#the witcher meta

[revoevokukil]

Thoughts on TW4's angle on Ciri

In the trailer of The Witcher 4, Mione is an analogue to Ciri.

Mione's father has raised her for a fate of becoming a noble sacrifice on the altar of a God. Men make Gods of all kinds of ideas, often out of fear; the beast in the cave is no different. Ithlinne's Prophecy is no different; once it reached the masses and sprouted numerous interpretations.

The father's monologue applies as much to Mione as to Ciri.

Fulfilling one's Destiny is a double-edged blade, and not at all straightforward. This is a Sapkowskian classic and a crux around which Ciri's character turns. When the father apologizes to Mione, saying this was "his only choice," it somewhat echoes back to the ending of The Witcher 3, where Ciri did what she did, because she chose to be the bringer of salvation; Geralt got no chance to influence her decision (only, we hope, the outcome).

To be chosen by the Gods/Purpose is, in Ciri's words, always a choice, too - one the believers make. Including herself.

The way Mione kneels before the Bauk's lair, again, echoes the ending of The Witcher 3 and Ciri in the blizzard. And when Ciri tells Mione to "save yourself," it's a noticeable shift from her mindset in TW3. "What can you know about saving the world, silly? You're but a witcher." What changed, Ciri?

I think the Witcher 4's trailer isn't subtle at all about what Ciri is struggling with. Bauk preys, specifically, on trauma. It says: "you cannot change anything," "fate cannot be changed," "you weren't supposed to come back." Did Ciri manage to change anything in the Tower? Or did she fail? Did she run? And then Kalemba saying: "She's almost obsessed with the way she lives."

It's as if Ciri is burying herself in witchering like an addict, while seeking atonement (for not being what she was meant to be, but still wanting to do good; on her own terms) by saving a girl - her own inner child? - from a fate she has related to since forever. Upon slaying the monster, there is an expression of elation, satisfaction, and release on her face. It's as if by being a witcher, Ciri is trying to slay her own haunts over and over and over again.

It's like she is running from herself. Because Ciri is, in truth, much more than a witcher.

While the witcher's profession is where Ciri's first notions of good and evil come from, I think Ciri might have a romanticized view about that life. Kalemba mentions that Ciri always chooses, but that includes choosing the greater evil often enough. That's classic bread and butter for these games, but I think given Ciri's unique position in the Saga & her traumas, there is a lot more that can be done with it. Perhaps CDPR will engage with what Sapkowski mentioned in regard to creating Ciri:

Ciri personifies evil, that's how i intended her to be – a monster, because (almost) everyone is trying to make a monster out of her.

[sacred-algae]

I don’t think Jaskier is fully aware of the fact that Geralt is It for him.

I know we aren’t getting Geraskier, (they’re still canon to me) so at this point I just want my blorbo to be able to move on and be happy instead of fucking miserable but the more I think about it, the more I realize that even if he does get chance to be with Radovid… I don't think he would ever be truly happy.

Yes, he could love him, and be happy that he's being treated well, and worshiped and valued, and everything a good relationship should be. Yes, he'd learn to move on as much as he can… but that’s only as much as he can. Geralt will always be with him. Geralt will be a filter for which he perceives affection and how it's given out and received. Everything will relate back to him.

Geralt is love for Jaskier.

It would be doomed. As much as he could learn to love somebody new, it would take far too long to be fair, and even if Radovid fully understood and stuck around because he knew Jask was trying and didn’t mind, even if Jaskier does love him—It’s doomed.

He couldn’t do it. Because everything they do reminds him of Geralt even though they weren’t even together… but he can’t escape it. It could even be years down the road with zero contact with Geralt (because that’s the only way he could truly even begin to move on) and he would be miserable.

So he’d leave Radovid. Because it’s not fair. And he’d decide he’s better off having one night stands and casual affairs that last no longer than a month for the rest of his life.

And maybe he’d go back to Geralt. Because he sure as hell can’t live without him if the past however long it’s been has taught him anything.

Geralt would be so mad at him for leaving but it’s not like they haven’t gone a long time without seeing each other/not contacting each other before. It’s just been a while since then… And Geralt needs him too, how could he say no? He missed him horribly.

And I think at that point, Jaskier would tell him why he left. Geralt deserves to know. Because at this point, if Geralt will take him back, what’s unrequited love? It doesn’t matter. He should have known it wouldn’t matter. And really, he should have done this a lot sooner, maybe he could have gotten some fucking peace—

“You should have.”

“I should have what?”

“You should have done this sooner.”

“Yeah, that’s literally what I just said. Why are you— Geralt? What are you— Gods, that’s unfair, don’t look at me like you’re about to—”

Kiss me.

He should have done this much, much sooner.

[spoonietimelordy]

I really like that those are the shots we see to illustrate the sentence "all I want is for us to stay together". They could have easily not included jaskier since he wasn't part of any other shots,he wasnt in the cottage scenes, but they still included him.

This line also resonate a lot with something I've noticed in the trailer: they are never all together. The group is always missing someone, Jaskier or Yen specifically. Definitely feel like an important plot point, them not being able to stay together despite it being their biggest wish.

[greisekinderschar]

Alright, guys, it’s been more than six months but it is time for a Radskier meta essay on why their storyline isn’t as badly written as many people say. (Includes spoilers)

Is it rushed? Yes. It’s a side-story of a side character and actually Jaskier’s first side-story on the show. Is it cliché? Yes. When I first watched the season I was terrified about where their story would be going, knowing what happened in the book and knowing how mainstream media treats queer storylines. (I did not know about Joey’s deep involvement in the writing until later.) But once I knew how it all ended, I was entirely sold. Of course, that’s a question of taste, Radovid just turned out to incorporate so many tropes I am obsessed with, but I am trying to say that compared to the overall writing of the show, their story is not particularly badly written, which blew me away considering it’s a queer storyline in a mainstream medieval fantasy show.

Yes, they gave Jaskier a queer story for the sake of having a queer story. That was another reason I was very anxious about it. But what they (read: Joey, and let’s be honest, Hugh too) made of it is so exciting to me.

Here’s the thing about them ageing up Radovid and making him Vizimir’s brother. I have seen people complaining that they could’ve introduced an OC instead of changing source material like that. But to me, the fact they chose Radovid makes it so much more than a queer storyline for the sake of having a queer storyline. He’s the prince and later the king of Redania. He is entangled in the greater scheme of things. He is /on/ the same chessboard as the main characters. Turning him into Vizimir’s brother rather than son is way less forced than introducing an OC to be Jaskier’s love interest. Because he is more than Jaskier’s love interest. He is the King of Redania, played by Dijkstra and Philippa. Also, he cannot be killed off.

As I already said because it’s obvious, their story is rushed. That’s just the fate of side stories in TV shows (that are not masterfully written, lbr). But to me at least it is amazing how much they managed to convey in these few scenes.

You have Jaskier’s role as a spy for the Redanian Intelligence. That begins his own side story where he has a role of his own, that has nothing to do with Geralt. He meets this guy who actually appreciates his music and openly flirts with him, showing that he is desirable, something new to the character of the comic relief (although he is the romancer but you know, we never saw it on screen, also this time he is being romanced). He is suspicious, because he knows the Intelligence is not to be trusted, and the Prince of Redania is kind of the enemy. But he is also Jaskier, and his interest is caught. Besides this interest, Radovid’s suggestion to bring Ciri to supposed safety is right up Jaskier’s alley, because he is one to rather avoid battles if possible. He ponders on whether it is a possibility.

Later, he uses this vague connection to Radovid to have some agency of his own. He negotiates with him about Rience without discussing it with Geralt. He’s following his own plan, checking out the possibilities. He’s like alright, this guy at least pretends to be into me, let’s see if I can put that to good use to help Geralt. He sweeps Radovid off his feet with his ballad, and then Radovid says things that blow Jaskier away. He speaks of his talents, of determination to get to know more about him, of how Geralt should be grateful for his loyalty and friendship. Jaskier, the comic relief, has never heard this before. He’s Weak and he’s Wanting™️. But he still knows that he is Jaskier, easily fooled by romance, and that there are great things at stake. At the same time, Geralt is also treating him with more respect to make the decisions harder on him. But Radovid stays on his mind, he doesn’t know what to make of it and discusses it with Vespula, and she knows. She sees what’s going on.

Then, Radovid shows up while he is looking after Ciri. He is still suspicious. But Radovid is different from the last time he saw him. He is scared and he is vulnerable, and Jaskier can see that the mask is gone, and that what lies beneath it is not a villain. He is still cautious, until Radovid sings him his own song and he cannot take it any longer. He is giving in, and he struggles still as he does, but he is Jaskier. He’s Weak and he’s Wanting™️.

The next morning, he is not surprised. Of course, stupid Jaskier got himself fooled by some pretty eyes once again. Of course such blatant desire and affection for him could have only been a lie. He never knew romance like this and he does not hesitate to believe it was simply not real.

But then, he finds Radovid surrounded by his dead guards, alone. The people he was supposedly scheming with left him behind, so he was not all that involved, maybe he really was their puppet. He’s scared and he’s full of regret, he’s a helpless prince in the middle of the outbreak of a war, but he’s telling Jaskier to not waste more time on him because he knows he fucked up beyond redemption. But he’s Jaskier. He has endless capacity for forgiveness. And now that their plans had failed and Radovid has no more reason to lure him in, he’s still begging for a second chance. He still wants to be with him. He wants to prove himself to him, even if that means leaving the court behind. Jaskier has other priorities right now and he’s still hurt, but if there is a chance that this affection he never knew before was real, he is taking it.

And Radovid? He’s the spoiled prince brat, underestimated by everyone (just like Jaskier), and he’s riding that wave, because he does not really care about state affairs. He likes Jaskier’s music, and when he sees him he thinks he’s hella fine. He has his fun and at the same time tries to show Philippa he’s capable of more than she thinks, but he was not expecting that Jaskier would blow him away like that. That he would challenge him (the Prince), that he would be honest with him, that he would see through his act and by doing that NOT underestimate him. Radovid is Vibing and he decides to enter Dijkstra’s and Philippa’s game until he realizes he Fucked Up with his arrogance and being a prince is actually worth shit. He knew everything going on in the castle is pretense, but he was not prepared for this level of violence. He is terrified when he meets Jaskier, and Jaskier is good to him. And, again, honest. Unlike anything he had known up to now, the courtly schemes that had only recently culminated to him being scared for his life. He is still a spoiled brat prince and wants to be with Jaskier very badly, so he Fucks Up again. It is that last mistake that makes him understand his faults. But when he sees that Jaskier still does not hate him, he is determined to fix it, and he will do anything. Fuck being a prince, I will leave everything I know behind to show this man that my feelings were true.

Jaskier changes this man’s entire life and Radovid is willing to do everything for him. Yes, the idea to just go off and find him WHEREVER was kind of idiotic, but that’s the beauty of these two. They are both smart and idiotic at the same time, and they let their actions be led mainly by emotions, which sometimes adds up to the idiocy of it all. But Jaskier has more experience, and Radovid learns from him how to be less selfish, he grows as a person through knowing him.

So yes, the love-betrayal-redemption story is hollywood cliché, but it fits the characters and leads to interesting character growth. And honestly, as a queer woman I enjoy seeing some queers having a cliché storyline in a mainstream media piece. Geralt and Yennefer had a similar story. It raises the queer love story to the level of the hetero story. They struggle and they suffer just as much as anyone else, and they have something that connects them, a story that has potential to be continued in an interesting way. They don’t just exist as the obligatory queers, and their storyline isn’t inherently queer either, to a point where it feels like they’re only queer so Jaskier’s love interest can be the gods forsaken King. (At the same time, the story has queer coded themes, like having to pretend to be someone else, but the way it is portrayed, it can be relatable to non-queers as well.) The cliché of it all does not feel more cliché than other storylines on the show (to me). Its not queered cliché, it’s just a story, and I love that.

Also, Joey and Hugh have actual chemistry. And - and no one really argues with that - immense talent that filled these few scenes with so many layers in the first place. We owe it to Hugh that Radovid is not just a romantic interest, but a layered, flawed character (although Hugh attributes it to the writing but he’s too modest).

The last thing I want to say is that I feel we are generally overly critical of queer storylines, which is not a bad thing per se, because we know how many harmful storylines there are, but I struggle to see how this one is harmful in any way. You have to relate them to the straight romances. The straights will just randomly smile at each other and then they will date, but no one complains about it being rushed.

I am obviously not saying everyone has to ship them, I genuinely do not care. I just think it’s unfair to drag their storyline when it is nothing but normal that they didn’t have enough time for an elaborate story, but they (meaning Joey and Hugh) put a lot of work into making it a good one regardless, an effort no one would have put into a straight love story, because they would not have had to.

[iwillbringyouruin]

Radskier dialogue nuances in different languages

So I have been rewatching The Witcher in French recently and some of the changed lines stuck out to me, in the interactions between Radovid and Jaskier in particular. So i figured I'd compile my favourites from the translated versions I've seen so far here and compare their meaning to the original. I've also included some of the German lines since I'm German and I got curious!

Disclaimer: I'm just a guy who speaks a bunch of languages, don't expect overly technical linguistic wizardry here. Also this is not about the voice actors' skill or how well the lines are matched up to lip movements, strictly about the little changes in meaning when you take the translations literally! All meant to be in good fun.

Since this is about the season 3 dialogue, there are spoilers ahead.

This is going to be a long post so buckle up!

Season 3 in general: The way Jaskier and Radovid address one another

English (original): both use "you" which makes sense of course

French: Jaskier uses "vous" (the formal "you") for Radovid and Radovid uses "tu" (the casual "you") for Jaskier until they have sex in episode 4. When they talk the morning after in episode 6, they're both using "tu".

German: both use "Ihr" and the other formal derivatives for one another throughout (Even Geralt and Jaskier address each other formally the whole time. I'm not a fan)

Episode 1: Jaskier and Radovid meet

The dialogue here is generally very close, just two little things between the original and the German version I want to point out.

English (Jaskier): Fuck, I don’t really know what I’m supposed to… Bow? Or curtsy, or… I’ve been holding your hand a long time, so sorry about that.

German (Jaskier): Shit, I don't know if I'm supposed to bow or be polite... I've been holding your hand for too long, forgive me ("bow or be polite"?? HUH?)

English (Radovid): If your time at court’s been staid, you’ve been doing it wrong

German (Radovid): If your time at court has been too calm/quiet, something went wrong ([gay silence])

Episode 2: specifically Extraordinary Things

I've put the different lyrics as rather direct translations in the pictures below. They're also written out in the alt text. The French ones are a little more pointed compared to the original imo, I like that version a lot. I'm not sure how I feel about the German version but the first line did make me giggle.

Episode 3: Jaskier talks to Vespula about Radovid

I love this scene for many reasons. I have two things to point out about this.

The first thing is that while in the English and French version, Jaskier says that he and Radovid have only met twice, in the German version he says that he and Radovid don't even know each other.

The second thing is that in the English and German version, Jaskier calls Radovid a spoon and he does in the French version as well. However, he specifies Radovid is a "little spoon" here. Need I say more?

Episode 4: the scene in the shed

Ah, the scene of all time. Before the other scene of all time in episode 6. A few things about this one. The first thing is a very small change in the French version:

English (Jaskier, after Radovid admits he's scared): Just saying that makes you braver than you know.

French (Jaskier, after Radovid admits he's scared): The fact you're admitting that proves you are brave

The second thing bothered me more because it isn't really a subtle change. Both in English and French, Jaskier says Radovid has "learned [his] song", but in German he says Radovid "knows [his] song". The German line here isn't saying that Radovid "knows" the song as in he knows how to play it (from hearing and watching Jaskier play it for him once, mind you), the way it's said makes it sound like Radovid has just heard the song before.

The third thing is what they're saying right after the kiss. Unfortunately with the slightly changed lines for Jaskier we don't get the clever connection between Jaskier talking about taking Radovid into the cabin and Radovid asking Jaskier to take him (sexually).

English (Jaskier): I can't take you inside, I'm sorry.

English (Radovid): Then take me here.

French (Jaskier): The cabin is occupied, I'm sorry.

French (Radovid): Then take me here.

German (Jaskier): We can't go inside, I'm sorry.

German (Radovid): Then take me here.

Episode 6: the morning after

The German version is the same as the original here.

English (Jaskier to Radovid): I thought I’d seen through your mask. Turns out there was nothing behind it.

French (Jaskier to Radovid): I thought I had lifted the veil from your soul. But I found nothing but darkness beneath that façade

The subtle differences in the French version on the other hand not only make the pain a little different, it also includes an allusion of sorts to that version of Extraordinary Things with Jaskier talking about Radovid's soul. At least that's how I saw it. Ouch!

Episode 7: the moment where Jaskier finds Radovid at Thanedd

All three versions here make me want to cry. That's all.

English (Radovid): Just let me be there with you. Prove that I’m more than a mask.

English (Jaskier): Maybe.

French (Radovid): Just let me stay with you and show you what is beneath this façade.

French (Jaskier): Why not.

German (Radovid): Just let me be with you and show my true self.

German (Jaskier): Maybe.

[windflowerofskellige]

In a move surprising literally no one, I am once again thinking about Philippa Eilhart. Dress and how Philippa is dressed in the books as a whole are very important to her characterisation but the outfit I think is peak characterisation is her Thanedd Banquet Dress.

We consume this banquet from Geralt's point of view, we see the politics at play, are told the politics at play, but Geralt does not have a wider understanding because he is not a politician. The outfits are meant to describe a lot about the characters, they're easy to pick out at first, Sabrina, Keira with her Ankh juxtaposing her dress so sheer you can see the mole on her left breast, etc. And then Dorregaray of Vole talks with Geralt. Geralt has been pulled every which way told everyone is spying for someone and Dijkstra and Philippa are the most obvious yes? No. Dorregaray points out Philippa's dress is trimmed with an extinct fur, Diamond Ermine. When Philippa comes to steal Geralt away he points it out explicitly, he even adds that the species was officially declared extinct twenty years ago. No, corrects Philippa Eilhart, it was thirty years ago. She even mocks it, saying that she thought about instructing her dressmaker to trim it was raw flax, but then the colours wouldn't have matched.

This says nothing to Geralt, this says EVERYTHING to the reader. The two most notable aspects, the trim of her dress is a fur that is extinct now. The trim of her dress is ermine.

Ermine has historically been defined by heavy sumptuary laws and is a status symbol of royalty. The pointing out of its extinct nature serves to show you the reader she's been at this longer than we suspected.

This dress trim tells us many things about Philippa Eilhart Geralt doesn't know, that he will see through Keira's eyes next chapter more clearly. Philippa Eilhart is not Redania's spy, Dijkstra is. Philippa Eilhart is Redania's Queen Regnant, a puppet master. She has brought Redania's spy, and is there dressed as Redania's Queen in the interest of Redania as well as to have an alibi for the usurping of Vizimir the Second of Redania.

As Tissaia says in the next chapter, Redania hasn't had a King, not for a very long time. This dress shows that.

[serenfire]

attention, anyone who cares about the witcher s3's character's motivations with regards to the books but who hasn't then read time of contempt, here is a post for you!

here's some interesting differences between the book and show characters, especially in ep 5 (spoilers for the witcher s3 so far and the books):

since yennefer does not have her s2 beef w aretuza subplot, none of the mages are her direct enemies, and she is a member of the lower circle of leadership within the brotherhood, called the council, with philippa and 3 others who are not in the show. she is also not the one who calls the conclave; she finds out about it while bringing ciri to aretuza, and attends with geralt so that they can draw out the mage who is backing rience. in the book, they're trying to convinced everyone that ciri died at cintra, and haven't been together since then to keep up the illusion, so going to aretuza together will draw out the mage who knows ciri exists and is trying to kill her

vilgefortz is, firstly, the hero of sodden in the books. he's the war hero against nilfgaard, and one of the leaders of the brotherhood. he's also (spoilers for probably the second half of s3) working for nilfgaard now, and not in the way that s1 portrays where he kills his comrade on the battlefield after the battle's over, but in an "even the hero of sodden who singlehandedly saved the north from nilfgaard wants power enough to ally with his enemy" way.

he is the leader of the chapter, which is the highest circle of leadership of the brotherhood. tissaia and francesca findabair are also members, as well as artaud terranova (guy who falls over the champagne glass table in ep 5). in ep 5 he recounts his backstory to geralt, some of it word-for-word, except for an important part: as part of his backstory, he fell in love with an unnamed mage before becoming a sorcerer, and after breaking up with her, decided he should pursue magic. he and tissaia are not together! i cannot stress this enough, in the books the mages are powered by their individual searches for power, and love does not tie them together! it's what sets yen apart: she's one of the only ones willing to sacrifice for another.

FRANCESCA FINDABAIR. member of the chapter/high ranked aretuza member, in the book shows up to the conclave party early, stirring up the northern vs nilfgaardian sentiments by being there. wild that she hasn't appeared there in the show yet. her motives in the show are WHACK. in the books she did not have a baby and did not say she wants to genocide the humans (although that is propaganda against her): she leads the scoia'tael to fight for nonhuman freedom and allies herself with nilfgaard to continue to fight the north, and she will receive a free land for the elves (dol blathanna) in return for the scoia'tael being branded as war criminals and outlawed. in the books she is the catch-22 of stuck between a rock and a hard place: allying with imperialism will save her people but gut her guerilla soldiers who fought for it.

philippa eilhart is so far the best-written character this season (to me) because she is one of the only characters who everyone knows is seeking for power (in the book she's referred to as the one who's really on the redanian throne, backed by dijkstra) and she, directly, says that she's looking to keep power in the north. in the books, most if not every mage's motivations are for power, whether in a king's court or by allying with nilfgaard, and the imperial machinations are what the politics in the books are about, so having a character not be preoccupied with interpersonal reasons and instead directly embody this is refreshing!

however! in the books philippa's position is anti-nilfgaardian invasion, not anti-brotherhood. she's pitted against vilgefortz, who's allied with nilfgaard, instead of against him because he's a leader of the brotherhood. the brotherhood as an institution isn't interrogated as a state (unlike the northern kingdoms and nilfgaard), and her specific grievances against other court mages have to do with the fact that almost every kingdom is goading nilfgaard to attack so they can attack back and vie for power. she's also got redania on a lockdown by killing vizimir right before the conclave party and i don't know how this will play out in the show considering radovid exists as well

also in the books radovid is vizimir's son who ascends to the throne after philippa and dijkstra kill vizimir, and (in the games) he makes it his life mission to kill philippa. he does not physically show up in time of contempt and adding him into the show as vizimir's brother 1) crunches the timeline down to a period of time that makes a bit more sense than the books and 2) allows the show to make up the funniest fucking subplot with jaskier. oh my god none of that happened in the books but wouldn't it have been hilarious. jaskier hooking up with the sweet and sensitive younger prince who's a fan of his music and then smash cut to twelve hours later and he's the fucking king of redania. the comedy potential is unmatched

[arse-blathanna]

hi hello really loved your ves and roche meta!!!! it's so rare to see people talk about their relationship despite ves being basically one of if not the only one person roche trusts wholeheartedly, so ty for sharing your thoughts!!!

and to add to what you already said about them. you can tell already how much these two care about each other but there's another thing that makes me um...CRY?? if you ask roche for help to fight in kaer morhen, he will refuse if ves dies and when he talks about her death, he looks so fucking devastated and sad like he's about to cry...here's the link if you didn't see: https://youtu.be/DUIdY9kpy0s?si=x060P_n8_-VUZGNS

it's such a minor detail but it shows how much roche cares for her and wants to keep her safe at all costs, because ves isn't just a soldier to him, she's his only family...his little sister/daughter that he loves so much.

horrible HORRIBLE fucking man who will turn the whole world upside down just to make sure his loved ones are safe and alive DEAR FCUKING GOD

but um...if you don't mind, i also want to hear your thoughts about geralt and roche's friendship 😌!! these two old man have such a weird and complicated friendship but it somehow works for them? i dunno, there's something about geralt being roche's some sort of guiden who's words roche values more than anyone, because he knows geralt will make a better judgement, he knows geralt is a better person, more than he will ever be.

also damn that man is truly a pathetic loser with only two friends because no one likes his ass lol 😔

Thank you!

I think that Geralt is someone that Roche feels a particular sort of kinship with. While it's true that most of the time they work together it's not personal as much as it is having roughly aligning goals, Roche does seem to at least enjoy Geralt's company. Regardless, the relationship is mostly transactional and tends towards being professional.

But I think that there's something in Geralt which Roche is able to identify very strongly with. Childhood abandonment, difficult upbringings, adopting and nurturing young girls in violence bc it's the only way they know how (Geralt with Ciri and in the books, Angoulême, and Roche with Ves and Anaïs.) In the case of Ciri and Anaïs in particular there are quite a few more parallels (last heir to a dying throne, valued for the ability to legitimize a claim to a throne more than who they are) which I think Geralt and Roche would both be at least passively aware of.

Geralt is one of the few people Roche will just drop everything for. He's a friend, and we know Roche views people he's close with strongly. Foltest was a father figure, Ves and the Blue Stripes are his family, etc. I have no doubts Geralt is in there too, in some complicated category which Roche won't ever name.

[lassieposting]

Okay so that line with Jaskier and Lambert at the end of 2x08. Jaskier jokes, "Look at us, just a big old happy family, right?" and Lambert rather sharply retorts, "No," and limps past him with Ciri.

That seemed really sharp at first, and I thought it was just the writers and their thing where they handle Jask like nobody actually likes him despite him being one of the most likable characters, but then I was rewatching the ep and it occurred to me.

Lambert's just lost like, four family members.

We see Voleth!Ciri kill two Witchers, and then another two (three?) die in the final battle with the basilisks. Like, of course Lambert wouldn't be receptive to "happy family" comments. Some of his family are right there on the floor with their faces missing or their heads cut off. More are dead in their beds upstairs. Jaskier is Geralt's friend of 20 years, and the other Witchers have probably heard a lot about him from Geralt, but they've only known each other in person for a matter of days. A virtual stranger is no replacement for the family you just lost, and to Lambert it probably seemed like a really tasteless, tone-deaf comment to make, even though Jask didn't mean to wound.

So like. Understandable reaction, actually, yeah

[banapricot]

Such a shame The Witcher (netflix) didn't elaborate on the sandpiper thing At All. I get that Jaskier is a side character, and one that more or less fills the role of comic relief - I wasn't expecting him to have a fleshed out meaningful character arc. But he does, and it's never explored.

The immature idealistic teenager who bought into all the lies he was told as a child and carelessly contributed to the stigma against elves because 'respect doesn't make history' became a tired and cynical man that understands the weight of his words and regularly risks his life by smuggling elves to safety.

That's really compelling character development, and we see NONE of it.

They give us implications and throwaway lines and a handful of scenes, forming a vague outline that they refuse to fill in. And it's so clear the writers didn't think or care about it, because otherwise we wouldn't have gotten that baffling scene where Jaskier seemingly ruins any chance of getting the elves onto the boat in favor of insulting the guard at the dock. (Personally I loved seeing him tear into the guy, but this was Not the time.) He's clearly meant to have been successfully helping elves for a while, but for some reason they don't want to show us any actual evidence of his competence.

And the disconnect between who he is vs who the show/characters treat him as grows when you look at his short appearance in Blood Origin.

He matters enough to the scoia'tael for them to attack a Temerian army camp he’s being held captive at, has enough influence (as a bard)for the seanchaí to believe he can spread the story she tells him, and for some reason the head of Redanian Intelligence bothered to be his benefactor. And the show ignored all of this completely in s2, even while setting it up. I really hope they explore Jaskier more in season 3 like it's been hinted, but considering the way shows usually refuse to address any complexities in characters like him I wouldn't be surprised if he spends the entirety of his screen time without displaying any of the abilities context says he has or (intentionally) doing anything useful. 

[revoevokukil]

Reflection on Andrzej Sapkowski's Thoughts on Le Guin & the Healing of the Waste Land

In re-reading Pirog, or There’s No Gold in the Gray Mountains (1993) by A. Sapkowski—perhaps one of his more well-known essays on the state of fantasy, and the genre’s reception in Poland in particular—I cannot help but get stuck on how he analyses Ursula K. Le Guin’s Earthsea series. It resonates with one very particular strand that Sapkowski plucked on at the heart of his own books: the duality of human nature. Good and Evil, yes, but also: male and female. As psychological and symbolic polarities balancing the psyche.

‘Already the Archipelago of Earthsea itself is a deep allegory - islands scattered across the sea are like lonely, alienated people. The inhabitants of Earthsea are isolated, lonely, closed in on themselves. Their state is such, and not otherwise, because they have lost something—for full happiness and peace of mind…’

The loneliness and alienation, the Waste Land of the human heart, is a recurrent motif in The Witcher. Its influence is felt not only in the plot threads of our protagonists, but also in those of such characters as Emhyr var Emreis, Vilgefortz, the Rats, the Alder King, Avallac’h, anonymous elf who burned down Birka, and humanity and elves in toto. It is just that antagonists rarely reveal their hearts to the protagonists (and to the reader)—if only to have a blade struck it through.

‘Ged’s quest is an allegory, it’s eternal goodbyes and partings, eternal loneliness. Ged strives for perfection in constant struggle with himself and fights the final, symbolic battle with himself, winning by uniting with the element of Evil, accepting, as it were, the duality of human nature.’

Le Guin broke out of the Tolkienian mould, in Sapkowski’s words, by focusing on symbolism and allegory; on the inner journey, as a reflection of, and as affecting, the external world. It is in the recognition and healing of the Waste Land that Evil, or potential Evil, could ever possibly be undone.

In ”The Tombs of Atuan”, the allegory takes us into the Labyrinth of the Psyche, which Sapkowski compares with the Labyrinth of Crete. The Minotaur within is not a monstrous beast, it is ‘pure and concentrated Evil, Evil destroying a psyche that is incomplete, imperfect, not prepared for such an encounter.’ Evil gets close to a psyche in conditions of imbalance, loss, alienation, abandonment, incompleteness.

And then Sapkowski gives the entire thing a gendered spin, bringing Le Guin’s writing closer to the archetype he himself uses.

‘And into such a Labyrinth boldly steps Ged, the hero, Theseus. And like Theseus, Ged depends on Ariadne. Tenar is his Ariadne. Because Tenar is what the hero lacks, without which he is incomplete, helpless, lost in the symbolic tangle of corridors, dying of thirst. Ged thirsts allegorically - he's not after H2O, but after the anima - the feminine element, without which the psyche is imperfect and unfinished, helpless in the face of Evil. … he is saved by the touch of Tenar’s hand. Ged follows his anima—because he must. Because he has just found the lost rune of Erreth Akbe. A symbol. The Grail. A woman.’

Be it the loss of the Alder King (Shiadhal), or Avallac’h (Lara), or Emhyr’s (sacrificing his wife Pavetta, and having been sacrificed by his own father), or Vilgefortz’s (abandoned by his mother, falling in love with a sorceress and coming to hate her for the power she held over him via his feelings for her), or the wartime children of contempt (written off and abused by everyone and everything), the wound remains archetypal and notably alike.

(Not to speak of The Witcher’s protagonists into whose hearts we do see, and in whom we witness the transformation of the Wasteland of the heart in ways which eludes—or only with the very first fleeting steps is beginning in—the rest.)

Love is the essence. Love and lovelessness walk hand in hand at the heart of everything in The Witcher, and with them the good and the evil. What matters in the end, as in all good fantasy, is heart—knowing it, seeking it, letting the spirit flourish in its presence. To gentle the heart. To remain human.

As Tenar to Ged, in Sapkowski’s reading of Le Guin, so Ciri to oh, so many characters, in my reading of Sapkowski.

‘Now Tenar grows into a powerful symbol, into a very contemporary and very feminist allegory. An allegory of femininity. … Tenar leads Ged out of the Labyrinth—for herself, exactly as Ariadne did with Theseus. And Ged—like Theseus—can’t appreciate it. … he gives up, although he likes to enjoy the thought that someone is waiting for him, thinking of him and longing on the island of Gont. It pleases him. How ugly male!’ … ‘After an eighteen-year break, Ms Ursula writes “Tehanu,” … the broken and destroyed Ged crawls to his anima on his knees, and this time she already knows how to keep him, in what role to place him, to become everything for him, the most important meaning and purpose of life, so that the former Archmage and Dragonlord stays by her side until the end of his days…’

---

Marginalia

This motif is universal in how it explores the psyche, but it is also very particular, because Mr Sapkowski’s influences include Bettelheim, Freud, and Jung, as well as Campbell, the Wicca movement, and the feminist current in fantasy. It is evident then, I think, how the balancing between the male and the female is seen as essential for the flourishing in either’s soul.

As seen in ”The World of King Arthur” (1995):

‘The wound of the Fisher King has a symbolic meaning and refers to the beliefs of the Celts - the mutilated king is unable to perform a sexual act, and the Earth he rules cannot be fertilized. If the king is not healed, the Earth will die and turn into La Terre Gaste, the Waste Land. The wounding spear is a phallic symbol, and the healing Grail is the vulva.’

Or as in Joseph Campbell (1988):

'...when the center of the heart is touched, and a sense of compassion awakened with another person or creature, and you realize that you and that other are in some sense creatures of the one life in being, a whole new stage of life in the spirit opens out.'

The word "compassion" means literally "suffering with." Nobody ought to remain alone in suffering. Evil happens so very often as a consequence.

In Excalibur (1981), sick Nature comes alive again when Arthur touches the Grail and wakes from apathy. Of the Grail stories, however, it is Wolfram von Eschenbach’s which speaks to the Witcher’s author’s own sensibilities the most.

‘Let's look for the Grail within ourselves. Because the Grail is nobility, love of neighbor, and the ability to have compassion. True chivalric ideals, towards which it is worth and necessary to look for the right path, break through the wild forest, where, and I quote, "there is neither road nor path." Everyone must find their own path. But it is not true that there is only one path. There are many of them. Infinitely many.’ - The World of King Arthur

Only then does the land bloom again in snow-white blossoming apple trees.

[it-happened-once-in-a-meme]

I Hate the Way the Witcher Treated Suicide

Spoilers for The Witcher season 3/The Time of Contempt under the cut:

"Sometimes the best thing a flower can do for us is die." originally sounded cool to me. It referred to transforming its life into magic, and it wasn't a metaphor for animals or people, it was just about plants.

But when Tissaia quoted this line in the finale, it made me so sad and mad! Because no, absolutely not! You don't always have to contribute something, and if you're someone with as much knowledge as Tissaia has, there's obviously a lot you can do. Even if she didn't have any sorceress knowledge, she still meant a lot to a lot of people, and I hate that she wasn't at least killed off with the reason being guilt, but with a completely wrong interpretation of this saying.

Sometimes the best thing a flower can do for us is die. From the perspective of a sorceress, the best thing a flower could do is provide life that can be transformed into magic.

But from the perspective of a human without magic, from the perspective of us watchers, a flower is something you keep close even though it does practically nothing for you. Of course we can't equate humans with plants that are only supposed the look pretty, but the point still stands: a flower is something with little to no use that we still keep around and care for.

[asolitaryrose]

I'm sorry but this is brand new information to me???

I actually never really knew what geralt wished for as the wording was either vague in the game or non-existent in the books ("tying their destiny together" can mean a lot of things lbr) but this is?? is that canon?

this is so tragic and makes the ending of the books even more heartbreaking 🥺 it also makes the bs they pulled in tw3 even more ridiculous with the whole "let's undo the wish to see if we were really in love with each other or if it was only the djinn's magic" fiasco

[spoonietimelordy]

Something I really appreciate in s3 is how naturally the distinction between sexual, romantic, intellectual and alterous attractions was shown. Perfect exemple that you don't have to turn your characters into dictionaries to clearly convey different aspects of queerness.

Jaskier's relationship with Vespula, Radovid and Geralt are all showing different kinds of relationships and attractions. His relationships with Vespula is very much on the sexual attractions side while his relationships with Radovid is a mixed of sexual and romantic attractions which both stems from intellectual attraction. And then you've got Geralt which is a previously romantic/sexual attraction turned into an alterous one, and it's not seen as being a lesser kind of attraction, just a different one.

And all of this is not told to us but shown.

[schizophrenicdandelion]

Every Witcher school has a specific sign at the core of their teachings . While all schools use all signs , and all Witchers will find their favourite sign regardless of what school they grew up in , the core sign will show itself in many ways . From the Witcher lore and previous writings , within their values and rules , it will present itself in the various fighting styles even if not casted . But the most polarizing effect of this is simple ,

The Bestiaries .

Witchers will never debate the value of a sign for a different school , even if theirs may be a polar opposite . But , by the Gods , they will argue tooth and nail when it comes to what signs can be used against what monster .

Logically , they know it’ s because that School would have adopted a stronger version of the sign compared to every other school . For older generations , however , it’ s not true cross school bonding if you do not criticize the use of a sign when it would just be easier if you did it this way .

When comparing notes , often newer generations will completely ignore discussing what sign to write down . They know their answers will be different . Just close your eyes when you write down Aard while your travel mate writes down Quen. Bestiary updates take long enough already , let us poke fun at each other later .

[decahedrones]

tbh I really wish there was more Shani art, for some reason she doesn't seem to be very popular on here? idk. anyway here's my blorbo collection

Yes I checked the "more sex" box for almost everyone, let them have some fun for fuck's sake