. Tends to deny compliments.

I was commiserating with my partner the other day about how intelligent characters aren't allowed to be thick-bodied. So between my fat, beloved Bumble the translator and Bright Storm the wise woman battle strategist I'm feeding us both

I needed to "finalize" their stripe pattern, because I actually plan for TIGERSTAR to have the same one. I'm probably going to update my Tawnypelt and Bramblestar designs to have it too; if they don't look better with Goldenflower's.

I just like the irony and bitterness of it. That these ancient stripes, once so associated with compassion and righteous fury, turn into a "legacy" so divorced from what Thunder Storm and Bright Storm stood for.

Becoming a symbol for the idea of modern ThunderClan and the culture of the new times, not the principles it was founded on.

Also I HAD to do the design thing where Thunder Storm's stripes look like top surgery scars lmao, my beloved transmasc boy

Anyway, I've decided that Thunder Storm was a REALLY dark orange. It bugs me a little, especially in-canon, that he looks nothing like either parent. So in BB he's not too far off color-wise from his mama.

I also removed the old "mane" and replaced it with combination white chest + his father's shoulder burls. The mane is going to become a Forest Cat trait, which is why it's going to get so prominent in ThunderClan.

Instead, Mountain Cats have a REALLY high concentration of ear tufts in their genes. They're also huge and generally hairy.

Funny enough though they're also "oily." They come from the Lake Cat population which was pretty water-resistant because of constantly dealing with the lake, and they haven't lived in the Mountains long enough for natural selection to get rid of it.

It's going to become SUPER advantageous for those who move to the River Kingdom, but become less prominent in the other populations.

But for now, Mountain Cats are kinda... well, naturally 'stinky.' That's not a BAD thing to cats who are animals who LIKE strong smells, but it is a notable trait that I'd like The Wind Runner in particular to comment on.

Thunder Storm: "Well? What did she say?"

Bumble: "Ummmmmm......"

Thunder Storm: "be honest"

Bumble: "she says she smelled you coming when you were upwind. rudely."

99% of the time when I'm changing character eye colors, it's to make them NOT blue because there's too many blue-eyed characters in WC imo. BUT.

I think it was another tiny waste to have the narrative constantly stressing Clear Sky's blue, blue eyes, almost like they're hypnotizing, and then they never really comment on what Thunder's eye color signals to other people.

So I've got an idea; instead of amber, Thunder Storm has ELECTRIC BLUE eyes. Almost green, like his mother's minty ones.

Intense as his father's, but more focused. Sharp. Shocking.

Side note: in my research I actually learned it's easier for tripod cats to RUN than it is for them to walk. They can "canter" like a horse, but when they go slow they have to hop. Taking this into consideration.

I put a splash of white on the little bit of lower limb that Thunder Storm has on the leg, so it sticks out a bit more. I don't want it to be hidden I want it to be prominent

I also figured out a hilarious trick for Bright Storm to pull on Sky's Clan at some point lmao

Thunder's crew is in conflict with Sky's cats and the attacks are getting more and more frequent. They decide they need some extra time to carry out some kind of hunt or diplomatic mission, but Bright Storm only has a small group of cats to pull off a stunt with.

She knows she can't fight them head on, but she NEEDS to buy her son more time, so she hatches a plan.

Clear Sky values his intelligence and his ferocity very much. To a fault, even. He loves to outsmart his opponents and overpower them-- so Bright Storm gets all her cats to build a very large, very tall, nearly impenetrable wall out of briar thorns. There's only one way in; the well-guarded tunnel they've constructed in the front.

It would be a challenge for a lesser cat. But Clear Sky, clever devil he is, realizes they've made a fatal flaw; they've built their camp right next to the trees. His fighters don't need to jump over the wall or push through it, the oaks are their allies!

So, while Thunder's cats are all surely sleeping, he gathers his best men and come through the canopy. In well-trained patrols, they swoop down into the camp and prepare for battle.

and no one is there.

You see, there was only one way in... and only one way out.

And Clear Sky and his best fighters watch with HORROR as the tiny crew of guards seals that entrance up like the neck of a bag. There are no trees to climb INSIDE the wall, and it's too tall to hop out of. It won't hold them forever, but it will hold them JUST LONG ENOUGH.

Bright calls this little plan "Operation Timeout."

[problem-of-ros]

im trying to pinpoint how mysterious lotus casebook gets to you because what happened to me was that i watched it in maybe 10 days and i thought i was fine. i thought for a full 24 hours after finishing it that it was a pretty enjoyable and well-made show with a poetic ending that nonetheless didn’t have a lasting impact on me. this was a month ago and ill probably never be normal again but my point is. not even watching it prepared me for how good it was. and i think it’s because mlc takes itself lightly, in a mid-budget sillyserious manner. it’s not wearing its prestige tv outfit, it’s wearing sweatpants and a graphic tshirt with a meme on it. but why is it that compelling then!!! and i think my answer is that mlc is an anti-story. to me!! this is not intended as meta im just journaling. walking up and down clutching my head and typing. so <<there are two quite different emotions: […] the heart-racking sense of the vanished […] ; and the other the more ‘ordinary’ emotion, triumph, pathos, tragedy of the characters […] forced on me by the fundamental literary dilemma: A story must be told or there will be no story, yet it is the untold stories that are the most moving.>> says old john ronald. this is the asylum they raised me in or whatever kids say nowdays. and here’s another one, a poem that is very very li lianhuacore but i have to translate it to english fml. the title is they say or people say. << i was born with knife in hand— / people say this is a poem. / surely the knife wasn’t enough, that’s why he grabbed the pen / [but] i was [simply] born human.” etc etc there is an insane dog motive line that’s sadly irrelevant to the point im trying to make etc last verse: “i am sealed by dirt [soil] and eroded [crumbled] by the sea— / people say i’ll die, / but I stay silent. / you hear all manner of things all the time.” thank you józsef attila sorry józsef attila. translating this took audacity. what i MEAN is that beyond the metanarrative pun that is a string of murder mysteries leading the detective to the realisation that his own death ten years earlier was actually a mysterious murder (which is already pretty elegant imo) . but beyond that, the complete plot and the whole show itself is a cover story for li lianhua’s private little suicide narrative that we know nothing about. and i want to be very clear llh isn’t fabricating the cover story purposefully, unreliable narrator style. he isn’t narrating shit. mlc doesn’t have a narrator. closest thing is actually fang duobing, as we the viewers are trying to get to know llh through him— except, unlike fdb, we have just enough additional information to understand that he is NOT getting any closer. he cannot. people smarter than me have said that llh is mother; he surely is unknowable like one. the closer you are to someone the worse the blind spots feel. if zhiji can be (as i understand) something like ‘knowing myself is knowing you’ then maybe having a mother is sometimes like ‘understanding myself is understanding you, but always a decade too late’. for me, fanghua is a synthesis of these two things. fdb either knows but doesn’t understand or understands but doesn’t know. same logic as the infamous masks. you stand on the shore with a letter adressed to you but not written for you and you know nothing, fang xiaobao. i haven’t fully seen GoT but this is how i imagine that line. but for someone with fdb’s brain and soul, not understanding is everything. let me rephrase, not understanding is sexy. in fact i’d argue that what makes lxy/llh irresistible for every tastehaver that ever fell for him is that he is shrouded in mystery. like a bride and like the dead. and ironically, dead brides with their shorter and prettier semi-transparent veils are but a frivolous subcategory of sheet ghost. goodbye

also not to quote contrapoints, but the lover(detective)-barrier(mystery)-beloved(truth) triangle. fanghua is all about yearning and anticipation and it’s a tension that never breaks. the resolution is beyond death (plot) beyond the end of the story (narrative) beyond the barrier — which is the story itself (metanarrative). it points us to an unanswerable question, and that is its depth. and that is what i love: cover stories that let me palpate something vanished and silent

[carrymelikeimcute]

'If Ed has to GROVEL to Izzy why doesn't Izzy have to apologise to Stede for trying to KILL HIM..."

Ed doesn't have to grovel, he needed to apologise, and imo he could have done more to apologise or to make amends and move the relationship forward (not just with Izzy but with the whole crew - discounting the ones who died because of his actions btw) but he did do it in his own way, so...fine. It is what it is and it was enough for Izzy as a character to forgive him, so I'm OK with that as far as the narrative goes - even if I personally will never feel the same about Ed as I did in S1.

Can we acknowledge that shooting someone in the leg with no warning/cutting bits off them while they're asleep - isn't actually the same thing as challenging someone to a duel? E.g. Consent playing a pretty vital role.

Ed and Izzy were long-time partners/friends/co-workers, when Ed cut off at least 3 of his toes, mentally tortured and then tried to kill him, resulting in him being maimed/disabled, and then tried to emotionally blackmail him into killing Ed and then himself. Izzy and Stede were ENEMIES - Izzy had made that clear. Stede had made that clear. They didn't like each other and had no expectation of loyalty. Enemies try to hurt you - it's expected.

Izzy tried to kill Stede directly, once, in a duel that Stede agreed to - Stede was trying to beat him, just as much as Izzy was trying to - Stede beat him without killing him, but arguably by accident. Izzy could even have killed him/tried to kill him after losing his sword, but didn't. He lost the duel and was bound by its rules. So he has nothing to apologise for there, imo - Losing is its own punishment for the duel.

Reminding Ed of ED'S PLAN to kill Stede, is not 'trying to kill him'. It's Izzy doing his job, and making sure his captain's wishes are carried out - those wishes being unclear, even to Ed himself, are the issue. Izzy could have ignored Ed's order and killed Stede himself during the fuckery - but didn't. He left it up to Ed and then challenged Stede to a duel instead of stabbing him in the back.

Selling Stede out to the Navy was not a slight against STEDE, but against ED - and Izzy did attempt to apologise/justify himself to Ed, before he got punched in the face - and when Ed returns to the ship, he doesn't hold a grudge, as the apology, such as it is, has already been given. See above, re. Stede and Izzy were enemies. Even if Izzy expected Stede to be captured, he doesn't even consider Stede a real pirate and neither do the navy initially! They treat Stede as a joke. And Stede, being of a higher class, has opportunities to save himself. I don't think Izzy cared if Stede lived or died, but again, enemies.

If Stede is owed an apology by Izzy, he's also technically owed one by 1. his ENTIRE CREW for mutiny and 2. Jackie, who has now threatened to kill him/tried to cut his nose off. But no one thinks they should apologise, because they were acting as expected given the context of their existing, antagonistic relationship. See above re - THEY WERE ENEMIES!

I think it would be nice if Izzy did apologise to Stede at some point, but their relationship would need to develop further for that to happen. Imo, Izzy attempting to console Stede in s2 e7, and telling him that actually, the relationship he was so against is GOOD for Ed, is a sort of attempt at amends, as is his tutoring Stede, and he could have done more, if there had been time to explore that before he was killed off.

[codenamesazanka]

cursory chapter thoughts:

What was this chapter

So... was Deku/AFO's attack supposed to destroy 'Shigaraki Tomura' (and leave 'Shimura Tenko' intact)? I guess that makes sense, since he didn't care about Shigaraki Tomura, only about The Crying Child. What gets messy is whether it made clear in the text that Shigaraki and Tenko are separate people? Deku treated it as if they were; Shigaraki insisted they weren't (BUT he's brainwashed/traumatized/wrong, so what does he know 🤡); the narrative seems to imply that they're still the same people but perhaps Tenko is more 'core' - At the end of 418, Tenko is the one saying 'No' to playing heroes, growing into Shigaraki/his adult self to say 'Villains need a Hero of their own', which seems to be his True Dream, implying that Tenko and Shigaraki do at least share that, they are at least partly the same person... (But then 419 said his entire life was manufactured, so.) Shigaraki Tomura/Shimura Tenko is whoever Deku decides he is, I guess.

Sero's speech feels condescending and dismissive. I totally get him, that he's a normal guy in midst of all these tragedies and trauma victims, he can't quite relate to them, his motivation is purely 'Doing well at school' and 'preparing for my future career' and that's perfectly fine! Tragedy doesn't make people stronger; there's only just suffering. The issue is that the disconnect between Normal Guy Sero and Trash Rat Baby AFO (and Abused Eugenics Baby Todorokis, Hate Crime Child Victim Hetermorphs, Quirk Conversation Therapy Toga) is pretty big. And so the speech comes off seeming to say 'that sounds like a you problem'. Or, even if he later says 'bad stuff shouldn't happen', that's so broad and vague it's meaningless, especially since the 'bad stuff' that's happening is mostly from... the system he's fighting to protect. Bad stuff happens to people and that should stop. How to stop it? Just don't be unlucky I guess?

I can't remember well, but isn't the majority of the damage Deku suffers pretty much self-inflicted? He was away for most of the Sky Coffin battle. Then he faced off only Shigaraki, and that consisted mostly of breaking Shigaraki's wrist in a hold, and dodging because he couldn't let Shigaraki touch him - though Shigaraki does get a few hits in, including tossing him across the country to Fuji. But the main injuries I remember getting prominence and significance is from overusing OFA - muscles tearing, unable to breathe, etc.

The Shirt is so awful. That's the extent of civilian help. Supporting Heroes by buying their exclusive merchandise and believing in The Symbol. And Deku puts value in that, given that he recognizes the fucking shirt. Yeah, yeah, it's symbol of their trust in him, their spirit and wishing energy is in that shirt, whatever. It's a terrible gesture and symbol to use, imo.

I like that AFO is sad.

[mswyrr]

forgiving and needing to be forgiven

Moiraine threatened Lan with a serious violation: she threatened to have Alanna force a bond on him. Lan could have chosen to walk away after that. Instead, he chose to consider this--and the rest of her shitty behavior--in context of Ishamael's assault on her and her own subsequent serious illness. He chose to forgive her - and we see, in the beach scene, that Moiraine makes it clear she doesn't expect his forgiveness.

When they come back together, choosing to open their hearts to each other once more--and emphasis is on Lan's wince as his heart reopens to her; it is his freely made choice, but it has a cost, there are scars left by what they've both been through and how Moiraine has treated him--the magic circles them and it is beautiful. Freely choosing to understand someone you love is hurting and commit to forgiving their mistakes and wrongs is a powerful thing; it is what makes long-term relationships possible. It is a kind of common magic - how people can grow, change, fuck up, and choose each other again and again. It is beautiful.

Loving someone, sharing a life together, and knowing them so well for decades--whether platonically or romantically--is one of the most beautiful things an adult human can choose to do. It is hard work; it is pure joy; it is the cultivation of grace for another and their failings and wrongs and the humility to recognize your own failings and admit your wrongs.

It's understanding and being understood, even the parts of you that aren't pretty, even the parts of them that aren't pretty. It's caring for someone when they're sick--not only temporarily, but even in chronic ways that wear upon you, that motivate the person to be hurtful toward you, like Moiraine was sick in s2--it's experiencing the vulnerability of receiving that kind of care even when you're difficult and unsightly. And every day it is a choice.

Moiraine can choose to forgive Siuan in the same way that Lan chose to forgive her. The same ethics and emotional truths apply and the reasons for Moiraine to choose to do so go back even further, are rooted even deeper, than Lan and her and their platonic love.

Lan forgives Moiraine at this point in the story because their relationship is very important, but it isn't Moraine's big true love romance - Siuan is. Their narrative arc is just gonna be more fireworks and grand imo. Siuan wrongs her at this point in the narrative (and Moraine wronged Siuan by deceiving her for six months!) because their resolution is being reserved for later. It's probably going to come along with another, even higher stakes resolution in the larger conflict, and it is going to be gorgeous.

Rosamund Pike didn't write Sophie Okonedo a passionate personal letter asking Sophie to play her wife--and Sophie didn't agree to that!-- just so it could end this way. That doesn't make "behind the scenes" sense or narrative arc sense.

[theshadowsingersraven]

I wonder if that's why they try so damn hard to act like Elain is special to SJM and she's just... not. If SJM loved Elain "so much she gave her two mates" then half or more of the fanbase wouldn't find her bland and underdeveloped. SJM's favorites are obvious (looking at you Rhys and Lucien). I don't know why they try so hard to pretend something is there when it isn't.

Hi Anon!

I agree with you, SJM absolutely makes her favorites clear, even across her series. I was recently listening to the TOG audio book with a friend on a road trip, and I completely forgot how many lines Celaena and Dorian both had in early TOG that were sassy, wise-cracking, sharp-witted, etc.

SJM really loves articulate, witty, and wise-cracking characters. Rhys, Lucien, Celaena, Dorian, probably even Bryce is up there, too. (Though I can't say I'm the biggest fan of her personally)

I think it may be that as well as the percentage of E/riels that abundantly clearly just project themselves onto Elain to fulfill the fantasy of being with Azriel. And the exact reason why they can do that is because Elain is not developed yet. In the instances where she is developed, she's notably kind, gentle, generous, and has a nice sense of humor.

It's easy to see why people want Elain to be so special because they want to be Elain. Elain is the most beautiful Archeron sister, and despite the polarized view that the fanbase has of her, in the narrative itself, she's not really viewed negatively since ACOTAR. We really only get some criticism about her from Nesta in ACOSF. Otherwise, she's pretty inoffensive from the way SJM describes her to us. Why wouldn't someone want to be the most beautiful fae girl with magic powers and two males interested in her when she's so sweet and kind? What's the drawback? Why wouldn't you want to be the most special girl since she's already so pretty and nice? Make her extra special. ✨️

I think on some level people want to see the characters they feel represent them be extra special, but I think they also want Elain to be extra special in the sense that she can "defy fate to be with Azriel" and not have any real consequences from that.

So many E/riels say that they want to see love after a rejected mating bond, and to me, as someone who writes and particularly for the ACOTAR world, what I hear from that is just, "I would prefer Elain have a lackluster, surface-level 'love' with Azriel instead of a soul-deep, intimately profound love with Lucien." Even if that's not what they mean when they say it, I'm pretty convinced that's what they're going to get.

They're going to get a love where Elain can't give herself fully to Azriel because a part of her will always be tied to Lucien. That kinda sucks for everyone involved, and is pretty far from a beautiful romance imo. I don't think enough of them actually take into account the cultural and religious implications of an E/riel endgame on top of the romance. They just see their sad shadow boy sitting quietly with their sweet flower girl.

They're well overdue for managing their expectations imo.

[uwushitsuji]

Reading black butler again as an adult, I find myself thinking a lot the sexualization of Sebastian and Ciel's relationship. I was expecting to feel disgusted but.... Morals aside, I feel from a narrative standpoint, it actually works?

We all know most sebaciel scenes are fanservice, Yana used to draw yaoi, the anime was sold as "shonen-ai" etc etc It's 2024 there's no point to debate that over and over again.

But is that fanservice unnecesary? At least in the manga, I dont think so. For the better or for the worse, it does serve a purpose. It defines the entire relationship of the main characters.

Just to make it clear, I think their relationship is very sexual, but not in a literal *they have sex* way. Sex is associated with love, intimacy, passion, desire, but also with violence, possesiveness, domination.

You could get rid of all the "weird fanservice", but that would destroy the complexity of their relationship. It would become either a story about two characters that don't care about each other, or a bland "wholesome" one.

Ciel, despite all his trauma, feels comfortable exposing his body to Sebastian. Having physical contact with someone. Showing his vulnerable self, because he's absolutely confident he won't be hurt.

Sebastian is always close to Ciel. Even too close. And the weird way he carries Young Master. It's clearly unappropiate and he doesn't seem to care about boundaries. Because Ciel is what he desires the most, and he *owns* him. Ciel is his treasure, his prize, his most precious possesion. Ciel is *his*. He's always being possesive, showing the world Ciel belongs *only* to him, while also being (somehow) gentle and caring.

(The topic of how Sebastian uses his sexuality as a weapon is pretty interesting as well, but not today!!)

Surprisingly, the fanservice does wonders to develop the duality of their dynamics. It perfectly showcases both the "light" and "dark" between them. Intimacy, healing, confidence absolute trust, caring for each other. Codependency, unhealthy desire, possesiveness, manipulation.

They're two sides of the same coin.

On the other hand, in contrast with Sebastian and Ciel's relationship, I think it's interesting how scenes involving real sex are not sexualized at all??

Sebastian and Beast are both really attractive characters, and they could be used in a more "fanservicey" way. However, their scene together it's short and uncomfortable. The intimacy between them feels fake, everything seems off. Beast doesn't look like he's actually enjoying anything. It's pretty clear she's being abused, and thanks Goodness there's no romantization nor explicit borderline fetish content. Instead, it does a great a job creating a "something is wrong here" atmosphere.

The Blue Memory flashback. It's disgusting and makes me physically ill, but it's able to do so without being explicit. It's really powerful without being morbid. Absolutely no fanservice here. Thanks Goodness again.

Like in real life, in Black Butler sexuality can be a safe place (Ciel and Sebastian), or a source of violence and pain.

Imo Yana is a better writer than you all give her credit for. She may be a shotacon or whatever, but at least she is coherent with the overall tone of her story and can be respectful when it's due. Despite all the fanservice at some points, I feel she's great at knowing when to do or not do it.

At the end of the day, I find fascinating how sex and sexualization are used in Black Butler. Sebastian and Ciel's relationship has nothing to do with sex, yet is so intense that I could argue that rather than being sexualized, their entire relationship is inherently sexual per se. If you remove that element from the equation, the main characters would be so different that the nature of the entire story would change.

The "fanservice" is not only fanservice, but what moves the characters and story foward.

Is it ethical?? That's up to you.

But for me, even if there are some uncomfortable moments, the result is worth it. A relationship so unique that you can't "tag" it. Both unhealthy and abusive, yet a safe place for Ciel to heal. It's problematic on several levels, but *that*is what makes it interesting.

Anyway, it's just fiction, and it's nice to explore different kinds of stories without hurting anyone.

[reddbuster]

I've talked about this before but I don't think I worded it all that well so I kinda want to try again to articulate what it is that bothers me about Dahlia's writing cause I have some thoughts.

We really aren't supposed to like Dahlia. The text does not like her. She is supposed to be an evil, manipulative girl. A wolf in sheep's clothing. This is made very clear. From the moment we are introduced to her character, Mia herself very clearly doesn't like her. She is written to be a difficult and frustrating witness, having already wrapped most of the courtroom around her finger. Cross examining her is even more of an uphill battle than usual. The first time we beat her in turnabout memories is satisfying to the player, because we know justice is being served. Even when we learn her story, we aren't really lead to closely examine or to sympathize with it. Because Ace Attorney is not a game in which we decide if someone deserves to go to jail. It's a game where we deduce whether or not someone is a criminal. And Dahlia, by definition, is undoubtedly a criminal. She's a liar, and a manipulator, and a serial murderer. Mind you, the game isn’t COMPLETELY unsympathetic to her situation. Iris, her twin and narrative foil of a sort, Is an example of the kind of person Dahlia could have become if her circumstances were different. Iris even says as much herself. Ace Attorney acknowledges that Dahlia is a victim of her circumstances, at least to an extent. But it also treats her as if she’s too far gone to be worthy of any kind of closure. And more than anything else that's what bothers me about her story. Because if you take a minute to think about her at all beyond this very orthodox formalist lens she's SO MUCH MORE THAN THAT. She's suuuuch an interesting and complex and compelling character if you look below the surface but the game really doesn't encourage you to do that and that makes me really sad honestly. From a psychoanalytic lens I personally think that agency (or the perceived lack-thereof) is a big point in her story and that more than anything is what makes me want to write about her from a feminist lens, because agency is a really big point of feminist literary theory.

I've seen a couple people say that they don't think Dahlia needs to be thought about deeply because they see her as a cartoonish sort of villain character like Manfred and Engarde. And obviously this isn't an objectively wrong reading, anyone who follows me knows that I'm the first person to tell you that are multiple good and valid readings of a text. But PERSONALLY I disagree with this. I think Manfred is easier to read like that because he doesn't really have an.. understandable reason for any of his crimes? Like lets be real the murder of Gregory Edgeworth was petty as hell. Personally I think he's pretty interesting himself and worth thinking about deeper esp after watching the anime but I also thinks he fulfills the role of capital V Villain in the game really well so you don't need to if he doesn't compel you that much. Engarde imo is much more interesting as a character if you view him as a culmination of the game's themes, or as a device to cause conflict within other characters. Ofc you can psychoanalyze him to hell and back if that's what you wanna do, but you really don't need to at all. Dahlia on the other hand.. way too much has happened to her for me to comfortably read her as just Girlboss Manipulator Villain™. The more I think about Dahlia the more I appreciate her as a character, and it makes aa3 even better to me. Of course it also brings to light some of my issues with the game, but even so everything just hits harder when you consider the ending of aa3 from everyone's perspective. It's just such a bittersweet conclusion it hits me in the feels very time.

anyway TLDR I support women's wrongs and I personally think Dahlia deserved better from the story. I dunno the more I think about her the more her story just makes me sad and I just wish they gave her some kind of closure in the end. This is just my take tho don't come after me ok thankies

[mamawasatesttube]

Do you have thoughts on how kon would be as a big brother to Chris and Jon? I've read Chris and Jon's comics and I'm writing a thing with them but I want to have their big brother be part of their character/internal problem solving even if he doesn't (as of yet) appear. But I've only read yj and superboy is unfinished/on my tbr so I'm going to the Expert

(If you have any thoughts opinions on Kara's familial relationships you can include those as well)

OOH OOH YES DO I EVER!!!!!

every time i think about kon as a big brother i immediately think of sb94 annual #2, which opens on kon taking a kid flying for his birthday and joking about him being superboy jr., kind of like his little brother. then we move to cadmus, where it turns out the prototypical experiment #1 (whereas kon was #13) has awoken and escaped his containment pod. he fights kon briefly, believing himself to be/wanting to be the "real" superboy, but is injured and collapses in kon's arms afterwards. it turns out he's not stable outside the pod and is dying; despite kon's best efforts to get the cadmus doctors to save him, he only lasts another few minutes. i'm personally never ever getting over kon's face when it happens (right after they both find out their dna donor was paul westfield):

SO!! with that being established backstory: i think kon would be soooo excited to be a big brother. he'd talk a big game and want the kids to think he's cool, and of course, he's a mega dork (he'd try to get them both into wendy, and if they didn't like it, he'd be offended). but imo, he's also gonna be so protective of them right off the bat, in large part because of poor clone #1. he's got a lot of feelings about people he's gotta protect, and little siblings are sooo high on that list.

one thing is that i don't think kon really thinks of clark as his dad. of course, it depends on the point in the timeline where you're really introducing chris and jon (because like kon was dead by the point of last son introducing chris, and fitting jon into new earth is always a fun puzzle), but (to be clear this is to an extent my hc also) by the time he's living with the kents, kon no longer wants superman to be his dad. i do think he does at first ("i wish i had parents" in sb94 #85 paired with how reactive he is about shooting down superman being his dad in sb94 #94), but when he moves in with the kents that dies down pretty fast. but he'd way rather the kids call him their big brother than, like, their uncle. that's so uncool (haha see, 'cuz uncle sounds kind of like uncool--aw, whatever)!!! it makes him sound so OLD!!!! he's not an uncle!!!

so overall i think it's like. he's a fun-loving and protective figure. they probably think he's So cool for a while, then get a little older and go oh wait. that's a dorklord. i do think jon throws one hell of a tantrum the day he finds out he's never gonna get ttk even if he grows into all the other kryptonian powers, though.

(i also hc that chris can get some weird funky powers other than ttk, not ttk itself, bc its like... kon is THE ttk guy, and thats a metagene designed to emulate kryptonian powers, so it feels a little weird to take something that specific and give it to another character who doesn't have any of the narrative reasons to need it. someone who knows more abt editorial please do correct me if i'm wrong, but i'm pretty sure they only gave chris ttk because prior to infinite crisis, the nightwing in new krypton shown to be using ttk was supposed to be kon, and was changed last-minute into chris.)

so like, he'd be a figure they can count on, someone they regard as always in their corner if they yell for him. he'll take the heat if they get in trouble (he spoils them. lois however has a very uncanny ability to tell if kon's taking the blame for something they did). i think as they grow older they might be like ...why's kon our brother but he doesn't live with us? and doesn't call our parents mom and dad? because kon stays with the kents but just hangs out with them all the time, and he calls clark and lois "clark and lois", and understanding that their family isn't nuclear might be a learning curve for them.

as for kara, i'll try and keep it brief bc this is already long i'm so sorry sdkhj but i generally operate in the realm of postcrisis kara, aka linda lang. she's roughly the same age as kon and she's got a Lot of feelings re: new krypton and her own guilt and her duty to her family, as well as whether she as supergirl can really measure up to superman. i love her. i think she would Adore having baby cousins because they mean her family is growing, after all the people she's lost. that said i think it's very possible she's a little awkward with kids because she just doesn't have that much experience with them. but i think she'd teach them to draw, and she'd really earnestly try with both of them. she'd LOVE to teach them about krypton, too.

[genericpuff]

I’m curious about some of your recent criticism of RS’s past making medical fetish art… in one post you mentioned there being a connection/continuation between her past art and the “problematic” parts of LO and cited DDLG and medical fetishism more specifically.

Can you say more about what makes those two things problematic? The obsession with Lolita and sexualizing actual minors is one thing, but kink isn’t inherently problematic IMO.

And, just to be clear, I appreciate your critiques of her art/the sloppy way that WT is shoving LO down our collective throats even though it’s way past its peak… I’m just more curious about how her past fetish art fits into your critiques of her as an artist.

I mean, that kind of enters "separate the art from the artist" territory which I don't feel you can actually do when the artist is inherently problematic and is sowing those problems into their art. But that's a separate topic.

Kink being a factor in her work is not an issue, and frankly, I didn't bring up any of the medical fetish art as to say it's an issue as a whole, more so to point out how this has pretty much always been Rachel's M.O. and it makes it make WAY more sense as to why LO is written the way it is knowing that (and more so just pointing out how weird it is that she apparently wants to ditch her life pre-LO but still keeps the usedbandaid name).

But I think it becomes far more of an issue when we all know her work is affiliated with Webtoons, a platform that predominantly markets to children as young as 11 years old.

Like, The Doctor Pepper Show was kinky as all hell, and it didn't try to hide that, it said right in its description that it was a medical fetish comic and it made it clear it was meant for people who were 18+. LO, meanwhile, is constantly trying to play this game of tug of war between its ideas and what it's trying to accomplish and who it's meant for. On the one hand, it's meant for teenagers who can identify themselves through Persephone's struggles as a teenage girl coming of age; on the other hand, it's meant for horny adult women who can insert themselves into Persephone's relationship with Hades and fantasize about getting swept away by a rich man who will solve all their problems, which isn't exactly something you want to be advertising/normalizing to the former demographic. It's trying to be both a serious deconstruction of misogyny and purity culture but it's also flippantly reinforcing misogyny and purity culture through the fetishization of Persephone as an "eternally 19" character who settles down with practically the first guy who pays attention to her.

When it comes to kink, I think it's more an issue of Rachel dangerously toeing the line between kink and predatory. There's nothing wrong with being into BDSM or the gothic lolita aesthetic, but there are people who use those labels as a way to normalize more abusive ideals and behavior (like what abusive men try to accomplish by infiltrating the BDSM community and claiming their abuse is healthy and fun, or when pedophiles try to infiltrate the gothic lolita community with the intent of fetishizing children).

Rachel being a fetish artist isn't the issue and that was never the point I was trying to make. The point is understanding Rachel's roots pre-LO and how they influence LO in ways that aren't necessarily good for the comic, its narrative, or the audience it's selling itself to. If LO were an 18+ series on a platform that marketed it as such and was unapologetically sexual/kinky the same way The Doctor Pepper Show was, then I don't think there would be quite as much of an issue (though it would still be held accountable if it did do anything morally questionable like what I mentioned above). But it's constantly being marketed to children and young teens, and it's being used as a self-insert power fantasy by Rachel to boot, rather than operating as an actual story with anything meaningful to say.

To use an example outside of LO, at least mongie had the nerve to step away from the WT's platform when she realized it wasn't going to suit the work she wanted to put out. She wanted Let's Play to be far more sexual than what they were allowing her to do, so she left. And while I don't like Let's Play all that much either, it has PLENTY of its own issues that almost seem to be adopted straight from LO, I can still respect her stepping away from the platform when she realized it wasn't going to be a good fit for what she wanted to pursue.

And no, none of that's to say that Rachel should leave WT or that she's in the same situation as mongie lmao but the identity crisis is evident in how LO is written, it feels very much like it can't decide what it truly wants to be.

That's all my two cents though, take it for what you may. That post about her medical fetish art wasn't meant to be like "LOOK AT HOW GROSS SHE IS, EWWW!" it was literally meant to just point out that she's still using a username from her medical fetish backstory for some reason despite the fact that she's tried REALLY hard to act like she never did any projects pre-LO. Shit, there are comics she's done pre-LO that weren't even fetish/kink comics, such as Castle Castle:

That's why I'm also not sharing much further and leaving it up to others to do their own digging, I don't think there's much to gain from sharing her kink art from 2004 unless it's somehow directly tied to her identity now in some way (like the madame issue drawing showing off the bandaids and self-insert aspects). A lot of that stuff is in the past. It's just odd that she's trying to leave much of it in the past but still couldn't let go of that one username that's still affiliated with it. I also think it's frankly ridiculous that she's trying to erase practically everything pre-LO, not just the stuff that she might cringe over or might be too sexual for her modern audience, but also the stuff like Castle Castle that she really should share, IMO! Because it's neat and it shows that she didn't just come from nothing, she made so much art pre-LO that ought to be shared and seen and preserved, but it seems like she's too focused on selling the whole "one hit wonder" image these days that she never bothers to mention the work that I'm sure even her own fans would love to see.

As a final note to wrap up this long response, it's wild that it's often only the critical community sharing these old art pieces, because a lot of the time, barring questioning of her values and ideals that are present in some of her old pieces, most people really like them and have lots of good things to say about them. I think the ultimate takeaway is how sad it is that she's fallen this low in terms of quality and effort. I think she is capable of making beautiful art, but somewhere along the way, she either stopped caring or lost the drive and that really sucks to see.

[watchfuldeer]

“in the alternate universe where eps 8-9-10 didn’t get rewritten”

Wait, rewritten how?? May I ask? Should I?

i wrote way too much sorry

they were rewritten to include shiv being pregnant, which hadn't been written into the season until that point. everything in 8-9-10 relating to shiv's pregnancy was an extremely hasty last minute addition, which is why it made no damn sense narratively when they dropped it into the beginning of 4.04, in a scene they filmed towards the end of shooting. every person who said in the interim between s3 and s4, shiv is not fucking pregnant, was in fact entirely correct, and they didn't plan to write it at all and it sticks out like a sore thumb in terms of succession's otherwise quite delicate plotting. which is especially disappointing given the huge payoff that paying close attention had during s3.

so, it scuppered their plot big time, but they just about clawed it together, if you ignore like. every emotional beat between episodes 1-7 lol. which is a real shame! i'm sure jesse had good intentions. but yeah, that's why they were rewritten. i think 8 and 10 weren't even rewritten to a substantial degree, but 9 is hanging by a thread in terms of cohesion - it's the only episode where they had any time to put 'oh shiv is also having a baby' scenes in, and reading the scripts it's just so clear that other stuff not only hit the cutting room floor but got swept away completely. connor is pretty much a non-entity after 4.08, for instance.

as for tom and greg (and shiv and matsson, and greg and matsson, and that whole mess of a love square) i think reading between the lines there are things missing. i can't say for sure what they were, but the script books were highly edited for publication, and no way is jesse ever going to personally give me a straight answer to the question 'what was shiv's actual arc in s4, before it became She Is Pregnant', or 'why did you prevaricate in the edit on tomgreg and tomshiv to the detriment of both, but mostly at the expense of tom, which felt really weird while watching the season because where the fuck did he go'. and yet, i think the denouement for both was really fucking good. stuck the landing despite taking a bizarre, last minute route there.

but yeah, if tom and greg did bang, it was 4.09. because the final scene for tom and shiv in 4.09 > first scene for tom and shiv in 4.10 makes very very little sense for either of them. it's like something else happened for tom at the end of 4.09 than what we saw. because the beginning of the finale he's with greg like yeah we're divorcing byeeeeee, and like wouldn't that have a lot more weight if he'd done anything other than be so eepy at logan's wake, while greg was crawling on his knees for tom to mencken and had that deleted scene with ewan. wouldn't greg almost betraying tom in the finale be higher stakes if they'd slept together, wouldn't it be more obvious and devastating that tom invites shiv into the car because she's suddenly more useful as his wife because of the decision she made at the vote... i simply think it would have been delicious.

huge caveat that this is just my thoughts. just my lil ol theories and thots. i read scripts and think about this stuff alot and have kept an eye on behind the scenes shenanigans. maybe shiv slept with matsson instead! maybe greg did! idk! but there are hanging threads that were snipped imo, rather than wonky plotting from the outset.