#there is also something to be said for the other way that i think valjean comparing himself to the bishop unfavorably is unfair because

[fluentisonus]

I've said this before but valjean's view of the bishop throughout the book gets me so bad because like. he knew him for what, a day maybe? and it absolutely had a vast & profound & positive impact on him. but then he goes on to spend the whole book comparing himself to his idealized vision of the bishop & finding himself wanting & feeling guilty and miserable about every petty or selfish thought that crosses his mind. but it's so fucked up because like we as the readers know the bishop better! we've read the whole first book and we know he came from a privileged & wealthy background, that he was a rake when he was young, it wasn't til he was in his 40s or 50s to have some sort of change of heart & become a priest (a similar age to valjean when he met him!), that he has moments that seriously shake him, that he has some dubious politics left over, that he still has moments of pettiness he has to work through on the page (his initial approach to the member of the convention, e.g.). and also he's just kind of a weird old guy (affectionate). and like this is not to criticize the bishop, I think he's a genuinely really good guy, just that while the bishop has a realistic view of himself & his past ("he described himself with a smile, an ex-sinner,"), valjean is not getting any of this except maybe like. what would be mentioned in the newspaper when the bishop died. so his whole view of him is of this one shining moment where he changed his life and he feels he doesn't live up to that. which is sad! because the bishop understood him more than he realized & wouldn't have wanted him to feel that way

[gayelderstourney]

OLD MAN YAOI BRACKET ROUND 1

Propaganda:

Jean Valjean/Javert:

One of the OG enemies to lovers. In the novel and musical, Valjean and Javert have complex, intertwined, and mirrored narratives which make them a fascinating ship to analyze. Also, there is a lot of hot fanfiction about them.

javert chases valjean around for at least 20 years because he broke parole and that's a big plot point. (jvj went to jail for bread theft if it matters.) considering how long that is and how much javert feels the need to do said chasing around that's kinda gay. also at one point javert is employed by valjean (except he doesn't know it's him and knows him as m. madeleine) and then asks madeleine to fire him. because he thought he was valjean and wanted to send him to jail even though he IS valjean. but some other guy got framed instead so it checks out and then WAY later on the barricades javert gets captured by a bunch of college students and valjean sets him free. this causes javert to have an existential crisis because 'OH NO HE'S A CRIMINAL BUT HE'S NICE TO ME' and then he kills himself. (also they have a very awkward carriage ride together. along with the unconscious body of valjean's future son-in-law. after valjean was in the parisian sewers and therefore covered in sewer water.)

what if i was an escaped convict and also the extremely benevolent mayor of a small jet producing town who broke into people's houses to give them money. and you were a furry cop trying to arrest me anyway. and then i save you from execution in the June rebellion and you realise that the police are not a symbol of justice but authority and being a criminal in the eyes of the law is completely separate from being a bad person. and this fucked you up so bad you killed yourself.

fuck those twinks in les mis these are the real finest gay love story victor hugo ever invented. javert literally followed valjean across france for decades because of his psychosexual obsession with recapturing him. valjean had the chance to kill him and spared his life, thus jump-starting javert's entire emotional arc. they're deranged and obsessive and they should kiss on the mouth

javert threw himself off a bridge bcs he was so mad the guy he was obsessively chasing was actually a good person depsite being a criminal theres gay ass old man yuri here

When you build your entire life around the existence of a man you despise is that still gay or do we need to invent something that transcends homosexuality. Asking for a friend.

fellas is it gay to spend your entire life chasing another man to arrest him even though all he did was steal a loaf of bread

Ravenpaw/Barley:

kitties who were outcast from previous groups they were a part of and find and live with each other. they are canonical mates even though theyre both dudes. they grow old together, but ravenpaw gets cancer and dies before barley (he lives to be considered old in warrior cats years). however ravenpaw wanted to be in the same kitty afterlife that barley will go to, so they can be together in kitty afterlife. barley is still alive though as far as we know and might be the oldest living cat in the series now. also i just think its funny to call little kitty cats "old man yaoi"

[television-bodies]

what's your favorite set design for les mis? alternatively, how would you stage it yourself?

oh anon, you have provided me with the dream question! this is about to be a very long answer.

i fell in love with les mis via the west end production in 2014 and have not been normal about it since. i was lucky enough to see said production, with that staging, quite a few times before the theatre was renovated in 2019 (this was when the revolve was removed and the production was updated to have the same staging as (i believe) every other global production of the show). since lockdowns etc ended i have seen the updated production on the west end a few times now too, and let me scream this from the rooftops: I MISS THE OLD ONE EVERY DAY OF MY LIFE

(i never like to assume people’s knowledge so i will continue here as if you’re not familiar with the key changes, and i apologise if i’m telling you things you already know!)

something that i loved about the original production is that there were almost no set pieces. there were always props, and the odd piece of set as in a wall or something e.g. the gate at rue plumet, but the majority of the settings were created through LIGHTING. examples, i hear you cry! i shall provide. my favourite example of this was in the sewers. when valjean is carrying marius, time was shown to pass as they walked around the revolve with a spotlight illuminating them every few seconds. the actors would change carrying positions in the dark gaps between these lights, so that it acted like a time jump. none of this animated scrolling backdrop screen nonsense they do now. if you haven’t already clocked it yes i am salty about this

lighting also played a bigger part in javert’s death — another point in the show at which they now have a backdrop to act sort of in place of this — the swirling water that he falls into used to be created solely through lighting effects and it was MARVELLOUS. real take your breath away type shit.

the other big point to make is about the revolve, my beloved. it was such a central part of the production but the most important use of it (and one that i see the masses on here mourn fairly often) was that at the end of the final battle, the barricade would slowly turn around to show all of the students dead across it. it was heartbreaking and beautiful and the way they have to literally wheel enjolras’ dead body onto the stage in the current production just does not have anything close to the emotional gutpunch of how it used to be staged. :’(

all in all the original production was much more stripped back visually than the show is now, and i think this served to amplify the power of the acting and singing and the PLOT whereas now it gets me down, because as much as i hate to say this, the current production sort of just looks like everything else. les mis used to be the best thing on the west end by a fucking mile, and it seems (to me) that they have lessened that gap. i understand why other productions of the show — particularly touring ones — would have to go without the revolve, but for the one on the west end, which has been in the same theatre for twenty years, i simply do not see why they thought to change it. change it for, in my clearly strong opinion, the worse.

(i will say here — as vaguely as i can — that i do have a modicum of insider knowledge, and that i can blame this change on cameron mackintosh. but that’s hardly a surprise)

this may all be coming off as very ‘old man shouts at cloud’ of me so i feel the need to say that i do still enjoy the new production — if i didn’t, i wouldn’t have been to see it multiple times. at the end of the day (ha) it is still les mis, and les mis is les mis. it’s always brilliant. i just think it used to be more, and it makes me sad that there’s nowhere to see that original staging anymore. i mean, sure, there are bootlegs. but no proshot? *breaks skateboard* alas, we seem doomed to concert versions until the end of time

thank you so much for the ask! i’m sure you can tell that you hit a nerve with this one lmao but i greatly enjoyed answering it

[nickyroethemarinebiologist]

Hello this is my presentation on what animals Les Mis characters would be except I'm only 500ish pages into the book so it's very short list at the moment

I decided almost IMMEDIATELY that Valjean would be some sort of owl, despite what I believe is the most popular interpretation being him as a lion. I was thinking of that one chapter in the book where he's referred to as an owl (the one called 'a nest for owl and wren' I think??) and decided yes absolutely that is 100% it. So then my first thought was a snowy owl, since they're pretty fucking big and also white (I'm not too bothered for hair colours and what have you in the rest of these but for Valjean it seemed pretty important) but the snowy owl look just wasn't doing it for me!! (something about their look was a little too intense, I guess??) And then! I remembered the barn owl (which is, by the way, probably my favourite owl). And yeah I might be a little biased towards them but they have a sort of gentle look while still being, y'know, owls (notoriously pretty dangerous predators). And of course, owls are nocturnal.

Also, just look at them!! The vibe is perfect, I'm certain of it.

(And!! While most barn owls have that light brown colouring, there have been white ones!! So the hair colour problem is all good)

Javert was a LOT more trouble (which I wasn't anticipating, after the easy pick for Valjean). He HAD to be some sort of wolf/dog-adjacent animal, that was the one and only condition (though I did briefly consider a horse. Just because he has a horse in both the 2018 BBC series and the 2012 movie??). A hyena was my first immediate pick (yeenvert <3) but it wasn't QUITE there and I was struggling desperately for some other idea. AND THEN! I decided, if no horse, why not a vaguely horse-shaped dog? Which led to a short list of hounds (scottish deerhound, irish wolfhound, ibizan hound) which I sort of juggled in my mind for a bit before finally deciding I kind of liked the scruffy deerhound vibe. They're very sweet dogs, as far as I know, so in that respect maybe not so accurate, but they definitely have the capacity to be foreboding in the same way most hounds have. They're also pretty tall!

(And yes I KNOW I said I wasn't fussed for colours but the grey on these guys is actually perfect for my mental image of Javert so! It's a happy accident!)

I knew pretty immediately that the bishop would be some sort of rooster. I have absolutely no reason for this other than the vibe was too perfect to ignore (though I think I might have been inspired by some gif of the bishop an old Les Mis movie where there were chickens in the background). So then I went on Wikipedia and ran through a list of roosters until I found this magnificent little beast, a faverolles rooster. I found on my not-so-extensive research journey that these guys are super gentle and apparently very hilarious, which, yeah, that's absolutely him <3

The bishop's sister (Mademoiselle Baptistine?) also gets a chicken. Because yeah they're related but also I just think it really fits her. Or maybe I'm biased, idk, I do really love chickens. I don't really have much to say about her which I am so so sorry for because I do really like her!! But she's a swedish flower hen

And Madame Magloire was going to be a chicken (before I gave that to the bishop's sister instead) but I later landed on some sort of donkey. Again, I haven't got much reason for this but the vibe is there!! I promise you!! I switched between a bunch of different donkey breeds (all of which I had never heard of before but I absolutely love, by the way. Go check out a provence donkey) and then i found the bourbonnais donkey, which is just perfect to me. If I have ever been certain of anything it's this.

(There's a disappointing amount of donkey photos on the internet. Where are they all!!)

I was going to save Fauchelevent for a different post but i really like him so he's here too. I was pretty sold on him as a sheep at first, and I very nearly left it at that but then!! I learned of a cashmere goat, which was not only a lot closer to how I imagine him but also they look cool as hell!! So I thought, okay, that was easy, but something still wasn't sitting quite right. The goat idea was absolutely perfect, but the cashmere goat was too far in the direction away from the sheep idea (which I'm still very attached to). So instead I went for an angora goat! Which apparently do something pretty close to gardening for a goat (eating/destroying nuisance plants and improving pastures) so it was almost too perfect to pass up. Also their horns are pretty awesome

(It's very funny to me personally that Valjean is an owl while Fauchelevent is a goat. Yes, we are brothers, the bird and the goat. Makes perfect sense)

I was going to give Cosette one in this post too but I'm not 100% sure of hers yet!! So she'll have to wait. I apologise deeply.

[lesmissocials-fuckedup]

Les Mis socials : 2023 hall of shame tournament - Round 2

Rules

Links to the posts and propaganda can be found under the cut !

Propaganda :

The "Who should Marius choose ?" question - source : Twitter - January 29

For many, many years, this fandom has been arguing that neither Cosette nor Eponine could be reduced to simply being love interests for Marius, that we shouldn't call their relationship a rivalry and that the Marius x Eponine relationship was way too toxic to be defined by love. Well, the musical's social media managers seem to disagree, no to mention that the picture is made to make it seem like Eponine is the only thing keeping the two lovers apart. Featuring an uncanny use of emojis you can find in every single one of their posts.

Mother's day post - source : Twitter - March 19

The one thing to be said in favor of this post is that they actually meant it as a joke and understood that Madame Thénardier was not a good mother. On the other hand, why not simply go along with the concept of Mother's Day and post a picture of Fantine, a mother who cared deeply about her child ? But they gave us an abusive mother instead. Again, very uncanny use of the laughing emoji.

The Wimbledon one - source : Twitter - July 15

Have you ever seen a post in which everything is wrong ? well this one is for you. Starting with the words they chose because no, there should not be a Cosette for every occasion. Putting a tennis racket in the hands of a starved and abused child ? To promote rich people's sports ? They also edited her arms to make her look more muscular. Also I know nothing about english sports but there is a strawberry emoji ? And finally, cherry on top of the cake... they messed up the colors of the french flag. Which, let's be honest, is an easy one to get right.

Cosette celebrating Thanksgiving - source : Twitter - November 23

Our only contestant left for the US team ! And... it's a bad one. Without even going into what is wrong with the concept of Thanksgiving itself and promoting it, why would you ever put Cosette in front of a Thanksgiving meal ? The gril who is famous as an icon of starved and abused children ? Not to mention how disturbing it is that there is so little to eat in the pate in front of her. And finally, on a purely cultural level : 1- Thanksgiving became a federal holiday years after Les Misérables was published and 2- most french people could not care less about when Thanksgiving is celebrated.

Christmas Eve - source : Twitter - December 24

To be honest, this one might by far not be the worst they have done, but it is undeniably very disturbing. And the way the edited the "One day more" quote may be the least uncanny thing here. They also edited snowflakes in the picture, a Christmas tree on the barricade and a Christmas hat on (I think ?) Enjolras's head... knowing that the men on this barricade are throwing a revolution. In which all of them will die painfully. What's more, this revolution canonically and historically takes place at the beginning of June. Which means this picture is the worst thing they could possibly have chose to illustrate the Christmas spirit. Also, as many people have mentionned, this year was the 200th anniversary of Valjean meeting Cosette in the woods, so... perhaps they could have done something about that instead ?

[breadvidence]

Today, on things I'm thinking about:

The medicalized model of the mind is more or less inescapable in the mainstream American consciousness (can't speak to the international scene, though I assume chapter five of the ICD has a similar hold as the DSM does in the States), to the point that I had a hell of a time choosing a phrase that wasn't speaking from that model. Whether the layperson's understanding and the clinician's understanding are the same is irrelevant to how it impacts media analysis, which is where I'm going with this, this is about Les Misérables, character analysis, and writing fanfic, what blog do you think you're on. I can't get out from under neurodivergence and mental disorder when looking at characters written by an author whose life predates those concepts, and there are two problems here for me, personally:

Victor Hugo's acuity in the description of the human experience (and his comedic faults in not depicting what I would call "neurotypical" people for shit) does not alter the inherent fact of fiction that you write from your understanding rather than reality—we're all in the cave—and his intent behind the characters' maladaptive, adaptive, and divergent behavior/personalities can't be meaningfully interpreted from the medicalized model—the author is dead, but he also dead-ass wasn't thinking about the diagnostic features of autism, either, or of autism as a neuropsychiatric way of being shared between humans across time and place. The fact that autism is a way of being that's existed across time and place (per my understanding!) is irrelevant. I'm putting aside, for the moment, the way Romantic tropes and symbolical choices impact verisimilitude as a journalistic depiction of daily life versus verisimilitude as the reality principle underneath... Y'know, no, I'm breaking off, what I'm saying is we're analyzing characters, their thoughts and actions, as if they have real people psyches and as such we're gonna leave aside the fun wacky way you can read, say, Éponine's ascent/descent from humanity to monstrosity, which prob cannot effectively be pointed to as a reflection of Hugo's understanding of how people work in the daily any more than it can be commented on as "hey, I knew somebody who did that, the doc said she had an adjustment disorder and that's why she became a ghoul with incredible powers over the plot". Anyway. When Victor Hugo writes of Valjean's eyes in 4.3.8 "they were those deep and glassy objects which replace the glance in the case of certain wretched men", I can pretty confidently say he's not thinking you know, a dissociative reaction, and that's a meaningful difference from an interpretive point than my looking at it and saying oh yeah, a dissociative reaction. To really feel how an author's understanding impacts their depiction of the human psyche, read literally anything written by someone who was a real close adherent to Freud. If you're just bip-bopping along looking for personal significance and meaningful patterns in the book this—don't really matter much, actually, we're not digging up the truth (there's no truth in literary analysis!) of the relationship between Hugo's framework for How Humans Work, In Their Minds and the book he made, we're just doing something fulfilling and fun. Still. It bugs me.

As you may know, I write little fanfics, which means (you also know, but to say it in a way that's fun for me to type out) parsing down the original text into a groundwork to then extrapolate from it in a way that is recognizable to readers familiar with it (sometimes very fucking familiar) (or sometimes readers familiar with other extrapolations from the text [I'm looking at you, Amis fandom], which I find mildly mind-blowing as a phenomenon tbh, just really neat—anyway). To some degree, point (1) kinda doesn't matter on whether or not I'm going to produce fic that makes readers happy, because fandom is about alteration of its beloveds (sometimes deliberate writing against its texts) as much as it's about mimicry, besides which y'all are also mostly living in the same cultural context as I am, reading Combeferre and Jean Valjean and Marius and whoever through the autism glasses right along with me. And yet still: it bugs me.

This matters less for Dammit, where the characters are living under the medicalized model¹, but it's disruptive to me when I'm working with the longer canon era pieces like Loup-Garou, where I'm aiming for a Hugo pastiche and the medical framework feels disruptive. Presumably the thing to do, here, would be to engage with some of the writing from canon era about why people experience outsized bad feelings and fuck themselves over—the root of psychiatry, right there—or to simply go "the fic does not actually suffer from this disruption, you have severe untreated anxiety and maladaptive perfectionism, you dipshit".

Which is a secondary roadblock to the present bigger problem with Loup-Garou, which is that I forgot to write down a note to myself about what the plot is and have forgotten it, because forgetting things is 90% of what my brain does. Oops!

Anyway, out of a resentful acknowledgment of my inability to escape thinking about social-mental ouchies and whoopses without medicalizing them, I will say that Loup-Garou Javert is deliberately not functioning with the same neuropsychiatric patterns as Dammit Javert—the latter has, at root, a history of severe crippling childhood anxiety that he has, as you do if you manage to survive to be an old functional lunatic, developed behavioral management for without medical intervention. He's functional. It's like a broken bone that heals without a cast, you know? And that characterization is based off of the line "When I have subdued malefactors, when I have proceeded with vigor against rascals, I have often said to myself, ‘If you flinch, if I ever catch you in fault, you may rest at your ease!’" (1.6.2—and in general Dammit Javert is more strongly aligned with the things that Javert says about himself in that scene than he is with what Hugo says about him in 1.5.5). Loup-Garou Javert has zero anxiety, he is Big Head Empty It's A Limpid Pool. In 5.1.1 we have "Thought on any subject whatever, outside of the restricted circle of his functions, would have been for him in any case useless and a fatigue", which fandom generally takes to mean he has not had thoughts: for Dammit Javert, he's had many useless and fatiguing moments in his life, he has thought things over, and his conclusions were either counterproductive/maladaptive/illogical or he bailed out before he reached them. Loup-Garou Javert aligns closer with the standard fandom interpretation of those lines. This is 100% because I wanted to play with an alternate take on the character. But that means I gotta somehow explain his perfectionism and rigidity and all without anxiety as a substrate, and I don't—actually 100% know where I'm going with that. Possibly puppy autism. Sometimes you don't know 'til you write it.

No real conclusion, here, just thinkin'.

(1) Lore! In one of those threads that inform the story but aren't visible, this impact Javert in particular—his medical record has OCPD as a diagnosis, F60.5 submitted on the insurance paperwork, and that means his psychiatrist [1] does not have a robust research literature to draw on when making medication decisions and [2] is working under the bigotry against personality disorders that doctors fuck over their patients with. If you ask me, the author, whether OCPD is a correct diagnosis, I would say [1] why do you want word of god, live your best Dammit interpretive life, if it's not on the page run free in the fields [2] I am highly cautious of the entire diagnostic framework of personality disorders as meaningful categories for human experience/psyches [3] without a sense of discontent over his career leveling out early, no close friends or family to push for change in damaging interpersonal patterns, and self-developed management of disruptive behaviors like angry outbursts, if I wanna armchair psych for a fictional character, there's not really something to treat as a medical problem, unless you wanna say that God this man is unpleasant in a way that fits a pattern of social maladjustment experienced by many people warrants medication the patient doesn't want, & so you might as well address his health problem under the label of an adjustment disorder and call it a day [4] all that being said, it's a better diagnostic framework than OCD, if you want a diagnostic framework, given all that maladaptive is consistent with his sense of self and he's not engaging in ritualistic behavior. Dammit Jean Valjean absolutely has gold standard PTSD and MDD tho, someone should diagnose that man and load him down with drugs.

[secretmellowblog]

Valjean is SO FUNNY in the Thenardier/Gorbeau House ambush scene. Thenardier keeps going on these long incoherent rants about revenge while Valjean just stands there calmly and tells Thenardier bald-faced lies with a straight face as he tries to Gaslight his way right out of the whole situation. Valjean is described as tranquil and serene as he continues to politely pretend “I don’t know you :). I’m just a random poor gentleman. :)” And Thenardier tries to act unbothered by this but (as a proud petty man desperate for recognition) he’s clearly losing his mind over it.

Anyway here are some of my Top Favorite Funny Valjean Lying Moments

“So you do not recognize me?”

M. Leblanc looked him full in the face, and replied:—

“No.”

Then Jondrette advanced to the table. He leaned across the candle, crossing his arms, putting his angular and ferocious jaw close to M. Leblanc’s calm face, and advancing as far as possible without forcing M. Leblanc to retreat, and, in this posture of a wild beast who is about to bite, he exclaimed:—

“My name is not Fabantou, my name is not Jondrette, my name is Thénardier. I am the inn-keeper of Montfermeil! Do you understand? Thénardier! Now do you know me?”

An almost imperceptible flush crossed M. Leblanc’s brow, and he replied with a voice which neither trembled nor rose above its ordinary level, with his accustomed placidity:—

“No more than before.”

10/10

M. Leblanc did not interrupt him, but said to him when he paused:—

“I do not know what you mean to say. You are mistaken in me. I am a very poor man, and anything but a millionnaire. I do not know you. You are mistaking me for some other person.”

“Ah!” roared Thénardier hoarsely, “a pretty lie! You stick to that pleasantry, do you! You’re floundering, my old buck! Ah! You don’t remember! You don’t see who I am?”

“Excuse me, sir,” said M. Leblanc with a politeness of accent, which at that moment seemed peculiarly strange and powerful, “I see that you are a villain!”

I love how he finds a way to insult him “politely.”

“Who?” asked M. Leblanc.

“Parbleu!” cried Thénardier, “the little one, the Lark.”

M. Leblanc replied without the slightest apparent emotion:—

“I do not know what you mean.”

But my absolute favorite small detail is that the false address Valjean gives the Thenardiers takes them to

“Rue Saint-Dominique-D’Enfer, No. 17.”

“Enfer” means “hell”— Valjean found a way to politely tell them all to go to hell XD.

I also love how, throughout the scene, Marius seems to fall for every one of Valjean’s lies; he seems to genuinely think he’s telling the truth when he behaves confused about “The Lark.” What a noodle.

But yeah, it’s fascinating how Valjean uses polite lies as a weapon for self-defense. As I mentioned before, Thenardier wants to have the skills that Valjean has, and one of his most valuable skills is his ability to politely lie his way around violent authority figures. This ability was clearly something he needed to adopt to survive nineteen years in prison, and years on the run; it’s an ability he’s cultivated for a long time. Meanwhile Thenardier also tries to “act polite” and lie in order to manipulate Valjean, but the difference is that Thenardier is generally pretty awful at it. He needs to take notes bc this is what real lying looks like.

[dolphin1812]

@eleancrvances has pointed out the heartbreaking similarities between Georges Pontmercy’s death and Fantine’s, with his last cry reflecting his wish to see his child and him dying as he lost hope. The tear is really devastating. Marius’ reaction, though, is interesting to contrast with Cosette’s. Age is certainly part of it. Cosette’s mother died when she was young, whereas Marius was almost an adult; neither one of them really knew their parents, but Marius’ awkwardness here and his attempt to adhere to some social norm for grief reflects his comparative awareness of these standards as an almost-adult, whereas Cosette simply repeated the fact of her mother’s death to a doll in distress. That being said, what these parents represent to each character is distinct. For one thing, Georges Pontmercy’s death is very physical to Marius in a way that Fantine’s wasn’t to Cosette. Fantine’s death was gruesome, but Cosette wasn’t there. She doesn’t even remember her mother:

“"Then you have not a mother?"

"I do not know," the child answered.

Before the man had time to speak, she continued,—

"I do not think so; other girls have one, but I have not."

And after a silence, she added,—"I believe that I never had one.”“ (LM 2.3.7)

At the same time, the idea of a mother means more to Cosette than it does to Marius. Although Mme Thénardier suggests that Cosette’s mother abandoned her, we don’t see Cosette repeat this idea, focusing instead on her mother being dead (or nonexistent, as seen in the earlier exchange with Jean Valjean above). She seems to believe that she suffers because she has no mother, not because her mother doesn’t love her. Marius explicitly feels abandoned by his father, though, making the relationship between them tense in a way Cosette and Fantine’s isn’t. 

To be fair, Cosette may not have complained of abandonment because of the narrative place in which we learn about her perspective on her mother: when Valjean finds her and adopts her. Hugo stresses that both her and Valjean were searching for someone to love, and that when they found each other, they were both able to express this wish and finally rejoice in caring for someone. Consequently, their love takes precedence over Cosette’s grief and/or confusion. Marius, on the other hand, is still on his own and doesn’t really love anyone. He didn’t love his father because he felt he abandoned him, but he also doesn’t love Gillenormand. Whereas Cosette’s story then was at a place of hope, Marius’ is one of resentment and isolation, allowing us to sit with that feeling of abandonment.

That lack of love is sad given that we know Georges Pontmercy did love his son, but it also allows Marius to figure out that something’s off. The scene he steps into is full of grief:

“Anguish, poignant anguish, was in that chamber. The servant-woman was lamenting in a corner, the curé was praying, and his sobs were audible, the doctor was wiping his eyes; the corpse itself was weeping.”

The dead can weep, but Marius can’t. It’s understandable that he isn’t exactly sad, of course, but it’s notable that Marius sees his father as an ordinary person who failed him here (he’s sad to see a corpse in general), not as the “brigand” his grandfather paints him as. This isn’t to say that Marius has changed his political views (he doesn’t really mourn him afterward), but this scene of death and grief humanizes his father to an extent, allowing Marius to process his lack of grief and his moment of guilt for that. 

Still, understanding Marius’ feelings doesn’t remove the pain of seeing Georges Pontmercy die in despair and then have every trace of his life erased. His garden isn’t just overgrown with weeds; everything in it dies, a final reminder of his isolation.

[piracytheorist]

So I just watched the 2012 version of Les Misérables, and I've got to say, I've never felt so conflicted over crying for a film. Because it's not a fucking good film. It's an adaptation of a stage musical but it looks like there was nearly zero effort to adapt from stage to cinema.

In different mediums, the audience works differently in order to connect with the story and characters. A book doesn't provide visual scenes, but can be detailed enough for one's imagination to do the job. A comic has no movement, but if it's staged well enough the audience can connect point A to point B. Animation doesn't aim for realistic depictions (and Disney can kiss my ass on that) but suspension of disbelief can connect the comical reactions to the equivalent real-life reactions. Theater has excessive makeup and the actors act with bigger movements with placements that may make no sense in real life (as they have to face the audience, sometimes turning their backs on their co-stars during a dialogue) but if it's placed well you're engrossed enough in it that it shouldn't bother you. And also, theater has set changes.

In stage work, musical or not, you stare at the same scene the whole time. How one creates a set design and changes it during the performance is an entire art and section of study when it comes to theater. And two of the results of good set change is that the viewer 1) doesn't lose focus and immersion and 2) gets prepared for the next scene.

And then this film fucking forgot that theater and cinema need different transitions from one to the other. As I was watching it and felt shocked by the sudden changes - like, Valjean starts as a prisoner. Oh now he's free. Now he's on the streets being beaten up. Now he's taken in by the church. NOW HE'S STEALING FROM THEM?? Oh now he's caught by the cops. AM I WATCHING A FUCKING MONTAGE?? - I eventually started thinking how it would be like if these sudden changes were happening on a stage, and I realized that, if they're good enough set changes, I wouldn't have a single issue because hey, there's a reason it's cool to see the set changes. They prepare you. Because when I see Valjean in a prison and then he's on the road then he's on the streets then he's in a church, all within the manner of like, three minutes, it's fucking jarring on a screen, where the changes are radical and sudden.

And it was like that in the entire film. It was especially jarring between the scenes of Marius asking Eponine to go find Cosette and then BAM it's night and we're on the rebel base and Enjolras chastises Marius for choosing love over the rebellion. It's too sudden, man! And I know that the original book is fucking long but that is not an excuse. When you make an adaptation you have to make sure that what you create can stand on its own, that not everyone will have read the book/watched the stage play/seen other films inspired by it in order to like your creation. You're making an adaptation for the screen. Adapt! Improvise overcome etc etc

And another way the adaptation was poor? In stage musicals it's common to have the actors make small reactions to things happening or being said. Things like "It cannot be!" or "Is it true?" or even "Dear Lord!" are small phrases that a character sings/says to draw the audience's attention and show their reaction. Do you know how cinema does that? BY SHOWING THE CHARACTER ON THE SCREEN. On the stage, you have a wide scene, with the actors spread around it, and when they react to something they need to say something so that the audience will turn their eyes to them. On cinema you don't need to "manipulate" the audience's view, because you control it fully via the cameras. If the director wants the audience to notice something, they simply focus the cameras on it. So having both those "small" reactions and focusing on the actors' face during it is redundant and also fucking ridiculous.

That's not even mentioning the atrocious choice of recording the actors live. Whatever you want to say about "realism" in the singing (it's a musical it's not fucking realistic to burst into song irl what the fuck shut up!!) the biggest issue with it is that it has piss poor audio mixing. Long notes that would be belted out and stand out in the stage play or a decent mixing are now lost and covered by the orchestra. It's a waste of their talent!

And since I'm on the topic... what the fuck did they do with Russel Crowe. What the fuck. Because the man can obviously sing. He has some wonderful long notes and vocal control... and then they either coached him completely wrong for Javert's songs, or they made a huge miscast. I cannot judge him as an actor, I think he was good for the acting role, but the singing oh my god it doesn't fit his voice. Javert does that thing where he sings in the same note then jumps to a higher note for emphasis, and Crowe fucking sucked at that it was painful. Why. Why did they do both the character and the actor dirty. Who greenlit this. Who allowed this. Javert is a fucking main character and they made a whole mess of him I am going to crawl up a wall and scream

And then I had the audacity to fucking cry at the end because Hugh Jackman acted his soul out in the final scene and then the ending number pulled at my heartstrings. I hate it here.

[needabetternamelater]

It's not a brick wall to continue to ask you a question you have not yet answered which is: What is the prison abolitionists' proposed solution?

"I ain't seen you since the last time I had to explain to you how the systems set in place in American™ prison complex is because it is a system set up on literal slavery and thus is working quite as intended." I mean, prisons unfortunately do do that. They also seperate murderers and rapists from the general population when they're convicted. Which, yes, having the trial first is a good thing. Obviously. Prisons aren't special to any country; they're older than the earliest known legal code. What is your point? I didn't say prisons were special to America If you told me rape happens in every prison, I'd just ask if you know what the word 'largely' means. Hint: it is not in fact a synonym of uniquely, only, or any of those words. Again, we're just back to 'largely does not mean 'only', 'uniquely' or 'is confined in its totality to'. And back to: . Read what I actually said and stop inserting your bullshit into it. Maybe in type and order but the name comes from penance. As in taking accountability? Which I thought prison abolitionists were all for? And well, do you think a reward is the correct response to someone doing some non-Jean-Valjean crime? I certainly don't. If you go into a prison and are like 'this has a bad effect on the prisoners' then...okay? Maybe some quakers thought it would cause reform in a soul-elevating way or penitatries causing penance or something but for the most part, the idea has always been that the benefits of having prisoners in society accrues to people not in prison. "Asking for 'nicer prisons' is like asking for a ICEE made of molten fucking lava 'but make that cold'." What do you want to do? So far, you still haven't answered the question. And no, it isn't. Like I don't think this is the correct answer because there are other rights to be balanced but if it came to it: stick everyone in Brevvik-style-solitary for the entirety of their sentence is one potential way to avoid intra-prison rape. I'm not a massive fan of this either but I don't know what other solution there could be. "There. I didn't dodge your question even though I'm pretty sure I didn't the first time are you gonna explain to me why you feel like 'harden criminals' don't deserve rehabilitation and do deserve to get raped and suffer a lifetime of emotional trauma?" You still haven't yet explained what you actually want to happen. And stop conflating prison conditions with the existence of prisons. As for rehab, yes, they deserve rehab but not at the expense of victims. I don't think they deserve to get raped. (That would be prison conditions). As for a lifetime of emotional trauma, I don't think they deserve that either. What I do think is that if we're given the choice between them suffering a lifetime of emotional trauma and innocent people suffering a lifetime of emotional trauma....I'll pick the ones causing the problem. They are the ones nominating themselves for the short end of the tradeoff, after all.

[shadowsong26fic]

An Imperfect Memory

Author: shadowsong26

Rating: PG

Fandom: Les Mis

Characters: Javert, Cosette

Warnings: References to canonical character death (Fantine’s)

Disclaimer: All characters are the property of their respective creators.

Notes: So, my roommate has dragged me (not entirely unwillingly XD) down a Valjean/Javert rabbit hole; and then I wandered off into another corner of the warren that is Javert & Cosette and how that stepparent relationship might work and to stretch this metaphor to the breaking point I got hopelessly lost so I guess I live here now lol.

Anyway, I have this headcanon that Cosette likes to draw/paint; Roommate informed me that in the novel (which I read abridged years ago but only remember so much of), Javert also draws. And that’s where this came from (along with another Super Secret Project I’m working on alongside other things for other fandoms).

This is, obviously, a canon-divergent AU where both Javert and Valjean survive and...again. Rabbit hole, lol. I may continue to tweak this (especially the last couple lines) but it wouldn’t leave my head until I shared it, so here we are.

Javert paused for a moment, hesitating before tapping on the half-open door.

Mme. Pontmercy was just where he’d expected her to be, settled in a chair by the window where the light was good, sketching something he couldn’t see from this angle.

It was that pastime of hers that had made him think of…well. That had brought to mind the purpose for this particular conversation. Once he took that step and began it.

Well. He was here now, and he had committed to this. No sense in delaying.

He raised his hand to knock, but then she looked up, beating him to it.

“Oh!” she said, half-rising. “I’m sorry, I didn’t hear you. Are you looking for papa? I think he’s--”

“He’s out in the garden,” he said. “I know. No, I was…I was actually looking for you.”

She blinked. “For me?”

“Yes,” he said, then hesitated, the folded paper tucked up his sleeve burning against his skin. “May I?”

“Of course,” she said, rising fully and moving over to sit on the couch instead, where he could have her full attention. “Please, come in.”

He inclined his head, and took a step into the room, then another. He remained standing.

A long moment of silence stretched between the two of them.

Damn it. “I…apologize, madame, if I am overstepping,” he began, breaking it. “But I…I am aware that you have…questions. About your mother.”

“Ah,” she said, lowering her eyes. “Yes, I…I still feel like I know so little about her.” She looked up again, tilting her head. “Did you know her, monsieur?”

“I only met her once,” he said. “Very briefly. And I was…unkind.” He closed his eyes for the barest of moments, then locked that--feeling away before continuing on. “In any case, I am sure your father has told you about her, more than I possibly could. But for all his many talents, your father is not…he is not an artist.” He winced a little. “I am not, either, not particularly, but from time to time, I…���

“I didn’t know,” she said, after another long and increasingly awkward silence.

“Yes, well,” he said, then pulled the paper out of his sleeve and offered it to her. “I thought…I thought perhaps you might like to have this.”

She tilted her head again, giving him another of those quiet, questioning looks, and then reached out to take the paper. She unfolded it carefully, and then froze for a moment before looking up at him, eyes wide. “Is…is this…?”

He nodded. “Based on my imperfect memory,” he said, softly. “Yes. That is…to the best of my recollection, that is your mother.”

“Oh,” she breathed, looking back down at the sketch.

He had tried to soften some of the…harsher edges of the circumstances, while still doing the dead woman justice--so to speak. In a way he had been incapable of all those years ago. It had been some time since he had focused so much on a drawing, rather than using it as a tool, or as a way to keep his mind and hands occupied between more important tasks.

But this--this attempt at…amends, perhaps…

Nothing had felt quite so important when he was working at it.

He wasn’t entirely sure how successful he had been. He hadn’t shown the drawing to Valjean, who was the only person who could have judged the likeness. He had considered it, but that had felt…no, this was something for the daughter alone.

And then a very strange thing happened.

Before he even realized she was moving, Mme. Pontmercy had risen from the sofa, taken a few quick steps across the room to him, and--

And flung her arms around him.

He drew in a startled breath and froze, unable to move or think. He could feel something wet on his shoulder--she was crying?

And then her voice, soft, in his ear. “Thank you,” she said, before pulling away.

Yes, her eyes were shining, and she had his drawing clutched tight in her hand.

“I…ah.”

“I cannot tell you how much this means to me, monsieur,” she went on. “Thank you.”

He bowed his head again. “You’re…you’re welcome, madame.”

She smiled at him, brightly, through her tears. “Would you…would you like to join me?” she then asked. “Drawing, I mean. There’s plenty of room at the window, and I think…I would like that, very much.”

“Some…some other time, perhaps,” he said. “But thank you, for the…for the invitation.”

“Some other time,” she agreed, still smiling.

[abrahamvanhelsings]

me when i send in a les mis ask to your fire emblem blog 👍

but fuck yeah!!! fellow russell crowe appreciator!!! could i get your thoughts on 'the confrontation' from the 2012 movie by any chance??

oh don't worry about it ill answer les mis asks anywhere lmao. and Especially if they're about this song because it is genuinely one of my favourite ones in the entire film, and that's not an exaggeration. it's fundamental to the audience's understanding of their characters, and in particular javert's: through the confrontation with javert we get an insight in his beliefs and troubles, and suddenly his motivations and his tension with valjean make so much more sense. the film version in particular i think recognises what this song can and is supposed to do and manages to enhance it.

first of all, what i really like about this version is the difference between valjean's/hugh jackman's and javert's/russell crowe's voices and their singing style. hugh jackman's voice is very polished, very clear, and relatively high in tone. it fits the character of valjean/madeleine, who is refined and learned and of good standing. in contrast, russell crowe's voice is of a much darker timbre, his singing a little brittle at the edges (good though!). their voices reflect their positions in the story and society: the convict turned gentleman and the ambitious policeman who came from nothing. their voices also compliment each other very well, and i also enjoy that, because they are so different, the characters' respective lines are easily distinguishable from one another.

the build-up is also insanely good. valjean pleading with javert at the beginning to give him more time sounds genuine and desperate - kudos to hugh jackman for adding a lot of subtlety there! then javert counters, ruthless and forbidding, and from there they launch into the 'duet' part of the song. i think that part is amazing just because of the way the two different melodies run counter to each other, but in the film version it's enhanced by the difference in their voices (as i said) and because the crescendo of the orchestra is really well-done. and most importantly, you can hear their singing get more emotional the nearer they get towards the end of the song, too - it really feels as if we're listening to them, all layers stripped and their souls bared at the end there.

and think leaving out valjean's last few lines so that javert's lines wherein he reveals his background stand alone was a great decision! they're put completely centre-stage, you can't miss them, and they're so important to crowe's characterisation of javert in this film that they need that attention. up to this point javert has been the cruel policeman dogging valjean's steps, but with this the audience suddenly understands why he acts and think the way he does, and why he has so little compassion for the poor and deprived (and valjean). he was born among the lowest of the low, and with hard work he managed to distance himself from that disgrace, to climb up to a respectful position in society without ever resorting to crime. he lives strictly according to the law and the word of the lord as he understands it. but nonetheless he can't ever change where he came from, and it haunts him. russell crowe puts a lot of anger and indignation in his voice (and face) here, which lets the message land very well, and then it's paired with good visuals too: javert telling valjean that he knows nothing of javert as he parries his weapon and redirects the blow, as if to imply that his background taught him tricks and strengths of a different kind than valjean's pure beast-like power.

anyway, finally, i think that the film has something that broadway can miss at times, which is more subtlety in the performance of the songs. the media of film lends itself to a lot more small details that simply won't work out well in a big theatre where the singer's voice has to reach all the corners of the room, and that's fine! but i absolutely prefer the fast-paced intensity of the film version of confrontation to the broader, more refined way it's often performed on stage, even if that is the original way to do it (tbf i have only seen vids, never had the privilege to go to a live show). this is going to make people want to crucify me, but for example i don't like the way peter qu/ast sings javert's songs. it's technically outstanding, of course, he is a good singer, but i personally just don't like his timbre or the way he sings/interprets javert's songs much. what can you do.

most importantly though im a huge valvert shipper and well the confrontation is their homoerotic bit and hugh jackman and russell crowe make great valvert material.

[everyonewasabird]

Brickclub 5.6.3 “The Inseparable”

Jean Valjean has been showing no emotion at all for several chapters now, just being as smooth a cog as he can be in the machine of getting Cosette married off to Marius and joined to the Gillenormand family as irrevocably as possible. Which he is convinced (unbeknownst to everyone else) means it’s time for him to leave forever.

I still think a lot of Valjean’s relationship to the world was formed on that drive from Montreuil-sur-Mer to Arras: from then until the end he’s the passerby looking at other people’s lives from a distance, close enough to know things about them but not close enough to ever be part of it. As he leaves the wedding and looks in the window at the festivities going on without him, he’s back on that dark road where he’s always been. Cosette, in his thinking--now, at least--was only the place he watched the longest as he passed by.

But, of course, he’s also been made into what he is by the convent, and by his wholehearted swallowing of the convent’s way of being. It’s not weird for a parent seeing their kid taking a major step into adulthood and independence from them to have complicated, sad, nostalgic feelings, or to pull out a keepsake or two and to cry over them.

But because of the convent, Valjean’s mode here is much more like stasis and death than that. There’s no joy in change here to mitigate the grief. Instead, he forsakes the celebration with his living child--who clearly indicates she wants him there--in order to spend time with the embalmed mourning clothes of a child who doesn’t exist anymore. He doesn’t seem to process a difference between growing up and death. It’s horribly sad, and I get how he got there.. but it’s just so horribly sad.

And it slots neatly into into world of this last section, where pretty bourgeois boys marry pretty bourgeois girls and are swept along in the pomp and wealth they were born to, and the only role of convicts in that world is to be the anonymous hordes whose labor the rich people in the house enjoy and try not to think much about. Marius’s attitude towards Cosette once he knows (”lovely despite the staining proximity of a convict!”) is considerably more well-examined than his attitude towards his grandfathers’ convict-made housewares, but it’s not really very different.

Which is to say--his rejecting Valjean’s money as unearned theft while accepting his aunt’s and grandfather’s money as his birthright is utter hypocrisy, stupidity, and a complete lack of understanding any part of this book. Valjean started his arc by explaining how the state had taken his labor and robbed him, and every other exploited worker in the text has said something similar. Thenardier explained it all in Marius’s hearing. We know that all the riches he’s accepting are at the expense--literally the theft--of the labor of all the characters we’ve spent the rest of the book with.

Marius really has learned nothing.

[thechaoticfanartist]

come here. sit down

Grim and obiwan. With a side of extra pain

ways to say “ i care about you. ” || Accepting

  It had only been a week since they had lost everything. Grim and Obi-Wan had found a home in an empty cave on Tatooine. Far away from the Empire, and close enough to keep watch over Luke as more time passed between them. Neither of them had new names yet, but Grim knew they had to, along with a story to hide behind.

 She had cooked a small breakfast for the two of them. It wasn’t the best, as they had very little of anything, but she hoped this small act was enough. It was still early in the morning, and the suns were not fully in the sky just yet. Grim sat just outside, sitting in meditation while she waited on Obi-Wan to wake up.

 When he had, Grim set up the small breakfast she made for them. She called to him, “Come here. Sit down.” 

 Obi-Wan did so, and Grim handed him the breakfast she had cooked. “Thank you,” he said. 

 They ate their breakfast in silence. Once they had finished Grim spoke. “We need aliases.”

 Obi-Wan frowned. “Yes,” he agreed. “Do you have something in mind?”

 “Well I already knew the name you called yourself in hiding long before this happened to us,” she admitted. “You go by Ben.”

 Obi-Wan considered it. “Satine used to call me that,” he admitted quietly. 

 “Perhaps that’s why you chose it,” she replied.

 “What about you, Grim? What name should you go by?”

 “I’ve been thinking about that. I think I have it figured out,” she replied. “I think I’ll go by Rue. It can also mean regret, so I think that fits for me.”

 “What happened wasn’t your fault,” he reminded her. 

“I know that, Ben, But that doesn’t mean I don’t have my own regrets. It’s not yours either but you have regrets too.”

 He was quiet for a moment. “What about last names? What was my last name that you know.”

 “You didn’t change it. Your name is Ben Kenobi.”

 “I see…” he said. “What will your last name be?”

 “That’s the other part I wanted to discuss. I had an idea for our cover story, but I wanted to run it by you.”

 “What is it?”

 “That I’m your daughter, and we recently moved to find a new life for ourselves.”

 “That isn’t too far from the truth,” commented Obi-Wan. 

 Grim smiled, “that’s what makes it more believable…” She realized what Obi-Wan had said ”…wait. You see me as your daughter?”

 “Yes, Rue. I have for quite some time,” he admitted. 

 “So I guess our story is just the truth in a different way,” said Rue with a soft smile. 

 “I suppose so,” agreed Ben.

 Rue hugged Ben, “I’m sorry that I couldn’t change this, dad.”

 Ben hugged his daughter back. And the two just stayed like that.

Tag List (let me know if you want to be added or removed) : @padme--amygdala @soclonely @mrfandomwars @jgvfhl @theleldaofzeldablog @milfspectre1 @togrutanduin @jedi-valjean @one-real-imonkey @traygaming @roseofalderaan @keoxus  @tranakin-thighhighwalker @veiled-in-stars @sentineljedi @spicysucculentz @purgetrooperfox @amelia-song-pond @kohtoyah @saturnsokas @thejediprincessqueenofnaboo

[lokigodofaces]

I posted 4,850 times in 2022

That's 39 more posts than 2021!

988 posts created (20%)

3,862 posts reblogged (80%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@worstloki

@lokigodofaces

@flyingbooks42

@everylokitten

@jedi-valjean

I tagged 3,753 of my posts in 2022

Only 23% of my posts had no tags

#loki laufeyson - 804 posts

#liv won't shut up - 354 posts

#agents of s.h.i.e.l.d. (2013 2020) - 341 posts

#thor odinson - 198 posts

#bucky barnes - 187 posts

#phil coulson - 171 posts

#the avengers (2012) - 168 posts

#loki (2021) - 138 posts

#tesseroki - 136 posts

#daisy johnson - 129 posts

Longest Tag: 139 characters

#i know you joked about bis saying screwdrivers but the screwdrivers that you can pull the end out & flip it to show a phillips or flat 👌👌

My Top Posts in 2022:

#5

Okay, I know this has been said and has been around for years, but I'm annoyed so I'm making a post myself. But I do not understand why people are so convinced fans of male characters just want to sleep with the actor of said male character and/or the character. I've encountered this mostly in regards to Loki and Bucky, but I'm sure this is something that transcends the MCU fandom. And I'm sick and tired of it. So I'm going to dump my feelings here. Sorry if it makes no sense. Feel free to add on if you want to.

You shouldn't assume someone's gender and sexuality. If you talk to a random fan on Tumblr, you don't know who they are. So maybe people should stop assuming the fans of every attractive male character are straight girls (I say straight girls specifically because it is often said explicitly or implicitly that the fans wanting to f*ck characters/actors are fangirls). You could be talking to someone any gender or sexual/romantic/etc orientation. How do you think some of us feel when you "call us out" for being "horny b*tches" when we aren't attracted to men like that? How would you feel if I accused you of wanting to sleep with a person you don't have those desires for? Not great probably. Think of that. It should be basic politeness to not accuse people of crap like that.

People are allowed to be attracted to fictional characters. In fact, the creators probably want people to have some sort of attraction to many characters (there's a reason for gratuitous shirtless scenes). People are attracted to who they're attracted to. Not that big of a deal. So stop acting like it's a crime.

There are different types of attraction and not everyone who is attracted to a character is attracted in every way. Let's take Bucky and Loki as examples. I am not sexually attracted to either, but I am attracted to them in other ways, such as aesthetic attraction and romantic attraction. If I were to, for example, write a post criticizing how Loki looks in Loki, that doesn't mean I'm upset because I don't find him and/or Tom Hiddleston sexy in the series. It means that (for me, personally) I am upset that he doesn't look as good because Loki/Tom are aesthetically pleasing as heck but the costuming, make up, lighting, etc was somehow able to make him look bad. I am personally upset because of my attraction, but also for reasoning outside attraction (why would you make your protagonist look like sh*t?).

Regardless of whether someone has attraction towards a character/actor, they can still have nuanced opinions on that character. Listen, I'm not going to say I'm unbiased. I know for a fact I'm not. I adore my favorite characters and am attracted to a few of them. I know that will affect my views on them at least a bit. But that doesn't mean every opinion I have on them is driven from my attraction. I'm demiromantic, so it's obvious for me. I had to like them before I liked them romantically. But alloromantic allosexuals can have valid opinions on characters regardless of whether they're attracted or not. Listen, compare this to real life. If you've been attracted to someone, you can still have opinions on them unrelated to you're attraction. If you are so blinded by attraction you can't, you need to get that figured out. Regardless of attraction, you can probably come up with some constructive criticism for them and some compliments anyone else would give them. Same thing applies to fictional characters! So does it really matter all that much if someone is attracted to a character they analyze? No, not really. They'll be accurate enough and it's analysis on a fictional character. It's not the end of the world if done wrong. Sure, someone could be so biased they admit no flaw of a character. But I bet you the majority of people attracted to characters can regulate their bias somewhat. Even if it's a, "He's cute, but did kill the dog." And, again, we're talking about fiction. Maybe you shouldn't be so offended by people having attractions/hobbies that don't affect you.

You immediately lose credibility if you're argument against an argument is saying crap about horny fangirls. How is that an argument against a well constructed analysis? Would you do it for a real life person? If I defended my friend, would you "call me out" for wanting to have sex with him? What if he was my husband? Would you "call me out" for thinking he's sexy (in a hypothetical world where I would find anyone sexy)? I certainly hope not. It's not a good argument, and once you use it you just become irritating.

Take a second and think about it. Have you seen people accusing men of wanting to have sex with female characters/actresses? I mean, it definitely happens. And maybe I just don't see that side of fandom enough, but in my experience it happens way more when the actor/character is a man. So are you saying women primarily are in fandom for the sake of hot men? You might not be thinking that, or realize you are, but recognize the implications. If you think every woman's favorite character is her favorite because of daydreams of sex, that's an issue. Because not everything is about sex for women. Women aren't shallow viewers. Women love their favorite characters. They might have daydreams of sex, it's entirely possible. But as mentioned before, that doesn't lower the amount they can critically consume media or analyze characters.

Dude, if you don't like a character, actor, or the content they come from, whatever. No one cares. You don't have to try to argue that fans are horny to not like it. Write your own posts about how you feel. Don't harass anyone who does like it. This is basic knowledge on online interaction.

Every time I've seen the "argument" that "you just want to be in bed with X," it's after a post about sensitive plot points. If I say I don't like parts of The Falcon and the Winter Solider because they portrayed Bucky's very poorly, essentially saying he was never a victim to Hydra and had to atone for "his" sins, that is the type of post that would get stuff about me wanting to sleep with Bucky. If I mention queerphobia, racism, or say the content has harmful things, then clearly I just want to f*ck the character and/or actor and am defending him. You see why I'm suspicious of these people? What's you're problem with me being concerned about the portrayal of mental health treatment?

Even if someone only ever makes content about how much they think X is sexy, it doesn't mean they're lesser fans. They just really like X sexually. They probably have lots of opinions they just don't share. People are allowed to choose which opinions to share.

...I got nothing else but would've been annoyed to end on #9 (unfortunately I'm like that). So let me tell you to just STOP with "calling people out" for finding X sexy. It makes you look stupid, it's rude, and it has no relevance.

139 notes - Posted February 2, 2022

#4

164 notes - Posted January 24, 2022

#3

I (think) I said it before but I'll say it again now that we've got PJO news. If we ever get far enough to have a Magnus Chase series, it would be ridiculously funny if Loki shape shifted at some point and the actor they got to be disguised Loki was Tom Hiddleston. I mean, it's Disney. They can legally do that. Why not?

192 notes - Posted April 20, 2022

#2

If I had a nickel for every time one of the Odinsons was stripped in promotional footage, I would have two nickels. Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it happened twice.

296 notes - Posted May 23, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

Me whenever I get a new Dracula Daily email and hop onto Tumblr:

3,025 notes - Posted September 1, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →

[daisywords]

I posted 1,703 times in 2022

That's 1,350 more posts than 2021!

382 posts created (22%)

1,321 posts reblogged (78%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@daisywords

@unbearable-lightness-of-ink

@headspace-hotel

@ettawritesnstudies

@jedi-valjean

I tagged 1,208 of my posts in 2022

Only 29% of my posts had no tags

#art - 221 posts

#second chance wip - 90 posts

#other's writing - 86 posts

#ask game - 59 posts

#other's wip - 42 posts

#boost - 36 posts

#my art - 33 posts

#my writing - 23 posts

#other's art - 19 posts

#writing process - 18 posts

Longest Tag: 139 characters

#i have one black turtleneck and it looks sooooo good on me literally it's like my first date outfit but also i cannot wear it for that long

My Top Posts in 2022:

#5

Kk just finished A Conspiracy of Kings

Sophos my beloved

the boy is back <3

I just loved Sophos as a narrator! His voice really came through ugh he's just so honest

the shifts between first person to omniscient were interesting I don't think I've ever seen it done in quite that way

bunny :)

"If my affections weren't otherwise engaged" oof

love how the middle section is just King of Attolia pt 2

"that Sophos held Gen's heart in his hand" + "He would have given Eugenides his heart on a toothpick, if asked" ok cool cool

we still stan Eddis Helen

I want to know more about Sophos's sisters they seem cool

uM did he just—yes he did ok he went there

"You shot the ambassador?" my Lord Attolis you gave me the gun

It's all just about how they all love each other but it's so much more complicated than that, except that in the end it isn't

Wow this book is so...heartfelt idk

Sophos my beloved

and here's the complementary doodle of Eddis and our boy Sophos ofc

140 notes - Posted March 14, 2022

#4

Ok so read The King of Attolia yesterday and wow ok

Costis is one of those characters that's just some guy but like. he's my guy

Also I love his friendship with Aris? just like aww look they're friends

just because no one ever sees the king visit the queen doesn't mean he's not you idiots did you forget everything you ever knew about the guy?

I feel like the narrative distance between the reader and Gen has to get further and further away lest we know what he is up to

What did Relius actually do wrong? was kinda confused there tbh

I guess Gen being mortally wounded is just a staple for this series like jeez give the guy a break

And yup there we go

Costis the whole time like "get a room" except they have a room he's just. also there

Aww Sejanus and Dite really did love each other <3

Also Sophos is missing??? Someone better go find him right now

This book was just straight character dynamics and I was riveted

I feel like Megan Whalen Turner Understands Something About Intimacy

This book is so incredibly spicy you guys

ok anyway here's the king and queen themselves and of course our boy Costis

156 notes - Posted March 11, 2022

#3

minimum page counts really coming for those of us who are concise

332 notes - Posted October 4, 2022

#2

can't believe it's 2022 and we still have posts around about not overusing "said" like seriously? Imagine if I made a list of words to use instead of "and." wouldn't that be stupid?

1,162 notes - Posted September 29, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

Conlanging for cheaters

quick tips for creating fantasy language(s) that look believable if you squint

Pick a few rules about what letter/sound combinations can and cannot exist (or are common/uncommon). For example, in English, "sp" or "st" can begin a word, but in Spanish they can't. The "ng" sound (or the voiced velar nasal if you want to get technical), can't appear at the beginning of a syllable in English, but it can in at least of third of languages around the world. English allows for consonant clusters (more than one consonant together without a vowel), but some languages, such as Hawaiian, don't. Picking a few distinctive rules that are different from English or the language you are writing in, and sticking to them, will yield a lot better results than just keysmashing.

Assign meaning to a few suffixes, prefixes, or roots. A simple and useful example of this is making up a particle that means -land or -city or -town, and tacking it onto your appropriate place names. You could also have a particle with a similar meaning to the "er/or one we have in English, such as in "baker," "singer," or "operator," and then incorporate it in your fantasy titles or professions. It's like an Easter egg for careful readers to figure out, and it will make your language/world feel more cohesive.

Focus on places and names. You usually don't need to write full sentences/paragraphs in your conlang. What you might want to do with it is name things. The flavor of your language will seep in from the background, with the added benefit of giving readers some hints on background lore. For example, you could have a conlang that corresponds to a certain group of people, and a character with a corresponding name could then be coded as being from that group without having to specify. A human-inhabited city with an elven-sounding name might imply that it was previously inhabited by elves.

You don't have to know what everything means. Unless you are Linguistics Georg R. R. Tolkien, you probably don't want to (and shouldn't!) actually make up a whole language. So stick some letters together (following your linguistic rules, of course) and save fretting over grammar and definitions for the important stuff.

(Bonus) This isn't technically conlanging, but it can be fun to make up an idiom or two for your fantasy culture (just in English or whatevs) and sprinkle that in a few times. The right made-up idiom can allude to much larger cultural elements without you having to actually explain it.

Congrats! You now have a conlang you can dust over your wip like an appropriate amount of glitter. Conlangs can be intimidating, just because there's so much you can do, but that doesn't mean you have to do it all. So yeah anyway here's what I would recommend; hope y'all have fun :D

5,598 notes - Posted May 12, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →