#there is really no need to intellectualize it or justify it as deeper than it is like just have fun w it who cares | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

oldgodsnewapproaches · 1 year ago

Text

This goes well with the ideas that

1) humanity needs to be more community-focused than individualism-focused for sustainable living to be viable, and

2) paganism/animism/viewing the land as a living thing that we are deeply and intrinsically connected to and must protect and care for if we want it to care for us in return is actually very good praxis for getting people to really, really care about the environment and also for getting people to understand how important its wellbeing is for humans to live.

Because while you can understand all of that on a purely intellectual, scientific level, it's hard to get it to stick sometimes in a world where we can so easily be persuaded to accept and justify most environmental destruction, enough to allow it to happen on a massive scale, because it benefits us.

If that destruction is only impacting some abstract, far-away place that only exists in concept, it's easier to accept and justify than it would be if it were happening to your kin or your gods. And nothing about animism is inherently opposed to science, nor is it inherently anti-intellectual; on the contrary, a deeper understanding of the science of physics and ecology can actually really deepen spirituality if you look at it through the lens of understanding the inherent beauty and magic in, say, the moon pulling the tides or the beautiful complexity of how trees use mycelium networks to communicate, share nutrients, and warn one another of danger.

Looking at past pre-christian cultures (and I mean really studying them and the reasons for their beliefs and actions in history and archaeology, not just accepting what some new-agey book on paganism from the Wiccan shop says) is helpful; for example, rhe Bealtaine festival practice of driving cattle between two bonfires served to ritually cleanse and bless them, but it was also useful for driving off or killing parasites and other pests without harming the cows, generally. Like harvest festivals, most other festivals have also historically served important functions beyond just the religious ones, and it's worth looking into the find out what they were.

And looking at modern cultures and religions with animist beliefs, especially Indigenous ones, can help us better understand the relationship between the land and humans and how it actually looks in a religious, spiritual, or cultural context that prioritizes it - and it ties right back into other major issues of importance, such as decolonization, anti-racism, and prioritizing Indigenous voices worldwide, because, of course, environmental destruction doesn't happen on its own and all of the major issues impacting the world today are intimately connected and can't be fully fixed without also fixing the rest.

Culture is a powerful force for change. Festivals are an excellent way to incorporate necessary changes in action and values into culture. But it's a lot easier to get people to care enough to do all the work a festival requires if we're also pushing for changes in our cultural and spiritual relationship to the land as a whole! That doesn't have to look like organized religion, either (in fact, it's probably better if it doesn't); just studying it yourself enough to develop a balanced relationship to it can be enough on an individual level.

Legit though, we should start turning ecosystem restoration and work to make our world more tolerant to the effects of climate change into annual holidays and festivals

Like how just about every culture used to have festivals to celebrate the beginning of the harvest or its end, or the beginning of planting, or how whole communities used to host barn raisings and quilting bees - everyone coming together at once to turn the work of months or years into the work of a few days

Humble suggestions for festival types:

Goat festival

Besides controlled burns (which you can't do if there's too much dead brush), the fastest, most effective, and most cost-efficient way to clear brush before fire season - esp really heavy dead brush - is to just. Put a bunch of goats on your land for a few days!

Remember that Shark Tank competitor who wanted to start a goat rental company, and everyone was like wtf? There was even a whole John Oliver bit making fun of the idea? Well THAT JUST PROVES THEY'RE FROM NICE WET PLACES, because goat rental companies are totally a thing, and they're great.

So like. Why don't we have a weekend where everyone with goats just takes those goats to the nearest land that needs a ton of clearing? Public officials could put up maps of where on public lands grazing is needed, and where it definitely shouldn't happen. Farmers and people/groups with a lot of acres that need clearing can post Goat Requests.

Little kids can make goat-themed crafts and give the goats lots of pets or treats at the end of the day for doing such a good job. Volunteers can help wrangle things so goats don't get where they're not supposed to (and everyone fences off land nowadays anyway, mostly). And the goats, of course, would be in fucking banquet paradise.

Planting Festival and Harvest Festival

Why mess with success??? Bring these back where they've disappeared!!! Time to swarm the community gardens and help everyone near you with a farm make sure that all of their seeds are sown and none of the food goes to waste in the fields, decaying and unpicked.

And then set up distribution parts of the festival so all the extra food gets where it needs to be! Boxes of free lemons in front of your house because you have 80 goddamned lemons are great, but you know what else would be great? An organized effort to take that shit to food pantries (which SUPER rarely get fresh produce, because they can't hold anything perishable for long at all) and community/farmer's markets

Rain Capture Festival

The "water year" - how we track annual rainfall and precipitation - is offset from the regular calendar year because, like, that's just when water cycles through the ecosystems (e.g. meltwater). At least in the US, the water year is October 1st through September 30th of the next year, because October 1st is around when all the snowmelt from last year is gone, and a new cycle is starting as rain begins to fall again in earnest.

So why don't we all have a big barn raising equivalent every September to build rain capture infrastructure?

Team up with some neighbors to turn one of those little grass strips on the sidewalk into a rain-garden with fall-planting plants. Go down to your local church and help them install some gutters and rain barrels. Help deculvert rivers so they run through the dirt again, and make sure all the storm drains in your neighborhood are nice and clear.

Even better, all of this - ESPECIALLY the rain gardens - will also help a ton with flood control!

I'm so serious about how cool this could be, yall.

And people who can't or don't want to do physical stuff for any of these festivals could volunteer to watch children or cook food for the festival or whatever else might need to be done!

Parties afterward to celebrate all the good work done! Community building and direct local improvements to help protect ourselves from climate change!

The possibilities are literally endless, so not to sound like an influencer or some shit, but please DO comment or reply or put it in the notes if you have thoughts, esp on other things we could hold festivals like this for.

Canning festivals. "Dig your elderly neighbors out of the snow" festivals. Endangered species nesting count festival. Plant fruit trees on public land and parks festival. All of the things that I don't know anywhere near enough to think of. Especially in more niche or extreme ecosystems, there are so many possibilities that could do a lot of good

3K notes · View notes

mdccanon · 3 years ago

Note

The crosses in the set pictures of Wanda’s room don’t really mean anything anyway considering 1) we don’t know the significance of the crosses, how they got there, if they were in the room when she got it, if someone got her them as gifts, etc. and 2) the actual movie doesn’t even show the crosses when it pans over the entirety of her room and we never get any references to Wanda’s religion throughout the entire film.

Indeed.

Ultimately, they are giving her a generic background and it is okay to be peeved about that if you want, but not a single person has been able to say why a woman who's main ethnic group - Romani - IS primarily Christian should be portrayed as anything else because of a 1970s soap opera plot twist that her dad is Jewish.

It's just that simple. There are two groups of people miffed about Wanda Maximoff. People who want her to act more Romani, whatever that means, and people who want her to act more Jewish, whatever that means. And like all Left-leaning-yet-oddly-still-conservative issues, neither side is talking to each other and neither side is developing their ideas much deeper than a vague insistence that they are being persecuted. And since they don't have much in the actual story to use as evidence, they lean on the idea that they aren't being represented well if they can find ANY fan across the world who doesn't know or care that Wanda is a Romani-Jewish Eastern European witch. "I brought this up and other people in the audience told me to shut up and that's basically Feige's fault for empowering them."

1) Wanda was raised Romani. Which means should would be Christian. Jewish-siders, how offended can you be that her Romani upbringing is vaguely Christian?

2) Has Wanda ever been a devout Christian in the comics? If not and she's just a bargain-basement "Jesus is a cool guy, I guess" member of her community, Jewish-siders, how jealous can you feel about a person with no relationship with Elohim in either religion not being Jewish. She's nothing.

3) Has Magneto ever been a devout Jew in the comics? Has having a relationship with Elohim ever played into any of Magneto's most circulated comic stories? If you have spent your entire life loving Magneto's backstory and motivations and not once did that require him to be anything more than an angry secular Jew, why are you suddenly making a big deal out of the religious status of his daughter?

4) Once the soap opera plot twist of Magneto's paternity was ret-conned into the X-Men story, was Wanda ever portrayed as a devout Jew in the comics? Has having a relationship with Elohim ever played into any of Wanda's most circulated comic stories? If you have spent your entire life loving Wanda's raw power, anger and creativity and not once did that require her to be anything more than the long-lost daughter of an angry secular Jew, why are you suddenly making a big deal out of her religious status?

5) Since you NEED some kind of cultural/religious confirmation to be satisfied with her character, since YOU are asking for this, I am going to ask you again to justify and reconcile why a woman classically trained in Romani witchcraft is your ideal candidate for a devout Jewish woman. Daredevil and Luke Cage put in some intellectual labor to balance the desire for violence with the belief in God. Do your part. In a fantasy story that acknowledges the very existence of Satan and Wanda had two babies with him, why are you putting your foot down that the Scarlet Witch should be religiously Jewish?

6) Oh, don't think I forgot about you, Romani-side. Romani and Jewish-sides, do you know what nationalities are? Do you care? This MCU story is about how American missiles where dropped on Wanda's home in Sokovia. How other countries torn hers apart the first chance they got. She was an anti-American terrorist who was fighting for her country... And you keep going on and on about her ethnicity.

Now, don't get me wrong... I'm African-American. I know how it is. Black folks love to demand for empathy from every other ethnic group and then, when the doors are closed and they are sure no one is looking, they ask "Oh, 9/11 killed 3,000 people! ... How many were Black, though. OMG, that many Black people died!? This is a tragedy!" Everyone in America is playing the same "No, pity ME!" game. Now, even Black trans women are claiming cis Black women are "stealing their fashion trends" which is "tantamount to trans erasure and killing us." Now, people online are actually asking if more people buying weighted blankets is somehow harming neurodivergent people because its "cultural appropriation" because the benefit they provide shouldn't be shared with everyone (because neurodivergent people who complain about things like this secretly love thinking they are special and have special needs and that's why other people will never understand them) but the same people who say this also put pronouns in their profiles even when they are she/her and he/him because they want trans culture normalized because trans people are the opposite and don't like feeling marginalized. Right now, young Mexican people are driving themselves crazy one day demanding that Anglophones pay more attention to the Day of the Dead and the very next day freaking out when Anglophones show up in droves to the Day of the Dead because "this isn't for you." What did they think attention was going to mean? Oh, and right now, Black people are demanding that beautiful dark-skinned actresses and supermodels get as much attention and money as light-skinned girls, but then they are crying in despair that glamour media is a sex-driven industry and they literally are asking White men to find dark women attractive, which means that White men dating darker skinned women is becoming more acceptable, which means more dreaded biracial, light-skinned babies are being born. What did they THINK "more attention" was going to mean?

I dunno, people who complain that Wanda isn't Romani/Jewish enough, I dunno. We all hate each other, we don't actually like multiculturalism, we want attention and pity and praise from each other at all times, we think children's cartoons not reflecting our values is tantamount to a second Holocaust (I'm so tired of hearing that from people when they know they are losing the argument), and we are all living and dying by the idea that if you have a strong emotional reaction to something, it excuses you from taking a moment to remember what has been said many times, many ways:

Shit pours on everyone. It's an intersectional bitch, isn't it?

P.S.: Likewise, in Daredevil and Luke Cage, exploring how religion affects those characters involves a seldom discussed aspect that people who complain these things want to talk about: supporting characters & villains and conflicts with BOTH of these character types. The point of a religious character isn't to put their hands on their hips, take a deep breath and say, "Man, I love being Jewish." What religious-themed conflicts are you asking Wanda to have and how can they be satisfactory concluded with a LASER-blasting competition, commoditized into an action figure, and simplified into a LEGO action short?

#wandavision #wanda maximoff #scarlet witch #liberal logic #conservative logic

8 notes · View notes

flickeringart · 3 years ago

Text

Thinking and Feeling - What keeps you civilized?

In order to be able to live in a civilized manner, a person has to align with certain values and standards that enable behavior that doesn’t threaten, disturb or cause disruption in social interactions. The air signs in astrology represents the thinking function, the ability to formulate ideals and communicate with the environment. The air element is the function of deductive reasoning and it allows for a certain detachment from the emotional-physical reality. The thinking function allows us to interact with the world on an intangible level, through sublimating actual experience to conceptual reality. “Communication” is only possible when there’s separation present – where there’s a subject and an object present.

The air element is often referred to as the basis for “civilization”. It is uniquely human; it is what sets us apart from the animals. Without thinking, there are no ideas, no conceptual ideal to strive for. This is not to say that thinking on its own is productive – there needs to be a physical- emotional reality in order for thinking to have something to conceptualize of in the first place. As humans, we are only partly thinking creatures, and we can hardly be said be defined solely by our thoughts. Even though air dominant types might be more justified in basing their identity on their capacity to think and navigating conceptual reality, there is so much going on at a denser, subtler level, a feeling level that might or might not fit into pre-conceived conceptual framework, that might not be understood through concepts.

Thinking is undoubtedly powerful. In a “civilized” society the pen is mightier than the sword, if used skillfully. A lot can be done with a sharp intellect and a quick mind. However, thinking is not responsive, it is a conscious construction. Powerful emotion or overwhelming instinctual reactions are more organic and dynamic. People can hold values and ideals that are perfectly in line with civilized society, but it doesn’t mean that the instinct is ever “tamed” because it can’t be constructed. Thinking can’t hold emotion back and the thinking function can’t ever perfectly define or describe what is felt simply because emotion is subjective and not objective. No person can completely act and behave in accordance with ideas and ideals. Emotions prevent this from happening – they are immediate responses that are personal – not impersonal. This is why, on an intellectual level one can say, “it’s wrong to kill”, but it won’t prevent the person from affectively responding to a situation in a way that results in a killing. Reversely, on an intellectual level one can say, “I have to kill”, but it won’t prevent the emotions from moving in a different direction.

Does thinking really keep us civilized in a real sense then? It seems not; it only creates a façade of civilization, a light façade of connectivity and communion, a light façade of love that stems from detachment from actuality and idealization of potential. The intellectual ideal is impersonal, seemingly more pure than the ambiguous and powerfully primitive emotional response, but in a sense, also inhuman (superhuman?) and inorganic. The thinking function is indispensable, but it is shallow in its own way, less potent and less alive than emotion. Words only have true power in connection to emotion; on their own they are simply tools, empty and dead. Perhaps it is accurate to say that civilization cannot manifest without alignment of the soul and the mind. Thinking can’t control feeling and feeling can’t control thinking, inevitably one is operating separately from the other but they can align. Thinking and feeling are unable to reduce each other to nothing. Thinking doesn’t cancel out feeling and vice versa. Strong emotion might call for intellectual justification socially, yet, since thinking didn’t cause feeling in the first place (at least not consciously), one can only speculate as to what the emotion is or was in response to – why it was so intense and if it was reasonable and so on… In a sense, trying to conceptualize of emotion is like trying to conceptualize of life and it’s never productive because it won’t make the feeling nature be different than it is or prevent it from expressing itself.

Generally speaking, emotions don’t “fit in” socially and societally because they are strictly personal and untamed – often impossible to fit into a conceptual framework that everyone can understand and make sense of. There is no logic behind emotions because they are immediately experienced and are not part of some pre-conceived conceptual construct. In fact, many people find it insulting when others try to make sense of their reactions and responses, to make them fit into a neat intellectual-conceptual “box”. Emotions demands acceptance no matter what – they essentially reflects organic truth rather than conceptual truth. The feeling function is often devalued and deemed “less evolved”, but without it, we would lack deeper “personal truth”.

------

On a separate note, albeit connected to the text above,

Some claim that thought creates reality and emotional experience is a direct result of subconscious thought patterns and programming. I believe this is true in the sense that there’s a universal blueprint that is set up for us, however, I don’t think that thought creates reality in our own personal lives in the sense that we can separate ourselves from our personal blueprint (reflected by our birth chart) by “working on ourselves”. It is true that one can become more conscious of components and facets of the psyche, but it’s too presumptuous to believe that one could “change” the self for the better to fit a preferred mold. Some people seem to work well with the “law of attraction”, they are able to positively focus and manifest the personal reality they want. This ability is undoubtedly reflected in the birth chart of these people – optimism, a propensity to believe and receive effortlessly. Not everyone is set up that way, which is quite evident considering the struggles and hardships that people face, despite the effort to look on the bright side of life. Some charts are set up in order for the individual to experience pain and crises in order to discover something of value through the death and rebirth process. This is a valid path, although it might not seem blissful or peaceful in the least. For these types it is not realistic or rewarding to soar on the surface of life.

Take Esther Hicks for example, a famous channel, author and public speaker. She helps people to close the gap between their desires and the manifestation of them. She is channeling a “collective thought stream” (called Abraham) in her talks that is concerned with seeing humanity actualize its desires and dreams. Her chart, as shown below (from astrotheme.com) has a grand fire trine with Jupiter, Venus and Mars. This trine blesses her with a certain fundamental and natural faith in her own ability to receive what she wants from life. Her chart is not void of friction and trouble, but this grand trine has her back when the going gets tough. She would have a natural propensity for generosity and an “abundance mindset” as they call it.

The conjunction of Pluto-Saturn-Mars (all in retrograde which makes the energy experienced internally) in Leo points to a charged desire nature, a concentrated and powerful drive that is, for lack of a better word, ruthless and almost painful. As Mars is the fighter of the personality, this kind of configuration makes me think of an insatiable, prideful yet painfully contained fighter who can’t admit to any personal passions without feeling weakened, but at the same time can’t let go and has to have at all. It makes sense, that a person who helps people to get what they want through mental-emotional alignment would understand the pain and dissatisfaction caused by not being able to control life. The conjunction opposes Mercury, which is interesting since she writes and speaks for a living, or rather speaks for an autonomous “entity” of sorts. She lends her communicative ability to something other than herself. When she channels, she’s not in her Pluto-Saturn-Mars mode. Venus and Jupiter, the two benefics, and Uranus nicely support Mercury. She can convey ideas that are revolutionary and speak of happiness and abundance. It strikes me that when she speaks, she speaks to people with frustrated desires (Mercury opposite Pluto-Saturn-Mars) – it is as if she projects this cluster of energy and experiences it through her audience. I’m sure she avoids identifying with it and meets it through others that she encounters. The Pluto-Saturn-Mars conjunction is highly uncomfortable and the person would likely attempt to work around it in any way possible if the chart allows for it. In Esther’s case, she has a lot to lean on in order to avoid its harshness - the trine certainly helps and the Mercury opposition allows detachment. Nonetheless she meets it in her life because it’s part of her blueprint.

My point with all of this is to illustrate that certain “philosophies” and belief systems come easier to others because of the personal astrological setup and it being backed by experience in accordance with the planets. It always makes sense why a person thinks and feels a certain way from looking at the natal chart. Nobody’s wrong and nobody’s right, there’s only the chart and what it allows for and doesn’t allow for. I do believe that no one can act outside of his or her chart. All paths are ultimately valid from a universal perspective. Work with your own blueprint because that is the only way to live anyway.

18 notes · View notes

salvadorbonaparte · 4 months ago

Text

Something I mention in the tags that got lost here is that I am excluding certain visible professions that have a lot of power over people (eg. doctors, police, politicians, should have included lawyers and journalists) because we do see a lot of distrust (often justified). We do not see the same level of distrust, at least not in online circles, for a majority of professions.

People don't make the same kinds of posts and don't have the same level of distrust for let's say designers and film editors. When we see criticism of enshittification and the film industry, and even sometimes individual "bad" films, the criticism is not the same kind because there is an understanding of underlying factors and the many people involved in a creative process. I do not see posts distrusting ux designers or film editors personally for "hiding" or "changing" something.

"the parties who need your services have no or few resources to allow them to confirm that the work you're producing is in good faith and not done with a particular agenda in mind" this is true and important but I want to add that it is also true for a lot of professions. There is always a power dynamic, there is always a potential for someone having a hidden agenda. You can always end up being scammed or buying a bad product. But we also generally trust that the buildings we walk into are safe even if we don't know anything about architecture, we trust that the many people involved in making a product we buy know what they're doing, even if we don't really know anything about the process. We also know that when things go wrong, which happens in every industry, those are exceptions.

My main academic research concerns looking at the times when audiovisual translations are unfaithful, on purpose, for a variety of reasons. In Germany, this used to be really common, but it has become a rarity since the advent of the internet, dvd and streaming. I am interested in researching how important loyalty and fidelity are really to audiences in the future, especially in the context of German comedy dubs. However, I believe that the distrust for subs and dubs we see specifically on tumblr runs deeper than the power dynamics of translator and audience and invisibility of the translator, and is influenced by a deep misunderstanding of how translation works, the general level of anti-intellectualism found on this website, and probably also some level of entitlement you see in media consumption and social media.

The way people post about subtitles and dubs and other forms of translation on here makes it clear they think translators are inherently untrustworthy and unprofessional. I have rarely seen so much distrust and skepticism towards a profession as "invisible" as this

#I am not disagreeing I am Adding and Expanding my points #I simply think it's more than that

177 notes · View notes

aperfecttimeforscreaming · 5 years ago

Text

10 reasons why a poorly adjusted adult Dib is a Valid headcanon

1. Dib is/was a neglected child

Dib doesn’t have a parent that he can lean on and go talk to for advice, his father is frequently out of the picture and doesn’t give a shit about the thing that Dib cares about. Dib is actively encouraged by his neglectful father to give up on it, actually. I believe this would make Dibs stubborn streak really bitter and spiteful. Most people reading this are LGBTQ+, I assume I don’t need to explain how a fucked up an isolated upbringing, or being unable to be yourself around a parent, hurts you in the long run.

2. Dib is bullied for the things he is passionate about, and being bullied heavily colours your perception of other people

The world of Invader Zim is not kind, Dib is frequently harassed by his classmates/superiors/family for his outbursts/lectures/overall investigator shtick.

Now you might say “but, Screaming, wouldn’t Dib learn to tone it down as he got older?” and YEAH. Probably! But does that mean that he would just forgive all the people that made his life horrible before that point? Or who socially ostracized him for the things he’d done in the past? No. No one is under any obligation to forgive anyone who hurt them, and I think Dib wouldn’t even try to forgive someone he saw as intellectually inferior

3. Dib is a selfish rich kid

Dib is selfish. He wants to be the protector of earth- but he doesn’t do it for earths sake. He’s clearly doing it as a cry for attention/ a reason to eventually be vindicated for being spit on by his own kind. I don’t think he would have genuine empathy for other people. If he did have it, it’d have to be something he had to work really hard at. However, I don’t see Dib putting much effort into understanding other humans.

Dib is rich (probably). This one being more of a headcanon- in the series Dib wants for no material object, he wastes technology on his explorations like it’s something he can just pick up from the dollar store, his father is a world renowned scientist with access to crazy technology and the ears of world leaders. I think he’d feel entitled to one or two things

4. Gaz is not her brothers keeper.

She’s not responsible for his mental health, she’s not responsible for keeping him in line and “normal”. Most of the time she doesn’t want a damn thing to do with him. If we’re going by the standards of the IZ tv show, the only times that Gaz interfered with Dibs paranormal investigations were when Professor M. Was also involved. Either she wanted to see her dad and Dibs antics were getting in the way (forcing her to intervene), or she was directly ordered by their dad to keep Dib out of trouble. Sure, you could argue that she would beat the shit out of Dib for doing something she didn’t like- but that wouldn’t “fix” the mind of a very stubborn person. It might even make them dig their heels in even deeper out of spite and bitterness as a “fuck you I’m right you’re wrong”

Furthermore, as Gaz gets older she’s going to have her own life to worry about and might stop tolerating the way Prof. M uses her as a middle man to deal with his “poor insane son”. She’s under no obligation to fix any of the phases Dibs life might go through. If Dib was unpleasant enough, and Gaz had the resources to leave, I think she might just bail on him.

5. Dib is arrogant

He's gonna do what he thinks is the best course of action unless you physically stop him from doing so. He comes from a place of thinking that he is right, the opinion of anyone else is secondary. Dib will do “what needs to be done” for “the greater good”. Whatever he thinks that “good” is. He wants to play the white knight at any cost. He cannot be in the wrong, or that bravado towards being righteous in the end crumbles. I think Dib would subscribe to a “the ends justify the means” mentality

6. Dib would harm another person to get what he wanted

In a room with a moose, Dib debates letting himself die just to take his entire class down with him. In the unaired episode “return of Keef”, he co-operates with Zim in an attempt to make Keef explode, because he thinks Keef is irritating. Dib used Gaz to test out an ancient spell book, cursed Gaz to only taste pork, and then only helped fix the problem when threatened with physical violence. This could be the kind of thinking that gets worse over time as more people mock his attempts to save and protect them. Why care about people that don’t even give a shit if they live or die? Dib is a smart fringe personality in his world, and the otherness that he feels for that could lead to a sociopathic way of thinking if things went bad enough

7. Dib does not care about other peoples personal space

Dib hides cameras in Zims house. Dib ran right past the front gate at NASA Place, Dib chased a baby big foot up a radio tower. Dib bullied Zim physically on the playground using his known weaknesses against him. Dib would do anything to get the evidence he needed to prove what he wanted to prove, and that would get him in trouble. Repeatedly

8. Antisocial tendencies (like spending countless hours fused to a chair, or most of your young adult life spent hunched over a desk at a computer screen) make it difficult to smoothly socially integrate, and the world of Invader Zim is fuckin' mean

You know the world he comes from is mean. However, assuming Dib did find community somewhere, who’s to say they would agree with him? Or like him? Maybe one of them would cause problems for him that were bad enough he’d have to leave. I’ve always found that the IZ portrayal of earth to be like this funny cynical parody of a dystopian police state america. If we’re going by “what can go wrong will go wrong”, Dibs social integration wouldn’t get easier without a bunch of effort on Dibs part. Maybe Dib would have to pretend to be somebody unlike himself just to get by in his day to day adult life. If we see Dibs country of residence as a police state, the world Dib grows up in would encroach heavily on his personal privacy, and that might make him even stranger via paranoia

9. Sadistic tendencies towards anything paranormal (obsessed with the act of dominating and exposing the unknown)

Dib is a fucking jerk to Zim (rightfully so), but Dib is a dick to pretty much every supernatural thing he comes across. Either out of an excess of enthusiasm, or using a supernatural being to further his own plans, or from an invasion of privacy, or being an irritant to the entity he’s dealing with. He LIKES to be mean to them. He wishes to have mastery over knowing how they work. (maybe it’s more fair to say Dib is a voyeur?)

This is more headcanon than anything, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to say he might also want to control the paranormal for his own purposes. If Dib could say- catch a ghost in a jar so he could show it to everyone, he’d do it. If he could trick a werewolf into transforming on stage in front of a large audience? He’d do that.

10. Dib is created to be Zims equal

Dib is as “evil” as Zim is and vice versa. Neither of them is good, or pure, or morally justified. It’s a nice little grey dynamic. Both characters think they’re entirely in the right when they act. That they often aren’t in the right is fun because then you get to write/draw/ think about how they’d react to the consequences. Dib could still totally be a hero in his own mind, despite setting an apartment block on fire to flush out a coven of litches.

The reverse of this is also true, Zim can do nice things, and occasionally be good as Dib can be good. I figure the Zim/Dib dynamic changes for everyones interpretations at least somewhat. Having Zims terrible actions rub off on Dib as their battles escalate is a really fun way to go about exploring their relationship

11. I like the it

There is no right or wrong way to enjoy a cartoon character! Live to make yourself happy in fandom! If you ever thought you needed permission to create rancid content, I’m sorry you felt pressured not to do it.

You want to make a serial killer Dib?? You want to make a basement dwelling depressed zit covered Dib?? You want to make a Dib who struggles with his trauma through substance abuse?? Go HAM!!

#screaming//#this has been an announcement from one of many Nasty Dib supporters #Please feel free to comment #This is all theory #and none of it is intended as malicious

2K notes · View notes

amateurasstrologer · 5 years ago

Text

THE PLANETS #3 MERCURY (IN THE HOUSES)

Sweet Mercury. Our baby celestial, dying to be understood. There’s more to little Mercury than meets the eye, so listen up.

If you take only one thing away from this shit, let it be this: Mercury represents an internal process - where Mercury falls points towards where you’re using your brain. Bullshit Astrology will try to convince you that Mercury shows how you communicate and how you express yourself. Yes, but also no. Don’t succumb to this basic ass understanding, people!! Mercury is deeper than this - literally. Mercury gathers up the goods and sets up shop inside your mf brain. Yes, communication and your ability to small talk stem from your thought process, but all that shit is secondary. Stick to the primary source you little history babies.

The best way to think about Mercury is to think about Venus. These two are peas in a damn pod. Why? They’re both judgemental. But. While Venus is your typical mean girl, Mercury just sticks to the fucking facts.

For example, take this given: the sky is blue. Mercury looks at the situation and says: okay, the sky is blue, the sky is not green. Venus looks at the sky and says: I love the color blue, green is fucking ugly good thing the sky isn’t green. They’re both making a judgement call, but Mercury’s call is a purely objective understanding, and Venus’s is based on a personal preference. Mercury sits in your brain and helps you differentiate between this and that; Venus sits wherever tf she sits and helps you respond emotionally to shit that you value.

Put another way: why does Mercury rule Gemini and Virgo? Judgement calls. Gemini is all about you discovering yourself. The Mercury influence there helps you differentiate between “you” and “not you” - Gemini goes out and does all these things to figure out who it even is and Mercury is behind the curtain going, “yes, you hit on something real there,” and “no, that wasn’t really you bitch, drop the act.” Same shit is happening with Virgo. Virgo is all about self-improvement - we need Mercury behind the scenes, making the “yes, this will move us forward” or “no, this will set us back” decision or else we aren’t improving shit. A Mercury judgement is objective - it takes in all the facts and makes a call. It’s not personal, it’s all business.

Mercury represents how we understand the world, mentally. Mercury is the sweet little computer in our brain that’s taking stock and running metrics and not giving a fuck because there are no feelings involved in Mercury’s process. Mercury is black and white, yes and no, this and that. No in-between. The only time Mercury goes from “right on” to “completely wrong,” is when it trades in objective analysis for personal taste. Stop. Leave the feelings to Venus. Mercury works best when it’s calm, cool and collected.

As always, particulars for the party people:

MERCURY IN THE FIRST (1) YES: these sweet freaks are unleashing the beast on their inner life - every thing that has ever happened to them getting analyzed to the point of no return; they believe they’re different than everyone else and they are gonna prove it. NO: one day decided all facts were irrelevant and took up permanent residence inside their own mind, made it their job to feel intellectually superior to everyone else.

MERCURY IN THE SECOND (2) YES: these sweet freaks are testing out every belief system and mental approach ever used to solve a problem, choosing the most effective ones, and thinking their way through every challenge they come into contact with without even breaking a sweat. NO: fucking rude, totally intolerant of everyone around them, deep-throating Traditional Thinking & Outdated Values’ dick for no reason - get over it.

MERCURY IN THE THIRD (3) YES: these sweet freaks are seeing straight though your shit, because they can find patterns in everything. When they’re not fixing every problem in their vicinity with practical solutions they’re adjusting to their environment like a damn chameleon good Lord where are they are they even still here? NO: using their mega-rationality to justify gross behavior, taking zero responsibility for their actions, denial level 10000.

MERCURY IN THE FOURTH (4) YES: these sweet freaks are getting in touch with their values, and once they do look out because they will not deviate from what they feel is Right. These deep, creative minds are hot-wired to find connections between all people, places and things. NO: too scared to figure it out, falling back on thinking that’s culturally/ socially/ religiously narrow-minded, RIP to their sense of self.

MERCURY IN THE FIFTH (5) YES: these sweet freaks are getting their fucking feelings out and everyone is loving it. Their sweet little brains are made to create and they are ready to relate, no one can express themselves like these bitches. It’s just the truth. NO: can’t just have a regular fucking experience because they’re too busy thinking about how they’re gonna sell that shit later, overly self-conscious, stop it you’re doing way too much.

MERCURY IN THE SIXTH (6) YES: these sweet freaks are a whole new kinda leader - their brains are totally focused on dealing with personal changes and social issues, crystal clear thinking let’s these babies soar through emotional shit with clarity and an organized plan. NO: True Life: Living Without A Backbone, self-sabotage level 10000, lacking the inner-strength to look at their shit objectively - get it together dammit you should be fixing the world.

MERCURY IN THE SEVENTH (7) YES: these sweet freaks just have a really strong mental approach to life, they’re lookin at all kinds of shit without getting in their feelings about it, they’re out here chatting it up, down to participate in life and always open to learning from other people’s experiences. NO: took it way too far, fucked around and isolated themselves in a sweet mind prison, one day decided different viewpoints were useless and totally lost sight of reality.

MERCURY IN THE EIGHTH (8) YES: these sweet freaks fucking love relationships (of any kind, don’t have to be human-to-human) - their brains are locked in on seeing past surface level shit and into the core of their connections, working through relationship issues is their favorite pastime. NO: one day decided you weren’t trying to cooperate with them and got fucking ruthless on your ass and/or completely lack the sense of self to apply their resolution abilities, let everything go to shit, then blamed you for it.

MERCURY IN THE NINTH (9) YES: these sweet freaks worship clear thinking and objectivity, they’re fucking ready to plan and discuss their goals, your goals - all the goals all of the plans all of the values - these bitches are going to write about them, sing about them, whatever. It’s going to be real and it’s going to be good. NO: the most closed-minded to ever live, picked the wrong hill to die on, bleeding out over some shit they don’t even understand, lost in the sauce.

MERCURY IN THE TENTH (10) YES: these sweet freaks can focus (I mean, for real, they will not be deterred) and focus they will on solving complex social problems and adjusting to meet the intellectual needs of their crew. These babies are quick as a whip and got serious intellectual versatility. NO: second-guessing every decision they’ve ever made, zero accountability for their social position, completely emotionally repressed mess.

MERCURY IN THE ELEVENTH (11) YES: these sweet freaks got intellect and they are not afraid to use it (to work through all kinds of cultural issues), on the look out for other smarties to check out all those beautiful, imaginary-but-hopefully-not-for-long horizons and ponder progressive ideals with. NO: never focused a day in their life, acting clever laughing everything off but actually dying inside and refusing to do anything about it.

MERCURY IN THE TWELFTH (12) YES: these sweet freaks are flipping the script and revamping every outdated collective ideal that crosses their mind - a healthy level of seclusion let’s these babies speculate way out into the future, so that they can formulate fresh social attitudes and actions. NO: Academy Award for Victim of Their Own Self-Created Loneliness, "what’s the use” oh my God shut up already and just try to change. Just try it.

Happy Charting, bitches. Unleash your brains.

XO BULLSHIT FREE ASTROLOGY

#mercury #mercury in the houses #astrology #mercury astrology #the fast and emotionless

1K notes · View notes

cerastes · 4 years ago

Text

So let me tell you a bit about being into anime in Chile as an early 90s kid, because it’s always wild to remember it, as well as one of my favorite personal anecdotes.

Chile has always had a very active anime scene. Things like Dragon Ball are cultural here, everyone watched Captain Tsubasa and Slam Dunk, and if you were more interested, you could always catch Trigun, Space Adventure Cobra and Tenchi Muyo on TV at late time slots. You wanted to go deeper, though, you had to go to get subs.

Nowadays, you just go to your bitcoin farming website of preference like Kissanime and watch those there, or you use a service like Netflix or Crunchyroll. Back in the day, when the internet technically existed except not really, we had to get creative, and by that, I mean you had to go to the Persian marketplace (”el Persa”) or any given equivalent and find whoever did that shit with VHS. They had the more obscure stuff, sloppily subbed, but back then that was more than good enough, it was great, it was access to things we otherwise wouldn’t be able to consume, like Tenchi Muyo OVAs that didn’t get translated until much later, Kinnikuman’s later arcs, Gundam, the Jojo OVA, Detective Conan movies, all the good stuff.

But because this was a very For Fans By Fans thing, you weren’t guaranteed quality of service, and by that, I mean that sometimes, you’d go home with what you thought was a VHS with sloppily recorded Zeta Gundam, and it was in fact a video of a girl named Emily getting fucked hard in the ass by an honestly delightfully fit dude. They used to overwrite porn tapes for anime back in the day (which would be a really funny metaphor), but sometimes they forgot to actually overwrite them, so you’d go home thinking you had the latest in Detective Conan’s intellectual exploits but little did you know you had the Spinebusting Six Point Five Incher instead. Point is, the adventure was never over until you actually saw what the hell the VHS had in it.

Now, my anecdote relates directly to how I got into VOTOMS:

During the early stages on the internet, there was limited anime sharing, but we only had 56k modems back in the day, meaning the compression made anime look like ass (not Emily’s ass, though, which was admittedly pretty fine), and your subbed Pokemon episode download could and WOULD die any time anyone actually needed to use the phone, which was a lot because cellphones were just entering the Accessible Civilian Market. So, VHS and DVD sharing was still a pretty important part of it all... But I never thought it would work internationally. So, I was a young Dreamer back then, a baby, a child, actively posting in 4chan’s /m/ board because where else would I find fellow mecha enthusiasts back in the day? And one day, as I scrolled past the same old tired polar takes of Zeon and the Federation, I came across a particularly exceptional thread: Someone subbed VOTOMS in English.

Finally!

But they weren’t uploading for this or that reason, I don’t remember why exactly, but it was something to the effect of them living at their parents, it was essentially impossible due to hardware reasons and personal stuff, thing is, they still wanted to share the VOTOMS love, so they... They made a very bold proposal: “Send me your mail address at this email and I’ll mail you a copy, free of charge”.

Now, if you’re not a Neanderthal, red flags would immediately flare up and tell you to abort abort ABORT. But I was known for my powerful jaw, crushing incisors, and love for meat, so obviously I went and emailed them my home address. The mail was something like “[email protected]” or something. It couldn’t have been more suspicious. I saw nothing wrong with this, no doubt due to the touch of Midas corroding my mind’s better judgment and turning it into a solid gold plaque that reads “FINALLY, VOTOMS, THE LEGENDARY SUPERCLASSIC MY JAPANESE FRIEND TOLD ME ABOUT”.

So I tell my friends about this and they justifiably call me a god damn moron and to sleep with an eye open. It then dawned on me, oh god, I’m a moron, and I should sleep with an eye open.

So I spend the next few weeks nervous out of my mind until I just forget about it, which is how kids deal with stuff... Until my mom tells me I received correspondence.

Oh fuck.

Oh no.

The consequences of my actions.

I sheepishly took the package, opened it, and lo and behold, three VHS tapes. I pop one into the VCR expecting to see, I don’t fucking know, children getting chainsawed or Sadako pointing a shotgun at me, and instead, I get this:

youtube

And I just absolutely lose, abandon, relinquish, and bequeath every single last one of my fucking marbles, dude, it’s VOTOMS. I legit screamed! I was so happy I wasn’t going to get murdered in my sleep by the internet mafia or a psychopath I just gave my address to on the internet! And I also had VOTOMS now!

And that’s the story of how I was able to acquire VOTOMS as a child: By taking an enormous risk and being completely devoid of any and all intelligence. So I’m glad we can just go to morally dubious bitcoin miners for our anime now.

64 notes · View notes

currantlee · 2 years ago

Text

Okay. I said I'll never talk about this fucking game again because it's not worth it, but... Here we are, I guess. Now that Engage is finally out and we're hopefully about to leave the absolute MESS FE3H was behind feels like a good time to do this.

This post really got me thinking about everything I loathe about this game's writing. While I do enjoy some of the characters in FE3H a lot, I didn't enjoy the game at all, both because the gameplay somehow manages to be even more boring than in Echoes, and because the plot is... Well, you summed it up best, Vee. It refuses to commit to anything (except that Byleth can never be wrong), or just outright do what writing is all about: making decisions.

You know what? I'm just gonna let it all out and then hopefully I will never have to think of this mess again. This post is probably gonna contain a lot of sarcastic humor because otherwise I'm going to lose my mind. So let's start at the beginning.

Oh no! Not everyone likes FE3H ☹️ A Tragedy.

Surely we all will never find happiness again 🙄

TL;DR: Everything said in this post is my perspective on things, and if you have a different one, that's fine, but I do not wish to discuss. I simply wish to get my feelings about this game out. The plot is a mock giant, which means it's trying really hard to appear deeper and more meaningful than it actually is by adding a bunch of random stuff that doesn't need to be there and just ends up being confusing. Byleth is a bad protagonist and barely even a character, also a big part of most of the game's writing problems. Edelgard makes no sense no matter from which point of view you approach her. It's not even that she doesn't have a point, she can't have a point, and that's Byleth's fault. Fodlàn's reunification ultimately doesn't matter and makes the entire plot feel meaningless. The game has obvious quality issues. I think this is a very bad game and ruined the series for me.

... What?!? You're still here? That means you either don't like FE3H very much either, or you came for my hilariously bad, notoriously German attempts at comedy. I'm flattered!

Okay, but seriously, thank you so much for your interest 🙂 Now, without further ado, let's get into why I don't really like FE3H!

The Plot is a Mock Giant

Probably the third-biggest problem of this entire game, but the first-best starting point for this rant.

So, in the novel Jim Button and Luke the Engine Driver, the two titular protagonists travel through a desert, where they meet the giant Mr Tur Tur. At first, they are scared, but as they come closer to the giant, they realize that he is actually just a normal-sized man. Mr Tur Tur then explains that he is a Mock Giant, which means that he looks like a giant from the distance, but is actually of a normal size (which one can only see if they stand close to Mr Tur Tur).

Now, what does this have to do with the plot of Three Houses? Well, the term Mock Giant can also refer to something that tries to appear big, but is actually rather small in size - or something that tries to appear like it says / has to say a lot, but actually says very little.

Three Houses is not some special Snowflake when it comes to this, in fact, a lot of modern media have this problem. Today's audiences, specifically mainstream-fandom, tend to expect a "greater message" in stories - my theory is that this is mainly the result of feeling a need to justify why you like something, and a great way to do so is to say "see, this thing is actually really deep, so I am an intellectual" (overly simplified), because intellect is something most societies value. While this trend has IMO been dying down a bit lately - thank Masahiro Sakurai! - it has also led to a trend in media where the meaningfulness of the plot is blown out of proportion, both by the medium itself, and by its audience.

I think it is important to say at this point: no story has to comment on society, politics, current trends or things that are generally perceived as important at a point in time (although they certainly can). Stories are allowed to be raw displays of emotion, or just simply fun (which is what Fire Emblem was before Three Houses. It wasn't trying to be deep, it was trying to be fun, and often succeeded at both). They don't have less value because they aren't "deep". Plus, "depth" is very subjective anyway - something that might mean a lot to one person might not even be interesting to the next.

To go back to the comparison between Fates and Three Houses Vee and emblemxeno made in their postings, both plots have premises that can roughly be summed up in one sentence. I'm attempting to make this funny, so please bear with me.

Fates: Mad Dragon orchestrates war between two countries, and a young noble finds themselves caught inbetween the frontlines Three Houses: Former school professor's student takes her wank with the school too far and starts a war (to this day, I wonder whether that is somehow supposed to be a metaphor for fandom and shipwars), and the former school professor's reaction is helping their former students to reach their goals in said war

I will admit, I actually had a way harder time to do this with Three Houses, but that's not because the story is deep. It's because there is so much unrelated stuff to the core premise going on in this game. And admittedly also because I' don't like this game, so I tried'd be losing my mind over this game if I took it seriously, so I didn't. Hope that was at least funny.

Anyway, here is the thing: depth in a story is not achieved by adding random stuff onto the premise. It's achieved by interpreting said premise in a meaningful way. Fates does this to some degree by making family a core theme of the game, which is a good choice because not only does it explain why Corrin finds themself caught inbetween the frontlines, it's also something that is relatable to many people. Therefore, it makes the plot more approachable, thus creating the potential for personal meaning - which, as we've discussed previously, can lead to more perceived depth in the story.

Meanwhile, Three Houses adds a bunch of stuff to its already confusing premise (by which I mean, why does a former school professor of all people get involved in all of this?). Examples include the unnecessary Fodlàn lore that gets tweaked depending on the route you play and has no value to the plot at all, or the secret faction that is only there to fill in some plotholes and so they could have dubstep in the OST.

I generally hesitate to call writing "good" or "bad", because how writing is perceived is very much context-dependent. However, I will say this: it's confusing writing, and also incredibly inefficient. Whereas Fates' family-thematic explains certain things already set up in its premise and therefore adds to it, many of Three Houses' "addons" are mostly or completely unrelated to the premise and thus don't add anything (this applies to gameplay features too by the way. Most infamously the fishing mechanic). They are only there to make the story appear bigger than it is - in other words, to turn the game into a Mock Giant.

It's a shame, because honestly? Three Houses does have an interesting premise. As I said before, why is it a former teacher who gets caught up in the war? Had they focused more on that instead of Fodlàn's excessive lore and the dozens of side characters (which they actually somewhat tried with Silver Snow, but it wasn't executed very well IMO, especially in the full picture), they could have made a genuinely interesting game that actually has more depth than the final product does. Which actually leads me to my next problem.

Byleth isn't interesting. Byleth isn't a character. Byleth is always right. So anyway, let's talk about Byleth.

One of the reasons why they didn't give the aforementioned former school professor a bigger role, and why even Silver Snow focuses more on Rhea than on them is because, let's be honest, the former school professor, Byleth, is just not very interesting. They are barely even a character.

Look, I get that Byleth is supposed to be a stand-in for the player, but that applies to every single avatar in a videogame (note: an avatar is, by the definition of Benjamin Beil and Andreas Rauscher, a character controlled by the player. As long as a character is controlled by the player, they are the avatar. This is the definition I'm going by, and since it applies to Byleth for a majority of the game, I am referring to them as the (primary) avatar character). There are many beloved characters, and none of them draw their appeal from being a Wooden Plank™.

*sigh* Unfortunately, this is the point where I feel like I have to talk about the different design choices for male and female Byleth. While Maleth wears light armor, which makes sense for his profession (Byleth is a mercenary in the beginning of the game), Femleth wears rather revealing clothing (to the point her stomach is exposed), barely any armor and looks very delicate for someone who has grown up being a mercenary. Her face, compared to Maleth, also looks much more immature, with big eyes and delicate features. While I personally don't think there is anything wrong designing a character like her per se, I can't help but notice the huge difference in how differently those two are represented solely based on their designs. It looks like Maleth was designed to be taken seriously, whereas Femleth was designed to be fanservice. There is a lot of underlying sexism with this one, and I don't like that.

That is not to say your avatars can't have sex appeal at all by the way. However, if you make players choose a gender (IntSys, here is an idea: gender-neutral avatar. Now don't hire me because I don't wanna work for you), please don't make it so one of them (doesn't matter which one) is disproportionally more fanservicey than the other.

It should also be said that sex appeal is not what makes a character interesting. For example, Zagreus from Hades does have non-accidental sex appeal (to the point where the storyboard for the trailer blatantly says "Zagreus wipes the blood off his hair SEXILY"), but the reason why a lot of people enjoy him as a character is because he is snarky to the point of being rude, but at the same time compelling motives for his actions (which also makes him relatable to the audience) and genuinely cares about those around him.

And yes, I know that Byleth's lack of a personality is somewhat explained, however, that does not make it better. The existence of this explaination takes the ability to invent a personality for Byleth away from the audience, which makes the argument that this is what players are supposed to do collapse in and of itself. Ultimately, it leads to Byleth lacking everything that a character, especially a main character, needs: a personality, goals and motives.

The latter also leads to the next problem: Byleth is extremely passive, which is generally not a great trait for a main character, especially in a video game and especially if said character is the primary avatar (since the avatar is the tool the player uses to interact with the world). Safe for one choice at the beginning of the game (two if you choose the Black Eagles), Byleth doesn't really have any involvement in the plot. The plot happens at them, not because of them and their choices. Which is pretty lame for a game that attempts to center itself around choices.

Let me compare Byleth and Robin, the player standin from Awakening, for a second. Yes, the player's choices choices do not significantly impact the plot, safe for the ending and two additional characters. However, Robin still feels involved in the plot (to the point of being at the center of it) and despite the fact that player choices do not impact the plot, it still feels like Robin's choices do. Wanna know why? Because Robin is a character, and their choices do impact the plot, even if the player isn't the one making them. In fact, the game's narrative constantly stresses the importance of Robin's choices (for example, by making them the tactician the rest of the group depends on), all in order to lead up to that single, final player choice that does impact the plot. This makes Robin an active character. The plot doesn't happen at them, a significant portion happens the way it does due to Robin's choices, which, by the way, are not always great. The narrative allows Robin to make some bad choices, which in addition to Robin being an active character VS Byleth being a passive "character" makes the former infinitely more interesting than the latter, who can according to 3Hs narrative never make bad choices.

Which brings me to the next point: Byleth is, at least according to the narrative, always right. What I mean by that is that Byleth is always on the winning side of the war, and can, as mentioned, never make a bad choice. This actively dehumanizes the character and thus makes them even less relatable than they already are, which... Once again... Unrelatability is not a trait you strive for in a protagonist, simply because it alienates the audience (especially when that's the character they're going to play as for a majority of the game). On top of that, it leads to a whole lot of other writing problems, but more about that later. Ironically, the only route in which Byleth becomes human again is the one which, according to the devs, is an afterthought.

Compare this to Fates. Yes, I know, Corrin has few fans, however, one thing that no one can deny is that over the course of the games, Corrin reflects a lot on their one choice that impacts the narrative (especially in Conquest), and whether it was really the right one. They aren't the only one to do this either: several other characters bring this choice up over the course of the plot, often forcing Corrin, and by extension the player, to think about it again.

The closest thing we get to another character questioning Byleth's choice in 3H and thus making the player reflect, is Edelgard's death scene in Silver Snow and Verdant Wind, which is cut short by Byleth executing her. What message was that supposed to send, I wonder? "You don't need to reflect on your choices, so we're just gonna make that bad other character there shut up"?

Anyway, speaking of Edelgard...

Edelgard should "get [her] fucking ass up and work" (Kim Kardashian), but doesn't. The only logical conclusion is that Kim Kardashian doesn't like Edelgard very much, and neither do I, so here is why

Edelgard is undeniably integral to Three Houses' plot. After all, she is the one who starts the war at the center of its plot, which makes her the antagonist... Or does it?

In any other Fire Emblem game, heck in most other pieces of media in general, this action alone would outright make her an antagonist, simply because of story structure and how that term is defined. The character who is the cause of / starts a conflict is, per definition (!) the antagonist. In Three Houses however, it's not so simple because the devs wanted to make a route following her, and because Byleth can never be wrong, that means they just couldn't make Edelgard an antagonist, could they? So therefore, the devs went on to reinvent story structures entirely and... Nah, I'm just kidding, Edelgard is still an antagonist. But yes, you can become one of her followers (which is not a new concept either, but hey, you don't have to reinvent the wheel every time you write a story).

Anyway, because Byleth is always right and the devs didn't want anyone to feel bad, they attempted the next best thing: creating a sympathetic antagonist. This is by no means a new concept either, and some characters who fit this archetype have garnered significant popularity. However, in order for your antagonist to become sympathetic, you have to humanize them. Usually, this means showing them in everyday situations, in which they act... Well, not like a villain, but more like a normal person, and / or explaining their motives. For the latter to really work, your antagonist needs something very important: a point. In other words, they actually have to be right about something they are trying to change.

To be fair, Three Houses does attempt this with Edelgard, the problem is that it doesn't work for a multitude of reasons, at least in my opinion.

First of all, whenever the writers try to humanize her by showing her acting more like a normal person, they usually go overboard in my opinion. This ends up in the character feeling uncannily quirky or even histrionic - like she is playing up traits that she may or may not have, but thinks others won't believe she has unless she plays them up, which ultimately leads to the entire thing coming across as dishonest to me (note that I'm not talking about the writing here, but about the things Edelgard is telling us).

This even affects her backstory, which is used to explain her motivation. When I watch / read that support conversation, it doesn't read like a genuine display of vulnerability to me, but like she is trying to manipulate me. Edelgard, over the course of the plot, lies repeadedly, or constructs narratives that either make no sense or actively contradict themselves, so this would not be out of character for her. This assumption is also enforced by the voice acting, and since that is an area where the game really shines, I like to think that this is not an accident, but a choice. Furthermore, we get no confirmation of her story by any outside parties. We only get the story from her, and please consider that this is the same character who, at the end of Azure Moon, willingly turns herself into a monster only to keep her war going a little bit longer (instead of surrendering like she tells everyone else to). In my opinion, it would not be out of character for her to have undergone those experiments willingly, and twisting the story later in order to gain sympathy. However, the game never even hints at this possibility, so that is more of a headcanon.

What I want to get at though is: I do not believe Edelgard's backstory. If I'm supposed to believe it because it's true, then that's badly written. If I'm not supposed to believe it because it's untrue, then it's also badly written because it is never clarified that her story isn't true. And if I'm supposed to believe it despite it being untrue... Just why would you write something like that? *checks notes* Oh, right. Byleth is always right.

"But what about Lysithea?" The only thing that Lysithea's backstory confirms in regards to Edelgard is that it is possible to implant people with a second crest, but that the survival rate is low, and therefore Edelgard is one of the lucky few (which, coming to think of it, might have inflated her ego quite a little bit). Also that Edelgard did indeed have blood reconstruction sugery done (but not whether it was against her will or not). Nothing more, nothing less.

Secondly, because... Does Edelgard even have a point? In order to answer that question, lets look at her motivations.

Edelgard's stated motivation is that she wants to rid the world of Crests, which she blames for the existence of most suffering in Fodlàn. Now, remember what I said about the plot being a Mock Giant before? Yeah, this is also why. Crests are completely unrelated to the premise, and just another unnecessary thing added in order to add "depth" to the story, explain a gameplay mechanic that didn't need this much explaining in the first place (by extension, it didn't need to be a mechanic at all), and explain Edelgard's motivation. Therefore, Edelgard's motivation has no relation to the overall premise. Yes, Byleth and her have the same Crest, but that is the only tangential connection, and it is never expanded upon, which makes it feel disconnected again. To be fair, they try to connect Edelgard to Byleth more by having her do all her obsessive teenie crush stuff, but this doesn't work as connection because Edelgard's crush on Byleth is unrelated to her motivations.

There is also the thing that actions speak louder than words, and Edelgard's actions are not in line with her stated motivations. If she really wanted to get rid of crests, she wouldn't have to invade other countries to do so. She is an Empress, for goddamn sake! She can do all the reforms she wishes in Adrestia!! There is also her declaration of war, which hinges highly on a narrative that is contradicted at multiple points in the rest of the game - that the Church separated the Kingdom and the Alliance from the Empire, thus denying the other two countries their sovereignty (which is very similar to imperialist narratives in the real world). All of this suggests that her problem with Crests is only an excuse, and that her true motive is that she wants to expand her own power.

The narrative tries to solve this problem by having Edelgard blame the Church for the existence of Crests too. This however doesn't make sense for two reasons: firstly because the Church plays no role in Edelgard's alleged backstory, and instead it was the secret bad faction - the Slitherers - who experimented on her. However, the Slitherers are also Edelgard's allies. Yes, she does get rid of them after the war, but this doesn't contradict the assumption that her actual motivation is to expand her own power. In my opinion, it even reinforces it.

So, Edelgard's motivations only make sense if she is lying. Which brings me back to the question: does she have a point? With all that we have discussed up until now, no, she doesn't. Whatever point Edelgard might have about the Crests causing inequality in Fodlàn's society is diminished once you realize that her actions are not in line with this motivation, so her true motivation is likely something else.

This is not to say that Fodlàn is perfect before Edelgard's war by the way. It is only to say that Edelgard's motives do not make her sympathetic, because she ultimately does not have a point.

Thirdly, can she even have a point? After all, Byleth is always right, and apparently no one wanted players to feel bad when she gets killed in every route but Crimson Flower. So no, Edelgard not only doesn't have a point, she can't have a point. This problem affects Rhea and Dimitri too by the way, but I think Edelgard's case is the worst in the entire game (due to her narrative position as the antagonist).

This however manuevers the game's narrative into a dead end: on one hand, they want to give players the option to walk with Edelgard. However, because Byleth is always right and cannot be evil, that means Edelgard has to be sympathetic. But because Edelgard gets killed in every other route (by Byleth themselves in two of them), they can't let her have a point because Byleth is always right. Which is how we end up with Edelgard lying about her motivations, which, while not out of character for her, is confusing because the fact that she is lying is never exposed by the narrative (because if it was, it would make her unsympathetic and then Byleth would be wrong for following her and Byleth cannot be wrong, so go figure).

This isn't even going into how a lot of Edelgard's actions are considered inexcusable by a wide audience (including genocide), which means that ultimately, no arguments can be made in her favor. This doesn't necessarily exclude her from the sympathetic antagonist role though - take Xehanort from Kingdom Hearts as an example.

For those of you unfamiliar with the series, the central conflict is between darkness and light, however, the game stresses that those aren't polar opposites, but part of a greater balance. This balance is usually tapped in favor of the light, which is something Xehanort wants to fix (note that the necessary balance is something the heroes also strive for, so Xehanort does have a point). However, the way he attempts to do this is by wiping out the entire universe and everyone in it, only to recreate it in a balanced state (so essentially genocide). It should be noted that he employs a logic that is somewhat similar to Edelgard's in that he justifies his actions by saying that the strong should decide over the fate of the weak (implying that he thinks of himself as strong).

The reason why Xehanort, as opposed to Edelgard, works as a (somewhat) sympathetic antagonist and even protagonist of his own story (a.k.a. Kingdom Hearts: Dark Road) is because he is a fleshed out character with relatable struggles (e.g. having impossibly high expectations placed on him by the residents of Scala Ad Caelum), but also because his actions are always framed as wrong. For example, in order to further his goals, he experiments on two important characters of the series - Ventus and Kairi respectively - in the latter's case even when she is still basically a toddler. Not only are these experiments consistently portrayed as cruel, we also see the effects they have on those characters (especially the latter during her PTSD-episode in Melody of Memory). His logic is also challenged by Sora, the main protagonist of the series, at the end of Kingdom Hearts III, which not only makes for a satisfying conclusion, but also cements why Xehanort was wrong the entire time.

This does not happen with Edelgard. The game attempts to make her sympathetic, but fails at it due to the limbo we have already discussed, and it only frames her inexcusable actions accordingly whenever it benefits the main point of the narrative that Byleth is always right. Furthermore, we never really see the consequences of Edelgard's war, which makes it more difficult to perceive the impact of her actions, especially in Crimson Flower.

It should also not go unmentioned that another reason why Xehanort works whereas Edelgard doesn't is that Xehanort doesn't get to actually see his genocide-plans through. Meanwhile, Edelgard does so in the route where she is supposed to be sympathetic, and while this can be prevented by the player by letting Seteth and Flayn escape, doing so has zero impact on the plot.

The result is, unfortunately, a character that could have been the best antagonist Fire Emblem has ever written, but ultimately ends up being a character who has to fulfill the impossible task of contradicting the narrative while not contradicting the narrative. Edelgard doesn't work as a character no matter which angle you approach her from, because she can never fulfill her narrative function. Combine that with how much wasted potential she is, and you know why I do not like this character.

Speaking of the narrative, let's talk about unsatisfying conclusions.

Fodlàn gets reunited. So what?

At the end of each route Fodlàn gets reunited, and I get to say "yay" unenthusiastically because... Does it even matter?

Here is the thing: Fodlàn's reunion is not the goal of any of the important characters, except Edelgard, who, as we have established, is the game's antagonist. Ironically, this means that the only time that the game actually wants this to be a satisfying conclusion is when the antagonist wins, which is a really weird narrative choice especially with how it's framed (antagonist ultimately gets what she wants without having a point, Slitherers aren't dealt with, etc.), which ultimately makes it unsatisfying as well.

The other routes are just as bad in this regard though.

Let's start with Azure Moon. Dimitri is our designated protagonist because Byleth still isn't a character. Azure Moon mainly revolves around being Dimitri's Redemption Arc, so to speak. The goal of the story is for Dimitri to become a good king, and to take Faerghus back from the Empire. Uniting Fodlàn is not necessary to reach this goal. It makes sense to take Edelgard out in order to stop her attacks on Faerghus, yes, but apart from that, the plot needs to bend over backwards to even reach the point of reunification in this route - mainly by having Claude hand over the Alliance to Dimitri for absolutely no reason. Also, surely there were people to take over the Empire from Edelgard. I'd be very surprised if Hubert murdered all of them.

Verdant Wind makes a little bit more sense in this regard in that it at least explains why no other competent rulers are available: Dimitri has been killed offscreen and Faerghus is in chaos, Rhea had character development and wants to step down, Edelgard is dead to and yeah... I guess there are still people who could take over, but at least in this route the reunification makes somewhat sense. That doesn't mean it's satisfying though. Byleth, who is still barely a character, somehow becomes monarch of Fodlàn despite the fact that this was never set up, Claude returns to Almyra (which was also not set up) and just in general, the ending doesn't feel earned. At least it kinda relates to Claude's goal, which was to bring Fodlàn together (which makes his sudden choice to leave all the more disappointing and confusing), I suppose.

As for Silver Snow... What was even the goal of that one again? *checks notes* I guess it was to defeat Edelgard and free Rhea... But that happens in Chapter 18. Then they defeat the Slitherers and somehow Rhea is the endboss. So I guess Fodlàn is threat-free after that and maybe that was the overarching goal of the storyline. Again, uniting Fodlàn is technically not necessary in order to complete the narrative goal, however, it becomes necessary because all other leaders are gone (again, pretty sure they could just leave that in capable hands though. But no). Due to this, the reunification feels very forced, anticlimactic and unrewarding here as well.

All in all, this wouldn't even be a bad thing - if it weren't for Three Houses trying to make this reunification seem like this big deal that secretly everyone wanted, even though no one alluded to such a thing throughout the rest of the plot (except Edelgard, but we already talked about her). Ngl, I would have loved if Three Houses went for a "war is senseless"-message - because that is how all of this actually would have worked (plus, "war is terrible" was generally an underlying theme I could make out in previous entires to the series. Maybe that's just me though). But the game doesn't do that. Instead, it once more tries to make a big deal out of something that quite frankly isn't one, and on top tries to turn an honestly bitter occassion into a joyful one. Fuck you, game!

By the way, this is something another user (inquisitorjeeves) has touched on in another reblog of this post as well. I agree with many of their points, and think that they bring some genuinely good ideas on how to improve 3Hs writing in general on the table, so I encourage you to read that post as well.

Obvious Quality Issues

I'm gonna keep this brief, both because I'm tired and wanna stop talking about this game already. Luckily, I actually don't have too much to say about this, so lets just list everything apart from the bad writing, which I already addressed. Oh, and the gameplay, which is just fucking boring, but I'm not gonna get into that because otherwise we'll still be here tomorrow. Anyway, quality issues.

Silver Snow and Verdant Wind are basically the same story with only a few dialogues, the final boss, and additional minor story beats changed.

Crimson Flower is shorter than all the other routes, ends with an unresolved conflict that is then resolved offscreen, has no cutscenes apart from its ending and instead relies on CGs, and generally feels very much like the afterthought the developers admitted it is in an interview.

Speaking of CGs, many of them are underwhelming or just not very good. Like...

I'm sorry, but those illustrations are not only pretty low-effort (simple linearts, flat coloring with barely any shading, aggressive reuse of backgrounds or lack thereof, expressions or other facial details that are off, ...), they also aren't flattering. Nothing against the people who made them - they are clearly talented artists, but with a lack of time and budget. I mean, I probably couldn't do it better, but that doesn't mean they aren't terrible... Okay, screw that, even I could probably do better at this point! This is not the quality standard I expect from an AAA-title, please pay your artists better and give them more time, especially since those artists are clearly able to make impressive CGs with the appropriate resources:

(by the way, that one was DLC-exclusive. The DLC-CGs are a lot better than those of the basegame in general)

Edelgard is an alleged Daenerys Targaryen clone, yes that counts as a quality issue because I don't know where else to put it.

The cutscenes very in quality. Like, you can tell that some cutscenes were animated by different studios / teams, because some use the 3D models, while others use 2D animation (which is also varying in quality). This is not only jarring, it is disappointing considering that Fates and especially Awakening had great cutscenes, and Echoes wasn't bad at this either.

Speaking of animation, the animation in dialogue scenes is very low-quality. Every character has the same two or three expressions, which they repeat across the entire roster. While I don't have anything against support conversations and plot dialogue being minimalistic per se (as this has always been something Fire Emblem tended to be minimalistic about), it just doesn't look good at all as the animations are stiff and fail to express what they are meant to express.

Some cutscenes aren't well-placed and thus don't feel like they mark an important story element, instead they're trailer bait (I think we all know which ones I'm talking about).

You can't pet the cats at the monestary (okay, that one is purely subjective).

Conclusion: Byleth is (mostly) to Blame

In the end, a lot of bad narrative choices can be traced back to the treatment of the avatar character, which is in and of itself handled really badly. Storybeats that are supposed to add more depth ultimately make the story more shallow due to how random and unnecessary they are. I'm tired.

*sigh*

Fire Emblem was one of my favorite game series before Three Houses. It isn't anymore, and that is in large part due to Three Houses. Yes, the community played its part in why I didn't enjoy this entry as well, I'd be lying if I said that isn't the case. But Three Houses lacks absolutely everything I appreciated about Fire Emblem.

I hope Engage can revive my interest in the series, and bring back that spark I had when I first played Awakening as a teenager. It looks great so far! I like the art direction, I think the game looks like it'll go back to being about fun rather than forced "depth", and I do have hope. I'll definitely keep my eye on it, but I'm holding back on buying it for now.

That being said, this was my opinion on Three Houses, and honestly, I never want to talk about this game again. I would just like to forget it exists, and hopefully now that I've finally gotten my feelings about it out, I can do that. If you have read up until here and put up with my bad jokes (sorry, but if I hadn't put them there, I would have lost my mind) - sincerely, thank you❣️I hope you have an amazing day, and maybe I'll see you around.

Like alright, say what you will about Fates’s story. Love it or hate it, at least we all generally agree on what the fuck happened.

No one is still discussing 3H because the story is just that Deep™️ and Good™️ that there’s always something more to find. People are still discussing 3H because people fundamentally do not agree on key aspects of the plot. And I cannot stress this enough, that’s just bad writing.

Like, can you imagine if we went the entirety of Triangle Strategy without defining whether or not the Roselle were actually oppressed or not, and that plot point was left entirely up to “how oppressed do you want them to be?” The oppression of the Roselle is not only a major aspect of one main character’s arc, it’s also a key detail for the entire conflict of the game. You cannot remove it or alter it significantly without running into some severe writing problems.

Like picture with me, for a moment, a Triangle Strategy wherein, on Frederica’s route, you discover that the Roselle have been horrifically oppressed for hundreds of years and your goal is to break them out. However on Roland’s route, because they didn’t want you to feel too bad about liking Roland, they game said “actually the Roselle aren’t that oppressed and even if they were, enslaving them is a necessity, so Roland has a point, actually. Fredrica is just overreacting.” Not only do both of those viewpoints exist within the game, the developers do nothing to develop the Roselle outside of their one appearance in either ending.

That’s basically how 3H treats the Nabateans. Their genocide at the hands of humanity is not only a key plot point, it’s the entire basis of the main character’s existence. Without it, Byleth would not exist. It should be important. But actually utilizing that or engaging with the questions it brings up would make one of the lords look bad. So the Nabateans have to live in this awkward space where they’re clearly a genocided race, the game says as much, but the game can’t focus on that too much for fear of making their main waifu less marketable. So you have Verdant Wind “my family was slaughtered by humans who drank their blood and turned their bones into gruesome weapons. Everyone and everything I ever loved was taken from me and I’ve been fighting desperately to get it back ever since” right next to Crimson Flower “lol, she’s crazy and evil, whatever, just kill her because I think she needs to be stopped” right next to Azure Moon “Rhea who? Never heard of her.”

The game can’t ever commit to one thing with her because committing to one thing with her risks making another major character come off as fundamentally unappealing (or just plain stupid, depending on which version of Rhea/worldbuilding they commit to). And then just for extra lols, the game literally gives you a library with a bunch of Alternative Facts Worldbuilding and says “idk, just pick which version you like best.” If the game can’t even agree on the basic fundamentals of a character and lore, how are we supposed to? Which is why we keep having the same goddamn arguments over and over. Not because the game is deep, but because the game can’t commit.

#Currantlee here #Reblog #teaveetamer #Meta #Analysis #Rant #Humor #But the kind of “I'm so mad I gotta make jokes in order to not lose my fucking mind”-kind #Fire Emblem #FE3H #FE Meta #Byleth Eisner #Edelgard von Hresvelg #So; I don't like FE3H #Deal with it.#Please do not attempt to argue with me over this; I am not in for a discussion about this game. I don't like it. Period.

106 notes · View notes

arbenia · 4 years ago

Link

The other day on the BBC news I saw a young, educated and eloquent Serbian woman speaking about the life of ordinary citizens under the NATO bombing. The Serbian citizens are afraid, she said. Normal life is more and more difficult. There are power cuts, and people are forced to go several days without access to the Internet. There is also a cigarette shortage. But yes, they are trying to live normally. They go to work, they shop, and they sit in cafes. Of course, the bombing turned the Serbian citizens against NATO, not against Slobodan Milosevic. After all, “bombs are dropping from the sky.”

Clearly, this young woman, like so many Serbs, does not want to understand that her country is at war. They still seem to be thinking, What has all this to do with me? I know this mechanism of denial, because I have seen it before. Serbs by and large ignored the wars in Croatia and Bosnia. It was always happening somewhere else, to somebody else, and they were not involved. It was the Serbian army, the police, the paramilitaries, but not them, the ordinary citizens. But now, when it is happening in Serbia and affecting all of them, they are still somehow surprised.

The young woman on TV used the expression “Serbian citizens,” but her use of this phrase suggested that these Serbian citizens are people struggling to maintain the normality of their daily lives. By “Serbian citizens” she evidently meant only Serbs. Others–that is, Albanians–are simply never mentioned in that context. Their problems are not addressed, by her or other Serbs. In the perception of ordinary Serbs, Albanians are not included in the category of Serbian citizen and therefore are absent from the language as well.

Why? The problem is that Serbs–or anyone else, for that matter–cannot identify with the suffering of others if they are not able to see them as equals. In Yugoslav society Albanians were never visible. There was no need to construct their “otherness”–as, for example, with Jews in prewar Germany or recently with Serbs in Croatia. The Albanians were never integrated into the country’s social, political and cultural life. They existed separately from us, barely visible people on the margins of our society, with their strange language that nobody understood, their tribal organization, blood feuds, different habits and dress. They were always underdogs. What was their place in the Yugoslav literature, in movies and popular culture? What famous Yugoslavs were Albanians? Because of that estrangement, not many voices were raised in protest during the past ten years, when Albanians in Kosovo lived practically under apartheid.

For the older generation, the only visible Albanians were people in white caps coming from Kosovo to their cities to cut wood in the winter. For my generation they were people selling ice cream all over Yugoslavia. They spoke our language with a funny accent and never could pronounce “lemonade” properly. They lived among us, but we chose to ignore them. If we did happen to notice them, we despised them, laughed at them, told jokes about them. I never had an Albanian friend in Zagreb. No one I knew married an Albanian. But the difference between Croats and Serbs was that Croats did not really have to deal with the Albanians; we had no Kosovo.

It was clear that they belonged to a different category from Serbs, Croats, Macedonians, Montenegrins or Slovenes. Serbs could even fight a war against Croats, but they never perceived each other in the same way they both perceive Albanians. The prejudice against Albanians can be compared to that against Jews or blacks or Gypsies in other cultures. Today every Serb will tell you that Albanians multiply like rabbits–that this is their secret weapon in the war they are waging against Serbs in Kosovo. This is not nationalism; this is more or less hidden racism.

The woman on the BBC the other day may be only an ordinary person, but there are other Serbs who should know better and who can’t use the excuse of innocence so easily. They are the people in the opposition. But all one hears from them is their lament about the destruction of democracy and civil society in Serbia. The NATO bombing is to them a savage attack, a terrible act of aggression against a sovereign state–they all use the language of Milosevic’s propaganda. There is “the other Serbia” they say, a better Serbia of the brave people who fought Milosevic all along.

Surely there is another Serbia that will surface once Milosevic is gone. And surely everyone can understand that opposition people are afraid now. One is tempted, however, to ask, Exactly what opposition, what civil society, what “other Serbia” are we talking about? The one that for more than a decade was not able to produce a democratic alternative to Milosevic? The one that never established contacts with Albanians from Kosovo in order to work together for the common future of both nations? If the opposition, political as well as intellectual, ever had anything in common with Milosevic, it was in its attitude toward Kosovo. Kosovo Albanians were a litmus test for the opposition all these years, and they always failed it. Now they are engulfed in self-pity.

An open letter from Vladimir Arsenijevic, a young Serbian writer of some renown, circulating on e-mail, is a striking example of this invisibility of Albanians. In his answer to a friend from Zagreb, who reproached Serbs for their lack of remorse over the situation of the Albanians, he wrote: “On account of lack of pity for the fate of Kosovo Albanians, I know (from my own experience–and I know that I have no bad feelings whatsoever directed toward anybody, least of all Albanians) that it is very hard to care about somebody else’s problems if you are personally experiencing major problems of your own at the same moment. There is no favoritism in this society. Everybody is too busy surviving here to be able to feel any remorse…. Remorse is a privilege of the well-nourished, clean and civilized. And we are all Albanians here. All of us: Serbs, Montenegrins, Hungarians, Slovaks…. Poor, underfed, degraded, oppressed. And I mean ALL of us, even those who have supported Milosevic with all their heart through all these years of terrible hell.”

There is something almost obscene in this sudden “visibility” of Albanians, in the Serbs’ desire to achieve the status of victim through this kind of identification. Albanians remain an abstraction, an empty notion with no real substance, used solely as a means of adding visibility to Serbian suffering, thus denying the Albanian identity once more. I can see this young writer sitting at his computer (there must have been no shortage of power then) in his Belgrade apartment: He sends his e-mail letter, checks the latest war information on the Internet and goes to bed. Meanwhile, his Albanian counterpart, with whose suffering he identifies so much, sits in a tent somewhere in Albania or stands in the mud, waiting to cross the Macedonian border. His house is burned down, his computer–if he ever had one–has been taken by Serbian paramilitaries and he doesn’t know where his family is.

If the young writer considers himself an Albanian, why is he not fleeing to Macedonia or Albania as well? How cynical–or young or innocent or perhaps stupid–do you have to be to say that? It is as grotesque as if the Germans, after World War II, had said, “We were all Jews.” After all, had they not suffered occupation, bombardment, rationing?

The writer means to say that if the Serbs are victims, then how can they possibly have anything to do with the responsibility for this war? Or for the Milosevic regime? War goes deeper than bombardment, and the more we pretend it doesn’t concern us, the more it invades us. War is destructive of the human soul. It corrodes human beings, bringing out things we didn’t know about ourselves. And when he says that remorse is a privilege of civilized people, he puts himself and his nation on the level of people without pity. He is justifying the inhumanity of his people, and that is terrible.

This is what the war is doing to the young writer. But like the woman on the BBC, as well as ordinary people and opposition intellectuals, he is not able to realize that. Precisely this denial, blindness, unconscious racism and cruelty toward other human beings, this lack of remorse (but no lack of self-pity!), is what war is doing to Serbs, and it is much more devastating than NATO bombs. Living with Milosevic’s regime and the war for so long takes its toll. It has changed Serbs in the past ten years, and the rest of the world is witnessing this only now, still puzzled and bewildered by it. It is hard to understand that our acquaintances, our lovers, drinking buddies, philosophers, our once dear friends, are different people. It is even harder to understand that they themselves let that change happen.

`(Slavenka Drakulic, a Croatian-born author, is a Nation contributing editor. Her latest book is A Guided Tour Through the Museum of Communism.)

#albanian #kosovo #kosova #Yugoslavia #Serbia #balkans #balkan

62 notes · View notes

thepursuitofunderstanding · 3 years ago

Text

February 9/2021

I listening to Jordan Peterson yesterday and he was talking about how one has to find some sort of meaning that justifies the suffering of the world; something that allows one to behold earthquakes, cancer, the inevitable death of everyone and the possible explosion of the sun, and say, with eyes wide open, it’s all worth it.

This was an idea that I could intellectually apprehend the last time that I was intensely listening to him, but now I seem to also understand it in an embodied sort of way. Which is a deeper, more intimate sort of understanding, for it requires one to act out one’s understanding instead of merely interacting with it in a calculating and impersonal manner. I get this idea in a way now that I just wasn’t able to before. I had been on the outside looking in then, now I’m living it. Thus, I may well have to take a deep dive back into Peterson’s thought and see what else I can inhabit in a new way. Because it seems that ever since I seriously started to devote myself to my work, I have been able to interact with ideas in a way that I hadn’t even known was possible before. I seem to be pushing the boundaries of my capacity farther than I’ve ever done before. Oh how exciting it is!

Certainly I’d caught glimpses of this potentiality of mine before: questions asked in my classes that were maybe above the caliber asked by my fellow students, or the fact that some of my most intelligent professors seemed quite content to just sit and talk with me for hours on end. There have been indications of.... what exactly? My capacity to interact with ideas with a creativity and to a depth that is unusual? If I may say such a thing of myself... Damn, I think that this capacity might be something that I’ve been dancing around for awhile here now, but always too reluctant to name. For, once named, it exists, it’s real. And once it’s real like that, it can be proven wrong. Which is perhaps my greatest fear--discovering that I’m not as capable and insightful as I might think myself to be. For, my belief in this capacity of mine to probe, to wander and explore, is what my identity is built upon. It is my very foundation, the grounding of my Being. And it’s hard to know, as I’m so close to myself, whether there’s actually anything to this belief in myself. That is, in comparison to others, are my capacities unique? Because I know that this is what it will come down to: all the working in the world won’t matter if I haven’t got that something to distinguish my work, you know?

No matter what my talent level might be, another circumstance that is manifesting out of my increased focus in my work is that I’m feeling myself become the person that I always wanted to be. It’s like I always knew that this person was here, that I could sense the potentiality within myself, I just never dared believe that such a person might ever actually come out for any extended length of time. I figured that the best I would ever get were glimpses every now and again, glimpses of what I could be. It seemed like too much to hope for that I might live this person every day. I mean, on the one hand, I’m the same person that I’ve always been, but I’m also not, you know? I used to be so hesitant, anxious, tense and scared. And of course, that’s all still there, but it’s now massively overshadowed by all that has grown up in the presence of my work. It seems that only through the process of my work has my potentiality been able to materialize into actuality.

Now, this is where it gets a bit complicated, because I have this sense, which of course I can’t explain, that my work is somehow tied up with my experience of God/divinity. And if explaining that weren’t hard enough, I also have to contend with the fact that I still have no idea what I mean when I say “God” or “divinity.” I think that these topics are vastly more nuanced than our modern cynical world seems to think. In our present context, I think that there’s something to be said for Kierkegaard’s idea that with God all things are possible. Although I’m obviously still very fuzzy about all the implications and connections brought forth by positing such.

To flesh this idea out a bit, Peterson says that gratitude towards God is something that characterizes Abel... I might have to go back and listen to that segment again, I was admittedly very stoned the first time. But, alas, I do seem to be experiencing a gratitude now that I never knew was possible before: with God all things are possible. And think! It’s only just begun! Perhaps I’ll be lucky enough to get many more years of this. It’s almost too good to even think about. How truly glorious life can be... Although, it can also be wretched beyond comprehension as well; it can be pure hell. And perhaps it is the fact of that great variation that gives life any meaning in the first place. For, it can always be other than it is. Thus the gratitude. Thus also, it seems, the need for sacrifice. As I wander farther down this path of mine I discover how much is and will be demanded of me, everything really. It’s okay though, because I’m nothing without God/my defining commitment/my work anyways. I’ll give Him/it my last breath if that’s what it takes. Because I understand that I wouldn’t have any reason to be alive in the first place if it weren’t for Him/it.

Alas, should we attempt to pursue what I mean when I say that I (or anyone) is walking with God? I think so. I’ll start by saying that this is a concept that I have adapted from Peterson. It’s not yet entirely clear to me if my conception of it is the same (or how similar) to his conception. In my mind, walking with God is to consciously focus oneself wholly upon one’s defining commitment. Because, it is now becoming apparent to me that I take God to be synonymous with one’s defining commitment and the highest good that one can conceive of. For God is that which illuminates one’s Being and makes all things possible. And it seems to me that this is exactly the effect that a defining commitment has on one’s life. That is, this is the effect when one leaps into/towards this defining commitment as Abraham did, we can’t forget that part. Because there are no halfway movements when it comes to one’s defining commitment. (Since we now understand that when I say “defining commitment” I mean: the meaning of one’s existence; one’s ultimate aim; --God--, I shall from here on out say “God” and take this to mean all the above mentioned simultaneously.) It is all or nothing. And nothing, I have come to understand, is to become Cain: to come to despise Being itself and seek to take revenge upon it. Hell, in other words. Or rather, a self-created Hell.

Thus, to walk with God is to bow down to God and recognize that one would sacrifice everything if God were to ask it of one. Perhaps even if God doesn’t ask it of one. For God is everything. To walk with God is to recognize this with every fiber of one’s Being... I think that I need to flesh this out more but I don’t have the capacity to articulate it yet. Alas, one day.

#february #journal entry

0 notes

sssyzygy1 · 4 years ago

Text

His: new shamy fanfic

He had never liked to be touched. As long as he could remember- which was nearly every day of his entire life as he has an eidetic memory- he had been uncomfortable with others around him. His best friends knew not to even casually suggest a high-five. He avoided handshakes unless absolutely necessary for professional reasons alone. Even when his family would hug him, save his mother and Meemaw, he could barely tolerate it. Just the brief notion of intimacy in any form made his brow and lips wrinkle in distaste.

He has never really been concerned as to why it bothered him to be touched. He never wondered if his germ phobia was the root cause or if it was something deeper and further ingrained into his makeup. It didn’t matter why, not really, and any rambling of thought in that direction was, in fact, wasted thought that could, instead, be devoted to unraveling the mysteries of the universe. No one, and nothing, had ever tempted him to reconsider his decision to avoid human contact. It didn’t reason that he should be uncomfortable just for convention.

But then something happened he did not expect: an experiment of sorts, as it were.

His well-disciplined, well-ordered, and well-controlled world simply slipped on its perfectly balanced axis. Her hand had reached out so very casually, so very slowly and deliberately. Gentle fingers ensconced his, and something monumental shifted. The soft heat lit up his world like a bomb of sensation. He expected to recoil, but instead he found his eyes closing involuntarily- just for the barest of seconds. Color exploded. When he was able to regain any semblance of thought, he sought her face, looking for some answer, some clue, as to why his brain- never quiet- had ceased to function. Warmth, and something more he could not name, spread through each nerve-ending. He felt electrified.

She was so much more than he ever imagined her to be. As such, he was more than happy to be her experiment.

Other women had touched him, of course. He was brilliant, and with his bold azure eyes and dark hair, he was, as they say, a catch. He did not underplay his attractiveness and never felt insecure in that regard. However, he felt no need to riddle his life with the baser urges that ruled the majority of his friends and colleagues.

He had, on occasion, found himself the victim of, well, assault, as it were. Women had casually touched him: his arm, his hands, his feet. He had been hugged more often than he would prefer, by women and by men alike. A woman- drunk, though hardly an excuse!-had kissed him full on the lips. Yes, he cringed each time. He had recoiled from them all in horror. His eyes would spring open in terror and revulsion and he would try to drown out the panic and step away. Yes, each experience had been nothing short of hellacious.

But with her, he stayed in the moment. Instead of fear and mindless panic, he voluntarily held on just a bit longer, almost enjoying the feeling. Reaching for the light and heat and yes, that something more, he accepted all that she had to give. What was this little extra shiver? Could it be love? So soon? So unexpectedly? No, no he didn’t believe in love. Love was just a social construct, or a psychological tool to justify the act of coitus. No, he was simply in awe of her beautiful mind. He wasn’t attracted to her beautiful face. That was illogical on such a short acquaintance.

He slid those thoughts aside as she let go of his hand. “Nothing, never-mind,” she had said. Nothing? How could that myriad of feelings be nothing?! Maybe for her that had all been average? He had so little experience with emotions, perhaps those sensations were commonplace. Or, perhaps she truly was truly unmoved. She was logical. Maybe she had greater control on her physiological responses than he did? That seemed impossible. Ultimately, it didn’t matter. This was all probably the results of happenstance anyway. He was happy to keep living his ordered existence. Their relationship could return to a safe, comfortable affinity. They were friends and there was no need to complicate matters.

She was his only intellectual equal. This was true and real. He had spent his life in pursuit of knowledge, and had wandered for many years, alone in that pursuit. An intellectual companion perhaps? Yes, this was more than enough. He left those silly memories and his hindbrain feelings outside on that sidewalk. Their continued association would excite and challenge them. She was integral to his happiness, this he already knew, but he need not admit such a weakness.

xxxxxx

There it was again, that perplexing tingle in each cell: radiating, penetrating each extremity. The source? Her lips: soft, supple, delicate upon his own. And again, his eyes closed. And there was that kaleidoscope of color, echoing the deep hues of his heart. He should pull away. Shouldn’t he pull away? What was this feeling? Not fear. Not the common, expected revulsion. No. This was a yet unnamed emotion. Could this be desire? He was entranced. He was unable and unwilling to pull away. No, instead he shifted forward, just barely, in an attempt to prolong this temporary and temporal euphoria. His body urged him to demand more, to feel more, to take more, to want more, to need more. He welcomed the storm. And then she was gone again. Fascinating.

Late that night, as sleep eluded him, he relived each second. Like the atoms and equations he moved with his mind, the scenes and reels of the evening played like a movie, in perfect clarity. Each breath, the taste of cherry vodka, the hinting smell of lavender, and that feel of her lips…. The ethereal evanescence was his alone to linger over in the deepest recesses of his mind. He felt something click into place deep within: He could envision himself laid bare and naked, kneeling, his heart bleeding and beating in his raised hands; an offering of all that he was, is, and ever will be.

But when morning came, alas, no: he could not revel in this longing. He could not embrace her with everything he was- not now- certainly not when her memory failed to recall anything more than a brief recollection of their time together. He placed this deep need high upon a shelf. He would not share himself with her, not then, not ever. He could barely believe the power she had over his thoughts. He could not continue this charade. This was no who he was! He was no hippy, he was a man of science! He would reset that moment, both to save her the uncomfortable embarrassment and to save him the acknowledgment that something -something that shook him as hard as an earthquake - could be forgotten and lost in a haze of alcohol. He pretended not to feel that slight ache within his chest. Their relationship of the mind was enough. It had to be enough. He never needed anyone.

xxxxxxx

Why did she care what those troglodytes did? Penny and Bernadette clearly had no taste if they purposefully left this mesmerizing, perfect creature behind. Her opinion and knowledge were certainly more valuable than theirs! He was outraged. Each would get a strike! How could they have hurt her? She was so superior in every way. Why did she feel so inferior when she was the very center of his world? She sat before him, devastated by their carelessness. He could see the evidence of her desolation on her reddened cheeks as easily as he could see the sorrow in her downcast eyes. He wanted to reach out and catch the lone tear left clinging to her dark eyelash.

She was saying something? What was that? She was proposing what? Concentrate for heaven’s sake! Contact? Human contact for comfort? Kissing? Uh-oh: no more kissing! He could barely keep himself from dwelling on that last kiss. No, he could not permit another kiss to short circuit his finest commodity. That instance was still interrupting his work! Love-making? But they weren’t married! Not even dating! He couldn’t make love to her! Could he? No, no, no. What’s this? Cuddling? That would be acceptable. It couldn’t be as dangerous as the other options. He adjusted himself into the couch cushion. She slipped into his arms. Had he said this was safe? He couldn’t have been more wrong.

He immediately became overwhelmed with heat and need. He held her, gently. Her body lay against his. He could feel each curve sit snuggly against his side. Instead of savoring the feel of her, he concentrated instead on simply breathing. He felt lightheaded and slightly dizzy. He had to ignore the overwhelming desire to nuzzle her hair. The scent of lavender invaded his senses. He felt his eyes drift close of their own accord… Again. It’s almost as if he closed his eyes to enhance the moment and sear it into his memory. He was a prisoner to her desires, and yes, to his own desires as well.

He would admonish Howard and Leonard. They could not allow their women to hurt his woman. His woman? No, that was not correct. She didn’t belong to him, even if deep down, he wanted her, most desperately. More, he wanted to be hers. Part of him wondered briefly if he didn’t already belong to her. After all, wasn’t his life greatly improved by her mere presence? With her, he was accepted. With her, his heart was safe. With her, his body came alive. That was all fact. He could not deny fact. Could he?

xxxxxx

What is this ? What is happening? Illogical! Irrational ! She accepted a date with Stuart?! Not once, but twice? Why? For what purpose? Surely her needs could not be met with his inferiority? Sharing a latte? He rolled his eyes at the mere thought of such a cloyingly unconventional, unoriginal date. Stuart did not deserve her: not her intellect, not her gleaming emerald eyes, not her sassy, devilish, cheeky smile. No, she was everything, and Stuart was nothing. She was not for him!

She couldn’t be with anyone like Stuart. She couldn’t be with anyone else at all! She was his vixen! Only him! She must be his! A decision once made was like a bullet shot from a gun. His feet moved of their own accord. He would declare himself. He stormed into the darkened theater to lay claim to what his heart has known from that first moment: she was his everything. She was his love, his one and only. Love, the deepest and most abiding love did exist after all. This, too, was fact. And that love existed in her. He knew it then, as sure as he knew the 1000th place of Pi. As the knowledge grew and expanded inside him, he offered her his partnership, he offered her himself, fully and without reserve. There it was, that bleeding heart, tossed at her feet. Terrified, he asked her to be his and his alone.

At her simple response, her acceptance of all that he was, his eyes lightly closed, but his heart saw and felt everything. She was his.

His Amy, always.

#shamy fanfic #shamy #fan fic shamy #sheldon x amy #so many feels #review #be kind #first fanfic

30 notes · View notes

hellzyeahwebwielingessays · 5 years ago

Text

Superior is INDEFENCIBLE Part 2: Odds and Ends

Part 1

As a little follow up to this post I want to wrap up some defences I have encountered for both Superior #2 and the Superior storyline in general.

To start with we have more hypocrisy from the man I once admired as he tried to defend his position on Superior.

He was challenged on his primary argument that Peter and MJ’s separation justified her obliviousness now that they are back together; for further details see the above linked post.

In response to this challenge he said:

“I think there is more to my argument then "They've lived apart for a year" and her relationship with him during that time doesn't have to hold relevance to their relationship after being apart.”

Like…this guy was for fucking real.

OF COURSE their relationship back then is going to hold relevance to their relationship after being apart.

Obviously with the benefit of hindsight Nick Spencer’s run proves this to be the case. And you can refer back to my prior post where I dive deeper into the topic.

However, in that post I was talking about the specific nuances of Peter and MJ’s relationship.

What’s mind boggling is that in the above quote he’s making an even bigger reach. Jesus Christ OF COURSE their past relationship is going to hold relevance for their then-current one.

That’s how relationships work!

FFS, romantic or otherwise everyone’s relationship with everyon else is shaped by the past. This is like arguing Peter hating Norman for killing Gwen Stacy doesn’t have to be relevant to their relationship after his return to the Clone Saga.

I mean shit dude, Peter’s high school romance with Betty Brant was relevant to their romance after he graduated college!

This is how all types of relationships work. You don’t just jump in after awhile, start fresh and then nothing from the past has any bearing on the present. Even in the most positive of scenarios the fact that you are getting together again would still be shaped by the fact that you liked each other in the first place.

And for the life experiences those two shared that’d go a thousand fold.

Now let’s move on to some over miscellaneous comments sent to me a looooooooooooong time ago.

I’ve had this stuff in my drafts for years!

For the sake of catharsis I’ve decided to clear it out. It revolves around Superior Spider-Man and the comments I’m responding to were made before the original volume ended in 2014.

“Rob Wrecks wrote:Why would Aunt May even react to it? She doesn't even know the identity of Spidey now.”

In Civil War she was able to tell that the Chameleon, a MASTER of disguise who was being more subtle than Otto was, was not her nephew.

Whilst she might not know he is Spider-Man she knows her nephew so she should react and become questionable regarding his change in demeanor and behavior. What’s the old saying ‘A mother always knows’.

“As for MJ, they aren't even married anymore either. Sure she remembers who is under the mask. But I doubt she's gonna bring trouble on herself for prying.”

I address a lot of this in this post.

Basically, not being married anymore has nothing to do with it. This woman lived with this man for years (five to be precise) and had a very close relationship with him which involved countless tragedies and traumas. That doesn’t just go away. This is to say nothing of the fact that she has known this man for about 10 years and has been his friend and girlfriend during that time. In fact in Stern’s run when she knew who he was but didn’t let him know, she was depicted as knowing him better than anyone and was able to read him as a book. This was back when they weren’t as close as they are now, hadn’t known each other for as long and she didn’t know him as intimately as she would later come to down the road. In ASM #290 Peter himself says MJ knows him as well as he knows himself and this was before the marriage.

Even in Slott’s run this depiction of Mary Jane knowing Peter better than anyone else was highlighted in various stories like Spider Island, a time travel arc, Alpha, and a Lizard arc at HORIZON labs.

In JMS’ run Peter and Mary Jane were shown to be somewhat in synch even though they were separated at the time and had been for a long while going back. This was showcased in ASM V2 #50 and they had been effectively separated with minimal interaction as far back as ASM V2 #13; arguably even issue #1.

And yet she understood him and knew him very well, falling back into synch with him when they reconciled. Yes there was some awkwardness and them getting to know each other again but it was not on the same level of Otto guzzling champagne, creating spider bots, talking in a manner which was unlike the way he’s ever spoken before and MJ just wondering passingly then dismissing it. This woman has lived through the Chamelon, robot parents and clones and lives in a world where friggin Skrulls have invaded.

This out of character behaviour should send off alarm bells. She DOES clock something is off in Superior #10 but only when he says a phrase she’s never heard him say before. He was doing shit MUCH more out of character before then and she was dismissing it.

Later she was STILL dismissing the notion that Peter wasn’t himself as merely crazy on her part.

Again this woman knows Peter can be/has been cloned repeatedly. This woman even for awhile believed Peter himself was a clone so she knows even memories can be replicated. But Peter is acting so obviously NOT himself that it’s practically SCREAMING at her that she should get this. In fact Peter’s ghost point this out which is Slott lampshading the situation. That doens’t make it good writing that’s just pointing out how bad your story is.

“Hasn't she (I'm guessing he's referring to Aunt May?) been focused lately on her new marriage though? I don't read enough of Spidey these days so I'm only going with bits and pieces I've read about here and there.”

What does being married recently or focusing upon it have to do with anything?

In Civil War she was focused upon not dying because Peter’s ID reveal had upended her life.

If you are someone’s MOTHER and have raised them all their life you will absolutely be able to tell when something is wrong, when they are in fact not the real deal.

“As for MJ, who would she go too? Not like anyone would likely believe her unless she had a telepath scan her mind.”

Who would she go to? I dunno maybe the fucking Avengers or Fantastic Four who are Peter’s friends and team mates. Or maybe not go that far why not go to Black Cat, Human Torch or Daredevil . These are all people whom she knows (at least vaguely in regards to Daredevil) personally and have access to technology that can prove things one way or another.

Even if you argue that it’s not fair bringing in the wider Marvel Universe, Black Cat, Carlie, HORIZON labs, the Bugle staff and Scarlet Spider are all Spider-Man franchise characters.

“Now there could be a possibility she's making a list of his behavior and the like and is just waiting for the right time to say something when she knows she's less likely to die from it.

Maybe Slott's just got something going that'll eventually be revealed? Who knows.”

Oh boy, that didn’t stand the test of time did it?

This is just shitty analysis on principle. It hinges upon blind faith and writing stuff in your head about what characters are doing behind the scenes.

There was NEVER an indication MJ was doing anything like that and her actions actually contradicted event he idea of her doing any of that stuff.

The net responses are to the statement that Doc Ock was a gentleman who would treat women with respect.

“Keyword there, 'was' a gentlemen. I can imagine after years of defeats at the hands of Spidey, certain habits would change and he wouldn't care anymore.

It could have just been a subtle change that no one really noticed. He did try and end the world before #700 if I recall right.”

You need to SHOW those habits changing. The last major Doctor Octopus story before BND was in JMS’s run when he was very much a gentleman. You can’t just say his illness and defeats suddenly transformed him into a would be rapist. It’s utterly out of character for him. It’d be like bringing back Ben Reilly and making him a mass murderer. WHY is he a mass murderer.

(Fun fact. The stuff I bolded about Ben Reilly was something I wrote at the time. I kept it in because of how sadly ironic it wound up being…fuck Clone Conspiracy seriously)

Ending the world before #700 is one thing IN Doc Ock’s character. He is egotistical and wants acknowledgement of his genius.

Superior depicted him going against a character trait he’s always had. In his origin story, when he was ‘courting’ Aunt May, when he was involved with Stunner and Lady Octopus and the like he has always been show to have a respect for women and not had to resort to cheap ploys to woo them.

In Superior he was trading off of MJ’s relationship with Peter and Peter’s memories to basically abuse this woman. That is beneath Doctor Octopus. He is an intellectual a man for whom such actions are debase, the realm of the common thug whilst he is much more he is DOCTOR OCTOPUS.

BTW in Web of Death it was established that Doc Ock probably would not target MJ or Peter’s family even though he knew Peter’s identity.

So for him to suddenly switch to ‘I’m gonna fuck his girlfriend to get one over on him” is again utterly out of character.

‘Web of Death’ was co-written by Tom DeFalco btw, who established Otto’s origin. Thus the argument is flying in the face of someone who helped define the character with no explanation at all.

Slott had done this with other characters like Ashley Kafka.Suddenly the most naively compassionate woman in the world who believed she could redeem CARNAGE is saying this lesser serial killer is a complete monster. That is piss poor writing.

Even if Slott WERE to establish and show how Ock went from one extreme to the other it doesn’t make it a good idea. Doc Ock would be rapist is a lot less interesting than Doc Ock the lone super villain who is part gentleman and part humanitarian with a respect for women. If this was Norman Osborn in Peter’s body, or Electro, or Shocker I’d believe these actions.

The topic then changed to Carlie Cooper’s depiction in Superior as a goddam idiot who isn’t even telling MJ Peter might be evil. “Red Hood wrote: Carlie and Wraith followed Ock’s paper trail because she knows for fact that peter parker doesnt have the money to fund his own private army, the reason she hasnt said anything is because it's not such a good idea to go pointing fingers without absolute truth, remember eddie brock and how he was so sure about the sin eater?”

Carlie’s investigation was going incredibly sloooooooooooooooooowly. Not only was it dull reading, but it made her completely unsympathetic. Why not warn Mary Jane by saying “Look before he died Doc Ock told me he and Spider-Man had swapped bodies. I’m not saying Peter IS Doc Ock but just....be careful MJ”.

Or why not inform the Avengers or Fantastic Four about this. Sure the Avengers gave him a physical but they wouldn’t know what to look for. And why is Carlie Cooper all of a sudden saying “Wait I KNOW Peter doesn’t have this kind of cash so this is a big clue that he isn’t himself.” When her first big clue should have been that time Spider-Man SHOT SOMEONE IN THE FACE!

“also peter and mj arent married anymore.”

See above.

You don’t just suddenly fall out of knowing someone if you’ve been THAT close to them and known them for that long just because suddenly you are not married anymore. She has deduced subtle differences in the Chameleon and clones before this but Ock is NOT being subtle whatsoever. He isn’t even talking the same way he normally does. And Mister Red Hood even says so himself, Carlie can tell right way. His co-workers whom he’s known for LESS THAN A YEAR can tell something is up. But the woman who’s been closer to him than ANYONE in his life, she can’t tell. That is bullshit of the highest order.

“1. mj and peter arent married anymore, idk if they were married in identity crisis but remember how after the deal with mephisto they were separated for x amount of years before she even came back to new york, i can see her not being able to tell peter is acting different at that point. aunt may and the avengers though don't get a pass especially when carlie who knew him the least could tell right away.”

See above.

When you separate from someone you’ve been that close to those feelings don’t just disappear. This is especially true of people who’ve been through immensely traumatic events together. Soldiers often find that only fellow soldiers, specifically ones who were with them in combat, can truly understand what they went through and how they felt. It creates an emotional/mental bond. Same thing here. Peter and Mary Jane went through Venom, Kraven’s Last Hunt, the death of Harry, Gwen, aunt May, Ben Reilly, the clone saga as a whole, Civil War, Peter’s OWN death, Maximum Carnage and so on. They’d have that kind of connection I was speaking about, you don’t just forget it to the point where you let MASSIVE differences in behaviour slide, especially massive differences in behaviour which are different to the way he was acting LAST WEEK!

“3. Also i don't think his [Doc Ock’s] actions are entirely out of character, i mean he was dead, then revived, beat down for several years into a dying body. given time to think about all the things you would do if given another chance i dont think its out of the question for doc to say "great, second chance at life with a movie starhottie gf". also if you'll threaten the city, then the world, then mind swap with someone i dont think having sex is that big a stretch.”

See my comments above why this IS out of character for Doc Ock. Again this isn’t just him wanting to get laid this is him potentially date raping an innocent woman. You need to SHOW the progression of that change

And rape in comic book fiction is understood to be worse from the reader’s POV than the various Saturday Morning Cartoon style crimes he’s pulled.

The next comment was in response to the public’s indifference towards Spider-Man shooting Massacre in the face! “7. As far as no one caring about massacre, didn't he break out a few times and inflict his namesake? no one is going to care that a killer like that gets shot, humans aren't dignified at all. i can see aunt may saying something but no one else is going to be like "oh great that killer is back in jail, too bad all criminals break out" no they're going to be like "finally someone put down this thug, maybe my life or someone i care about will be spared from him at least in the future" and maybe it was caught on security cameras or phones but maybe they deleted it, i mean spider-man just shot a dude in the face and if he wanted there would be nothing anyone could do to stop him from putting the hurt on someone else”

This is just rubbish.

No one is going to care? For God’s sake the police in real life get reprimanded for using unnecessary force.

The law is the law you CANNOT publically execute an unarmed man. And my point was no one, not even Mary Jane or Jonah, were reacting to this mind-blowingly out of character action on the part of Spider-Man. Maybe they do not care that Massacre was killed but they should be wondering “Jesus that’s not like Spider-Man at all”. This was Spider-Man becoming absolutely EVERYTHING Jameson ever falsely accused him of and no one reacted. And I am sorry but the attitude of ‘human’s aren’t dignified so they’d react like THIS” is extremely broad and generalised. This would be a major talking point and a major issue. This is EXACTLY what the entire ‘Civil War’ debacle was about. Super heroes running unchecked doing as they pleased. It’s been what, a year tops Marvel time since Civil War? If that stuff was deleted YOU NEED TO SHOW IT. The cover story is that EVERYONE in that massive crowd covered for him. That is in no way shape or form how humans actually act. And who would there be to stop like a teenager or a kid or a lone person in the crowd from tweeting “OMG Spider-Man just shot this dude” or uploading a video or picture. They were CHEERING him on they wouldn’t be afraid of him being reprimanded. Once something like that hit the internet it’d spread like wildfire, it wouldn’t be something that if immediately taken down would die away, especially when THE NEWS was stating Spider-Man had ‘neutralised Massacre’ and then Massacre shows up dead, WTF would the public THINK happened?

“Aaron Alexander Luthor wrote: Superior is an excellent title, but I feel you approached it having already made up your mind. Doc Ock NEVER attempted date rape, and I don't know where you get that from”

Boy, I wonder where I got the idea of Otto trying to rape MJ from? What an obviously ‘excellent’ title.

Trying to sleep with Mary Jane whilst tricking her into thinking he is Peter Parker then that is categorically trying to date rape her. He didn’t go through with it because he discovered he could just wank off to her memories (I can’t believe I wrote that) but that is exactly what he was trying to do. Maybe to HIM he didn’t think of it as rape but yeah that’s exactly what it was.

“He ripped off his own shirt, not hers.”

I honestly have no idea what he’s talking about here btw.

“Mary Jane had/has mentioned several times that there is something wrong with him and that she thinks there is something strange going on, he also hasn't spoken to her in weeks in the time frame of the comic.”

Yes MJ has noticed passingly things are wrong but then he feeds her a line and she buys it or otherwise she dismisses it herself. This in monumentally out of character for her given her history and makes her incredibly stupid, which is the ONLY way this title could have worked out. Again, she lives in a world of Skrulls, clones, LMDs and shape shifters one of which is literally an enemy of Peter’s and has tried impersonating him multiple times (targeting her specifically twice). But she either doesn’t clock anything is wrong or doesn’t really react when she does. And he HAD spoken to her within weeks by the time or Superior #2.

“Same goes for Aunt May, he visited her the first few weeks as Parker, and hasnt spoken to her since. He is basically ignoring the people in Peter's life, and they have taken notice.”

See my response about Aunt May not knowing. Again, this woman RAISED him and she could tell when the master of disguise who was being a lot more subtle about impersonating Peter was not her son/nephew.

Also he wasn’t exactly ignoring the HORIZON labs staff was he?

“When he killed Massacre, some of the civilians were shocked and appalled, but when the police investigated all the officers on the scene lied for Spidey, because they think he did the right thing. That is why the only officers still interested are Carlie Cooper who does know, and is ACTIVELY trying to prove it isnt Peter, and Captain Watanabe aka The Wraith”

My point about NO ONE taking photos, tweeting, facebooking or whatever still stands as does the security cameras thing and the fact that Massacre was TRYING TO GET PUBLICITY. Again with Carlie why is she not warning SOMEBODY at this point. It isn’t like they wouldn’t believe her after Massacre. It isn’t like Spider-Man isn’t acting weird. It isn’t like body swapping is a legit THING in the Marvel universe. For God’s sake this happened to Captain America!

Kaine, the CLONE of Peter Parker with identical memories and everything. In the Sibling Rivaly crossover between Scarlet Spider and Superior Team-Up even HE couldn’t tell that Peter. Was an imposter This guy doesn’t just know Peter well, he IS Peter. And Otto was ranting none too subtley about how Kaine has bad blood with HIM. He doesn’t say he’s Doc Ock but he’s conveying unsubtly to Kaine that he is not Peter Parker and he is not TALKING like Peter Parker either. When his CLONE is still operating under the delusion that he is Peter Parker that’s put it beyond doubt this was ridiculously contrived.

“BTW, Carlie and MJ have talked about the suspicious way Pete has been acting, Carlie just hasnt told MJ directly.”

WHY didn’t Carlie tell MJ! And WHY were she and Peter noticing Peter’s different actions yet being totally blasé about them.

FFS in ‘Kraven’s Last Hunt’ MJ and Peter had been married for just 2 weeks and in that time she was able to deduce from his actions that the guy in the Spider-Man suit was NOT Peter. In the Mark of Kaine an identical clone of Peter approaches her and she is ultimately able to tell (twice) that he is not her husband. And she did this whilst pregnant and stressed out from a life or death situation to say nothing of the fact that Aunt May had recently died which would be weighing on her mind. Yet in Superior her mind was clearer and she was still buying this was Peter. This is enormously bad out of character writing for her

“As for the Avengers scans, it wasnt that no one could read them, its that they all came back NORMAL.”

No, the scans DID NOT come back normal at all. Doc Ock looked at the scans and could TELL something was not normal because he saw ghost Peter was in his mind. Yeah there was a tiny inconsistency in the brain waves but why the heck weren’t there people on the Avengers team that day to take note of stuff like that. Cap, Wolverine, Black Widow and Thor are obviously NOT going to be able to properly read this scientific equipment like Iron Man or Hank Pym or the Beast. ANY of those guys would’ve been able to tell but no only the Avengers who categorically would not be able to properly read the brainwaves were there. Why? Why get the unscientific Avengers? Because of plot contrivances is why.

And where were the telepaths? One telepathic scan from SOMEBODY should have told all. And again these tests come back normal....no one thought he could be a clone? Spider-Man has joked to these people about his clones, they know about them. Correct me if I am wrong but at the time of the Avenger’s physical of Peter wasn’t there a character involved with the Avengers who was supposed to be the living universe? SHE couldn’t tell Doc Ock is Spider-Man? The universe literally didn’t know this?

“Even Dr. Strange and Wolverines tests all came back regular.”

If Dr. Strange with all his power wasn’t able to deduce the truth that’s even MORE contrived!

And what the heck were Wolverine’s test? That he smelt the same? Of course he would.

“There was a tiny inconsistency in the brainwaves, it wasnt that no one could read it, its that it was so small that no one would even take notice of it, except for Peter or Ock if they were to look for it.”

See above for why this is bullshit.

“And the Avengers are STILL very suspicious, if you read the current titles.”

At the time a ‘current title’ was Superior Team Up #1.

In it the Avengers told him they were wrong to put him in probation and are still just ‘suspicious’ when he INVADED SHADOWLAND WITH AN ARMY!. Because THAT’S so usual for Spider-Man right?

“You're entitled to your opinion, but you cant just make up facts and call it a discussion. I get the impression that you a)Havent read the whole series; b) Had already made up your mind before reading the issues you have read; and c) Havent read the companion stories (i.e. Avenging Spider-Man, Superior Team-up, Hickman's Avengers titles). If you look at the story as a whole, its actually quite good.”

Said the guy who got all the above information I outlined WRONG.

From a technical point of view it doesn’t make sense, it uses contrivances and out of character writing to keep it going. You want to write Doc Ock as Spider-Man. Okay then don’t surround him with people who should be able to figure this out. Or say there is some kind of device redirecting their attention.

Don’t have Doc Ock not act like Doc Ock because that defeats the point of the exercise. Don’t go for deliberate sensationalism or crass storytelling which was essentially everything revolving around him hooking up with Mary Jane and then the oh so lovely page of the Superior Spider-Wanker.

That issue in particular even resolved itself in a contrived manner. Doc Ock begins uttering gibberish which recalled One Moment in Time about “we cannot be together because it’s an unsolvable equation blah blah blah”.

Basically he is saying “I can never be with you because of the danger I put you in”; which is Slott using the character as a mouthpiece.

In the next issue Otto began courting a student at his college because consistency rocks. Even Ghost Peter is out of character at this moment “WOW Ock you did the one thing I could never do and walked away from Mary Jane”. Peter is right he probably can’t walk away from Mary Jane but...does he WANT to? Where the heck is this coming from? What is worse is that it’s so unnecessary. There was a MUCH better explanation for Ock breaking up with MJ. If Ock were in character he could just come to the conclusion that sleeping with MJ under these circumstances would be wrong and beneath him hence he wouldn’t go through with it. If Ock was out of character as he was in their issue but still vaguely in character he could just come to the conclusions that since accessing Peter’s memories he’s begun to have genuine feelings for MJ and doesn’t just want to fuck her, it would involve him having a relationship with here which at this point in time he is incapable of, he doesn’t know how to handle it. I will wholeheartedly admit I was not jazzed about the concept of Superior from the outset. If nothing else I want to read about Peter Parker not Doc Ock and if I did want to read about Doc Ock AS Doc Ock, not as Spider-Man and not as an rotting body.

An arc in a comic is one thing doing this long term all the problems I foresaw have come up as well as some I didn’t even predict. This could have worked if Doc Ock was separated from Peter’s supporting cast who should be able to tell something is amiss but then that defeats a lot of the point of the story. It was a lose-lose situation.

People can enjoy garbage if you want but don’t call it gold.

Part 1

#The Superior Spider-Man #Superior Spider-Man #Dan Slott #otto octavius #Doc ock #Doctor Octopus #mjwatsonedit #mary jane watson #Aunt May #May Parker #Mary Jane Watson Parker #MJ Watson #Peter Parker #Spider-man #Civil War 2006

16 notes · View notes