#this is not really a complaint about the show itself so much as an analysis of some writing choices

[sawdust-emperor]

I can skip over it in the episode because it's a musical and the cringe is built into it as camp, so if you're not willing to let go of some of the preconceptions of what "good" media is you're going to FUCKING HATE any musical, not just Hazbin Hotel.

But dear God. Velvette jumping in and saying she wouldn't swipe right on any of these millionaires because they're not trending and are holding back in an unknown situation - this isn't other fashion designers at the table. These are supposed to be people with a total of MILLIONS of souls under their collective thumbs. You're saying a group of overlords who LITERALLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO PERMANENTLY OWN ANOTHER SOUL and force it to do labor or otherwise threaten it with destruction don't hold up to a trio of arguably the same type of person? Because they aren't trending or trying to remain relevant in the public eye? Like - just by sheer numbers, the original group with Carmilla in it has the Vs beat by numbers. She then says she's the backbone of the Vs, which, sure, that's who you send to your meeting with the people you don't respect? If anything, Vox is more personable and manipulative if it was about merit. This is like a Bitcoin miner showing up to a "how do we hide our laundering better so the IRS doesn't catch us" meeting with the Walton Family and Arms Dealer Tony Stark and telling them "we could just kill the agents who show up at the door", which - yeah. You could. But there would be easily foreseen consequences. We know this, Carmilla knows it, she figures the other overlords know (and absolutely would pursue the course of action that could fuck up everything she has going on) too. Maybe they want the reasonable doubt that comes with not knowing what killed the angel because they'd rather just sit back and deal with the loss instead of fight and risk losing badly as well. But VELVETTE should know that. Velvette should know all of this. The arrogance makes sense, but she is equating real investment power influence with social media and broadcast influence when they aren't the same at all. Again: Bitcoin Miner vs. old money. YouTuber vs. FCC approved broadcast media. Twitter vs. a newspaper. I have no clue how old she's supposed to be, but to be this off-base when speaking to people who could fuck you over as massively as any of the people in that meeting, she'd have to be like twenty.

[aihoshiino]

chapter 157 thoughts

Chapters Since The 143 Kiss Happened And Went Entirely Unacknowledged And Unaddressed Count: 14… IN THIS CHAPTER OF ALL CHAPTERS…????

Aqua Hoshigan Status: White

Congrats to 157 for taking 144's crown as the Oshi no Ko chapter that has vexed and confused me the most. Taken entirely in isolation, it's a sweet, lowkey, calm before the storm moment… but it's entirely because it stands in such stark isolation from the events surrounding it that it feels so baffling. It's like an amped up version of the issues with 156 - when viewed in isolation, you can't strictly say there's anything wrong with it, but as a part of the sequential storytelling of Oshi no Ko it just feels off. I'm reminded of the weird, off-kilter pacing of the Movie Arc, where story beats fell at weird places as if the story was falling out of tempo with itself. Because of that, this chapter review is probably going to be a bit disjointed but tbh besties i am fighting for my life on this one

I will say at the top of things though that it's darkly funny to me that we're fastforwarding through so much of the B-Komachi tour lol. Offscreen no Ko strikes again!

Honestly, this chapter in general kind of defies any attempt at a beat by beat analysis though that does seem to largely be by design. As the chapter title suggests, this is simply some pagetime spent on letting us stew in what a calm, ordinary day looks like for the twins and for what it is, it's sweet and chill. Taken on its own there isn't really a ton to pick apart, other than just pointing at what moments I found cute which was like 90% of them. I want a 5 chapter mini arc of AQRB goofing around at the grocery store and squabbling over the cooking together.

I also really like that Aqua is the one to suggest doing something nice for Miyako and that he joins Ruby in waiting up for her to get home and see it. It feels like a sweet and warm acknowledgement of the subtle shift in their relationship after 155, with the two of them properly stepping into their roles as parent and child.

As nice as this chapter is though, it does kind of feel like too little too late. One of the major complaints across the series (that I do largely agree with) is that Aqua and Ruby's day-to-day dynamic is for the most part underbaked and that the two of them don't really feel like people who grew up in the same household for 16+ years. I think a few more moments like this properly threaded through the manga would have helped but… well, considering OnK's pacing, do I really want to encourage much more downtime…

Moving on from the things I liked, as cute as this chapter was it's also just kind of weird that so much of it feels like the framing device is a recap episode lol. I guess it isn't the worst idea in the world to have one as we're heading into the final stretch of the story but… well, again, see my point above about weird pacing.

It's also just baffling as fuck to see Ruby frame these events in a way that distinctly did not happen lol. Like, sure, she was definitely having fun doing idol stuff for a lot of it but seeing her so warmly gas up stuff like Tokyo Blade when the anime airing right now is reminding us that Aqua was going through the SpongeBob horror hallway the entire time is so jarring - especially when Aqua (and thus, implicitly, the narrative) agrees with her. I mean, fuck, even putting Aqua aside it's WILD to see Ruby framing "Dig Deep" as having been fun for her when her major contribution to the show was manipulative drama stirring for the purposes of chasing clout that she herself said was having an impact on her mental health. I've criticized the story for the ways Ruby's black hoshigan arc amounted to nothing but there's a special kind of infuriating in seeing it specifically call back to that arc and still fail to actually acknowledge any wrongdoing on Ruby's part.

This is part of a much bigger trend in OnK right now of Ruby being super coddled by the narrative and coming off in some really unpleasant ways as a result. I didn't mention it last chapter but something that's been percolating in my brain since after I wrote my review is just how fucking bonkers Ruby's total non-respose to Mem's situation is. "Oh, you're getting stalked by the press? Sucks to be you, thank god I'm Miyako's special little favourite tho 🙏". Not only is this just kind of a shitty response to begin with but it feels insane coming from a person like Ruby who, you know, saw her mother's life blighted and then ended by this kind of treatment. No concern for Mem, tho!

Idk. I don't want to dislike Ruby but man. A lot of the ways Akasaka has been playing favourites with her lately has the effect of Ruby coming off, in universe, like a deeply self centered and callous person in ways I don't think narrative intends or even realizes and thus fails to interrogate in a satisfying way. But that's a rant for another day. And I'm pretty sure you guys already know what today's rant is gonna be. Which is to say, uh…

HEY. AKASAKA. ARE THEY GONNA TALK ABOUT… ANY OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MOVIE ARC?? ANYTHING AT ALL????

This is what I meant when I said this chapter utterly fucking bamboozled me. The way the story has contorted itself into knots to avoid letting Aqua and Ruby have a conversation even when they're literally in the same room is already insane, but giving us an entire chapter of them alone together with ample opportunity to have any sort of meaningful discussion as to the gigantic elephant in the room looming over their relationship and……. literally nothing happens???

This is made even more insanity inducing by the fact that this is, as stated above, more or less a recap chapter and not only does Ruby talk about the movie specifically but we even SEE a flashback to the HikAi kiss…. but not the one Ruby jumpscared him with at the end of 143!!!

What the fuck is even going on anymore? Was it retconned? Resolved offscreen?? Did we collectively hallucinate it??? Is Akasaka gaslighting us????

If nothing else, this chapter has proved to me once and for all that whatever goes on with Aqua and Ruby, that resolution is going to come entirely at the speed of plot, as and when Akasaka decides to do it and not when it would be natural and organic for development to occur. This is an issue that has plagued Aqua and Ruby's r/s from the start, where Akasaka simply refuses to let them communicate, seemingly for the purposes of drawing out the drama rather than because of any narrative justification. So I'm giving on predicting what direction their relationship is going in and what the outcome is going to be. The inner machinations of Aka Akasaka's mind are a mystery to me.

To pre-pick some nits before I leave off… I've seen some people calling this a 'Tanabata chapter' and insisting this is intentional/foreshadowing aquruby end/etc and uh… sorry to be that guy but no it's not lol. Even accounting for the differences in calendars that scatters Tanabata celebrations across July and August, August's Tanabata falls on the 10th this year - and even in the anime world, celebrations across Japan took place on the 'official' date of 7/7. And while there is a Tanabata festival being held in Sendai today… that's just in Sendai, which is all the way up in northern Japan, nowhere near Tokyo where the series is set (and which itself had its Tanabata celebrations on the weekends surrounding 7/7 as per usual.)

There's also just the fact that this chapter… has nothing to do with Tanabata? There's no imagery or iconography and it takes place in the middle of December lol. I simply don't think it was intentional at all on Akasaka's part. It's a cute coincidence, sure, but still just a coincidence.

break next week. i love biweekly manga, oshi no ko.

[jozor-johai]

Dorne, Shown not Told: how Darkstar is more than his reputation.

Darkstar used to bug me as a character—not necessarily because of his edgy dialogue, but because the way he was written: he's not on-page for very long, so we're really told much more about him than we are shown anything.

I've seen this same complaint voiced before, and almost always it's brushed over as an inherent failure of Gerold as a character, or other arguments that presuppose a lack of faith in Martin.

I can understand why, without deeper analysis, some people try to make the Doylist argument that Darkstar must be lazy writing by Martin, something along the lines of "I have to introduce this guy quick, so here's a bunch of backstory told by a bunch of characters". Instead, though, I argue that this situation of being "told" so much about Darkstar is actually the Watsonian perspective of his character; it is Arianne who has been told so much about him, and we're experiencing her misconceptions.

I've come to realize that the feeling of being "told" about Darkstar, with a focus away from what we're "shown," is fully intentional. With this different approach to interpreting Darkstar's character, I've found that not only do I like him so much more as a character in-universe, but I also like him so much more as an element in George R R Martin's writing. Melisandre might be his "most misunderstood character," but I think Gerold Dayne must be up there too.

I don't understand why it took me so long to see it: ASOIAF is all about the way that information—or misinformation—spreads and changes the course of action and history. Of course this would be a theme to look out for. Once I started to dig more into this idea in relation to Darkstar, I realized just how prevalent this theme was in the Dornish arc, which is entirely about the way that people are told something, and the way that being told these things—even without evidence—has such an impact. That's what the companion post to this one is about.

If you've read that post already, and now I've got you on board to doubt the reputation that Darkstar has, and to doubt the story Arianne was told about him, this is the post where I rebuild Gerold's character from scratch, and convince you that he's actually an alright guy, a trustworthy one, and possibly even a true knight. Maybe, even, he's worthy of Dawn, and the title of "Sword of the Morning."

I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this, as it's been so many years, but it's exciting to experience a moment of realization that makes me see the writing itself in a new light, so I wanted to share my thought process here.

2.0 Gerold Dayne, shown not told.

In this part, I attempt to look at Gerold Dayne as if I were Areo Hotah, not Arianne: to watch what he does and says, on page, rather than take anyone's word for it, and rather than interpret his actions against a prejudice that he is as dark and dangerous as Arianne thinks. This way, I want to see what kind of man Gerold Dayne actually shows us he is, through his actions and interactions, rather than who we're told he is.

Beyond just doubting Doran's story because I don't believe Doran to be trustworthy, here I'll be explaining why I think that once we get to know Darkstar as best as we can, maiming Myrcella doesn't even really sound like something he would do.

This is a long one too, like the other one, so the rest is after the cut

2.1 Early good impressions—by being early

We don't see very much of Darkstar on-page, so let's start with our very first impression of him, in the second paragraph of the chapter:

Arianne Martell arrived with Drey and Sylva just as the sun was going down, with the west a tapestry of gold and purple and the clouds all glowing crimson. The ruins seemed aglow as well; the fallen columns glimmered pinkly, red shadows crept across the cracked stone floors, and the sands themselves turned from gold to orange to purple as the light faded. Garin had arrived a few hours earlier, and the knight called Darkstar the day before.

We don't know when they arranged to meet, but I think there's room for a symbolic meaning to Arianne arriving just as the sun goes down. Symbolically, the day ending as soon as she arrives mirrors the way that her plan is going to end as soon as it begins.

In addition, it's a signature of Arianne's character this chapter, moving just slightly too slowly. In this way, Arianne is already more like her father than she wants to admit—remember the overripe oranges falling in The Captain of the Guards, or how Areo knew that Doran saying they would leave at dawn meant midday. Arianne is the same—she arrives to her own plan at dusk.

Even without that comparison, Arianne's late arrival is emblematic of her inability to structure a plan as carefully as she believes she can, which is also something that haunts her for the rest of his arc. Consider the meaning of this for her: she is the head of this plan, and yet she and her two companions are the last to arrive. Garin beats her to the rendezvous place by a few hours... and Darkstar is almost the opposite extreme. He gets there a whole day early.

Perhaps that's suspect, perhaps that's responsible; this alone is not enough to say. For a certainty, though, this clearly positions Darkstar as someone who is, say, the opposite of the "Late" Lord Walder Frey. He's a man who comes early, not late.

As the chapter continues, it's not the only time that Arianne lags carelessly while Darkstar vouches for a more responsible course of action, so keep this in mind. This passage sets the tone for the rest of the chapter.

2.2 What makes a man "Great"?

The next time we see Darkstar on page, we get his first line of dialogue and his first actual on-page action. He juts in while the others are talking about the storied hero who is Garin's namesake:

"Garin the Great," offered Drey, "the wonder of the Rhoyne." "That's the one. He made Valyria tremble." "They trembled," said Ser Gerold, "then they killed him. If I led a quarter of a million men to death, would they call me Gerold the Great?" He snorted. "I shall remain Darkstar, I think. At least it is mine own." He unsheathed his longsword, sat upon the lip of the dry well, and began to hone the blade with an oilstone.

There's a lot to unpack here for such a short passage. To begin with, we can interpret some of Darkstar's values from his additions to this conversation. He clearly has a certain pragmatism, because he chooses to see through the veneration that the stories have afforded "Garin the Great", and points out that his cause was actually poorly met. In this way, Gerold might come off like a humorless spoilsport, but we can also consider the fact that he's already learned some of the lessons that other characters, like Sansa, have been forced to face: reality does not match the songs, and not all "heroes" are good people.

Gerold also shows a concern for the ranks of the military. It's not about one man's veneration for him, it's about the success of the plan—and the survival of the men who act on it. This is actually the same concern for Dorne that Doran is obsessed with, at the end of The Watcher:

"Until the Mountain crushed my brother's skull, no Dornishmen had died in this War of the Five Kings," the prince murmured softly, as Hotah pulled a blanket over him. "Tell me, Captain, is that my shame or my glory?"

Doran has spent a lifetime hemming and hawing over this notion, unsure of whether to act or to wait, and choosing inaction over decision. By stark contrast, Gerold speaks with a casual certainty: "Garin the Great" was no good at all, because all his men died, and he lost. It might make him sound like a cynic, but Dayne knows what he believes in. Leading men to their death is no greatness at all.

2.3 Choosing one's own name

And, now knowing his thoughts on blind veneration, we might reinterpret his decision to invent his own nickname. Rather than grasping for approval from in songs (like Tywin's Rains of Castamere), his act of naming himself could be seen as a sign of honor, not blind pride.

"If I led a quarter of a million men to death, would they call me Gerold the Great?" He snorted. "I shall remain Darkstar, I think. At least it is mine own."

He does not believe in misjudged "bravery" for the sake of a title, and therefore is unlike so many others who we see across ASOIAF ready to die fighting in their desire for glory. Rather than dreaming of becoming immortalized in a song, Darkstar has no lust for public approval—he's given himself his own title, and means to prove himself against his own standard.

And at least it is his own. ASOIAF is a story where so much weight is put into names and epithets—Arya and Sansa losing their names and even their chapter titles, Brienne and Jaime fighting against the disparaging nicknames they are given. Here, Darkstar has already proven himself past all of those troubles with this one action—regardless of whatever names others should call him, or even remember him by, he shall go by this one, the name, and the fate, that he chose for himself.

2.4 Honing the blade

And then, immediately, Gerold starts caring for his blade.

He unsheathed his longsword, sat upon the lip of the dry well, and began to hone the blade with an oilstone.

Interestingly, the list of people who hone their blade on-page is surprisingly short. This shared action puts Gerold in league with the likes of Brienne:

I will, she promised his shade, there in the piney wood. She sat down on a rock, took out her sword, and began to hone its edge. I will remember, and I pray I will not flinch.

And also the likes of Yoren, Arya, Jon, Meera, Barristan, and Hotah himself; all of whom are dutiful if not also generally good-hearted. Ilyn Payne and Rakharo, care for their blades on-page, too, and though I'm not sure if they get enough story time to argue whether or not they are good-hearted, they are certainly pragmatic, skilled, and committed. Bronn, too, hones his blade on-page, and even if not good-hearted, he's these other positive qualities, the ones that make him likeable even in his scoundrel status: Bronn is skilled, pragmatic, dedicated to his craft, and even committed after his own fashion (he does name his adoptive child Tyrion, after all).

Better tying this to a morality case, the first time we see Sandor Clegane caring for his blade is after the Red Wedding, after he fully commits to taking in Arya. Similarly, Jaime is only seen caring for his blade in Feast and later, after he begins to have his own character turn towards searching for honor.

In stark contrast, Theon pulls out his blade to "sharpen" it before facing his father in Clash, but he only "gave it a few licks" with the whetstone ... what a total poser.

(It's a silly thing, but the most minor character we see sharpening a blade is a stray Blackwood... so you know these are the good guys, haha. Oswell Whent, too, which I don't make much of myself but I know others have.)

So, when we see Gerold Dayne start to sharpen his blade as his first on-page action, we might think: here is a man who is responsible, who is committed to duty, who believes in taking care of his person and his honor. Tying little actions like this to character qualities is the kind of thing GRRM does frequently.

2.5 Sober attitude

To a similar end, we also see that Gerold Dayne doesn't drink, preferring water with lemon.

Once the kindling caught, they sat around the flames and passed a skin of summerwine from hand to hand . . . all but Darkstar, who preferred to drink unsweetened lemonwater.

Which puts him in league with Brienne again:

"I would prefer water," said Brienne. "Elmar, the red for Ser Jaime, water for the Lady Brienne, and hippocras for myself." Bolton waved a hand at their escort, dismissing them, and the men beat a silent retreat.

As well as Stannis, paragon of "duty":

But not today, I think—ah, here's your son with our water." Devan set the tray on the table and filled two clay cups. The king sprinkled a pinch of salt in his cup before he drank; Davos took his water straight, wishing it were wine.

Again, this is the kind of quality that is associated with people who are attached to their sense of duty. (Note also that as Brienne feels increasingly lost during her search for Sansa, we see her increasingly drink wine. Roose, for his part, doesn't just drink wine, but wants wine sweetened with sugar and spices, which, like Littlefinger's minty breath, covers up his harsh reality).

So Gerold Dayne, in word and action, seems to have more in common with duty- and honor-bound characters, rather than being the heartless rogue which the Martells seem to believe he is.

2.6 Arianne's imagination versus Gerold's reality

Arianne asserts that Gerold would go so far as to exterminate an entire clan... but it's while she's fantasizing about ruling Sunspear with Myrcella as Queen:

Once I crown Myrcella and free the Sand Snakes, all Dorne will rally to my banners. The Yronwoods might declare for Quentyn, but alone they were no threat. If they went over to Tommen and the Lannisters, she would have Darkstar destroy them root and branch.

So we know what Arianne thinks he's capable of, but we also have heard Dayne's own thoughts that war for its own sake is not laudable. Would he really be the type to eradicate a whole family, like Arianne says? So far, he seems otherwise like an alright guy, and potentially even a true knight, so far: he takes care of his sword, he stays sober, he arrives early, he's not searching for glory from others, and he doesn't believe one should be rewarded for idiotic wars.

If I were to put this in a single quote—if I could create a single moment where I might show that Arianne's mental image of Darkstar is one way (hard, dangerous, mean) and his reality was a different way (dutiful, pragmatic, and good-hearted)—I might show it like this:

He has a cruel mouth, though, and a crueler tongue. His eyes seemed black as he sat outlined against the dying sun, sharpening his steel, but she had looked at them from a closer vantage and she knew that they were purple. Dark purple. Dark and angry. He must have felt her gaze upon him, for he looked up from his sword, met her eyes, and smiled.

Does he have a cruel mouth, and dark, angry eyes? Or does he have an easy smile? Arianne tells us the former... but so far, we are shown the latter.

And what does Gerold himself say with that "cruel tongue"? What counsel does he give, what courses does he suggest?

2.7 Gerold's bloody suggestion

Before Myrcella arrives, Gerold Dayne has the chance to offer counsel to Arianne. This moment comes directly following that moment where all of Arianne's other conspirators confide that they don't trust him, and that they don't need him for the plan. Immediately afterward, Darkstar returns and suggests that the plan isn't very good to begin with.

Dayne put a foot upon the head of a statue that might have been the Maiden till the sands had scoured her face away. "It occurred to me as I was pissing that this plan of yours may not yield you what you want."

While all of Arianne's friends have warned her of Darkstar, why is it that Darkstar is the only one to warn Arianne that this is a poor plan? It's important to remember that he's right, after all, because this plan gets thwarted, and as he goes on to say, was ill-concieved to begin with. If he can see it, why have none of Arianne's other allies considered this? Or, more interestingly, why have none of them told her?

This conversation continues, and notice how Arianne is never straightforward with Gerold about how she feels in response to his questioning. She says one thing, and then thinks another to herself. Already, we are being shown how we might be distrustful of what we are told—and again, Arianne has more in common with her father than she thinks. She knows how to speak carefully when she really has another objective.

"And what is it I want, ser?" "The Sand Snakes freed. Vengeance for Oberyn and Elia. Do I know the song? You want a little taste of lion blood." That, and my birthright. I want Sunspear, and my father's seat. I want Dorne. "I want justice." "Call it what you will. Crowning the Lannister girl is a hollow gesture. She will never sit the Iron Throne. Nor will you get the war you want. The lion is not so easily provoked." "The lion's dead. Who knows which cub the lioness prefers?" "The one in her own den." Ser Gerold drew his sword. It glimmered in the starlight, sharp as lies. "This is how you start a war. Not with a crown of gold, but with a blade of steel."

At first blush, it's easy to get caught up in the notion that Darkstar is simply offering to kill Myrcella for the ease of it all. We're told the whole chapter that Darkstar is a violent man, and here's the evidence.

Arianne herself only considers this interpretation, and it's how she remembers the conversation once she's imprisoned:

He wanted to kill her instead of crowning her, he said as much at Shandystone. He said that was how I'd get the war I wanted.

However, this conversation, though brief, is not so simple as that. Instead, while Gerold's advice to Arianne here at first seems unnecessarily violent, he's actually displaying wisdoms that we learn elsewhere in the story.

For a start, we see Gerold's disdain for vengeance for it's own sake—and his suggestion to Arianne that this quest of revenge and authority will not actually get her what she wants. In Gerold's words, she wants "a taste of lion's blood." He knows this song, as he says, as well as Ellaria, who gives an identical warning with far more impassioned language to the same audience ADWD The Watcher:

"Oberyn wanted vengeance for Elia. Now the three of you want vengeance for him. I have four daughters, I remind you. Your sisters. My Elia is fourteen, almost a woman. Obella is twelve, on the brink of maidenhood. They worship you, as Dorea and Loreza worship them. If you should die, must El and Obella seek vengeance for you, then Dorea and Loree for them? Is that how it goes, round and round forever? I ask again, where does it end?" Ellaria Sand laid her hand on the Mountain's head. "I saw your father die. Here is his killer. Can I take a skull to bed with me, to give me comfort in the night? Will it make me laugh, write me songs, care for me when I am old and sick?"

Gerold says it more simply, and more harshly: this quest for vengeance and lion's blood will not get you what you want.

He then tries another angle, saying that "Crowning the Lannister girl is a hollow gesture. She will never sit the Iron Throne. Nor will you get the war you want." This sounds, at first, like a complaint of the plan's futility, but he offers a suggestion of how to achieve said war instead: "Not with a crown of gold, but with a blade of steel."

I have to point out the metaphor at use in this moment:

Ser Gerold drew his sword. It glimmered in the starlight, sharp as lies.

A blade as sharp as lies—yet another allusion to this constant Dornish theme of lying and deadly misinformation. Seen from another perspective, we might put it another way: that lies are as deadly as a blade. This, too, is Doran's message: that the grass which hides the snake is just as deadly.

This too is Gerold's message, because in combination, his suggestion that crowning her is empty and to kill her is simpler sounds like an allusion to another wisdom we learn later in ADWD Tyrion I, given by Illyrio when Tyrion alights on the same bright idea as Arianne, to crown Myrcella:

"In Volantis they use a coin with a crown on one face and a death's-head on the other. Yet it is the same coin. To queen her is to kill her."

Gerold understands this, and he displays it in this conversation. His offer here, then, is to skip the trouble in between—the girl will never sit the Iron Throne in any case, so Arianne should just kill her and be done with it, and have your war that way.

Rather than a threat against Myrcella's life, the way Arianne remembers it, we might see this as a challenge: if Gerold sees that both acts end in Myrcella's death, and both in war, he's presenting Arianne reality of the lack of choice.

In a way, this is consistent with his earlier complaints about Garin the Great—was it worth it to make Valyria "tremble" at the cost of so many of his own? Gerold's question, though harshly put, makes Arianne face that question now, before they start off with the plans.

Like her father, though, Arianne defers the problem, preferring not to address it this night.

I am no murderer of children. "Put that away. Myrcella is under my protection. And Ser Arys will permit no harm to come to his precious princess, you know that."

Arianne makes the choice, but she does not say it aloud. Why? Because even she sees that it's contradictory to raise her up and expect her to live?

As we see so often with Arianne, she foolishly answers that it's not her responsibility. Myrcella may be under her protection, but Arianne relies on Ser Arys' action to keep it that way. Arianne tries to argue that the weight of this threat to Myrcella is not Arianne's burden to take, but rather Arys'.

Darkstar disagrees, pointing out the longstanding rivalry between the Dornish and the Marcher Lords.

"No, my lady. What I know is that Daynes have been killing Oakhearts for several thousand years." His arrogance took her breath away. "It seems to me that Oakhearts have been killing Daynes for just as long." "We all have our family traditions." Darkstar sheathed his sword. "The moon is rising, and I see your paragon approaching."

Finally, though, actions once again speak louder than words. Rather than pull his sword here against Arys, like he was just threatening to do, he sheathes his sword when he spots Arys, obeying Arianne's command. So far, whatever he's said, Gerold is still committed to following Arianne's wishes.

His threats about Daynes killing Oakhearts has another layer of meaning, though, in this complete context: Daynes have been killing Oakhearts, yes, but it's not just Daynes who wouldn't blink at killing a Marcher, it's all of the Dornish—as Arys is so intimately aware of in his one chapter.

As much as Arianne is dodging responsibility, she's also right that Arys is the final obstacle in anyone's way should they wish to do harm to Myrcella. Note, though, that despite the story Doran and Arianne later tell the Sand Snakes, it is not Darkstar who slays Arys—it's Areo Hotah. If we say that actions speak louder than words, hear this: Gerold sheathes his sword when Arys approaches, and it is Doran (through Areo) who kills Myrcella's most leal protector.

Given all the trouble Doran later goes to in an attempt to smooth over Arys' death, Gerold is probably right here that a dead Arys means war. Once again, Gerold is a pragmatic thinker, in theory. In my opinion, despite the cruelty of his suggestion, his conversation about the death of Myrcella is a reality check, not a call for wanton violence.

2.8 Gerold's good counsel and care

Later comes the second time where Arianne lags carelessly... and here, Gerold steps in to give Arianne good counsel.

Arianne had hoped to reach the river before the sun came up, but they had started much later than she'd planned, so they were still in the saddle when the eastern sky turned red. Darkstar cantered up beside her. "Princess," he said, "I'd set a faster pace, unless you mean to kill the child after all. We have no tents, and by day the sands are cruel."

Here, contradicting the stories of Gerold Dayne as a cruel man, Darkstar seems to show more direct concern for Myrcella's wellbeing than any of the other plotters. Arianne—like her father—moves to slow, and Gerold wants to make sure that the girl isn't killed. He's not just pragmatic in theory, he can also be pragmatic and considerate when it comes to the young girl with them.

Here, also, we see that Gerold does not actually mean the girl harm. The accusation that Darkstar slashed Myrcella implies this narrative where Darkstar took advantage of the chaos to finally take his chance to kill the girl and make good on his threat. If that were the case, then here Darkstar could have simply said nothing, and let the girl suffer or even die from the heat. Instead, he speaks up in order to spare Myrcella from the sand's cruelty.

2.9 Gerold's opinion of Arthur Dayne

With all of this context, I'll finally take a look at Gerold's opinion of Arthur Dayne.

As she led the princess to the fire, Arianne found Ser Gerold behind her. "My House goes back ten thousand years, unto the dawn of days," he complained. "Why is it that my cousin is the only Dayne that anyone remembers?" "He was a great knight," Ser Arys Oakheart put in. "He had a great sword," Darkstar said. "And a great heart."

He clearly loves the Dayne house, but seems to have less respect than most for Arthur. Many and more have taken this to be a sign of petty envy, that Darkstar is questioning Arthur's skill at swordplay, perhaps in comparison to his own.

But consider the quote another way: we know from his opinion of "Garin the Great" that Gerold resists the idea of blindly idolizing heroes only because they have become great in the telling. This newer hero, Arthur, is no more special to him. What has he actually done, not what stories have been told of him?

Once again, this is a return of our theming: being shown, not told. Gerold is quick to resist the allure of the songs of Arthur Dayne—to Gerold, there are plenty of other Daynes just as special, or perhaps even more so. This is not a lack of love for his house, nor for honor and glory—quite the opposite. Like with choosing his own name, Darkstar wants to create his own context to see Arthur in, as part of a ten thousand year old lineage of great Daynes (ha) and not some special, magic knight.

Perhaps Gerold Dayne is pointing out that there is more to a knight than having a sword; perhaps he is condemning the idea of equating "swordplay" with "greatness".

What we hear about Arthur is more often than not about his prowress with a sword, but consider the context in which Arthur Dayne was brought up in this chapter. When Myrcella brings him up, his reputation is marred by the fact it's own existence:

"There was an Arthur Dayne," Myrcella said. "He was a knight of the Kingsguard in the days of Mad King Aerys."

Not the most good-hearted of details to remember him by, truth be told.

I suggest that this passage instead serves to suggest that Gerold has a stricter sense of what is valorous than most. Even the great, seemingly infallible Arthur Dayne was a sword in defense of the Mad King. Does serving the Mad King still make for a "great knight"? Or only a "great sword"?

Of course, there's another interesting aspect to this quote: despite his disregard for the particular qualities of Arthur, Gerold is more than willing to acknowledge the greatness of the sword Dawn. I'll get into that at the end.

2.10 Gerold sues for peace

Finally, in his final appearance on-page, we get a last word from Gerold Dayne, who, this time, says exactly what Arianne is thinking... when she, again, is too slow to act, and is unable to say anything herself.

You reckless fool, was all that Arianne had time to think, what do you think you're doing? Darkstar's laughter rang out. "Are you blind or stupid, Oakheart? There are too many. Put up your sword."

Darkstar suggests to all that they surrender. He suggests they put up their swords. Yet again, this is a consistent characterization for Darkstar: a man who speaks against the honor of leading others in a death charge, a man who is a sober thinker, a man who plans to arrive early, and a man who considers heavily the consequences of the actions at hand, especially when they end in the death of a young girl.

After all this, I don't think it sounds like Darkstar to make a wild, reckless, opportune grasp for Myrcella's life, no matter whatever Doran says. Instead, Gerold Dayne has all the trappings of a dutiful knight, and even his brusque edges come from a certain brutal realism, not a sense of jilted pride. He may even be a good and caring man at times.

3.0 My predictions for TWOW: GRRM's next moves

I used to really not like Darkstar. I don't mind him being a little cringe, because this whole series, as well written as it is, still has plenty of pulpy 80s underpinnings which I love just as much as the highbrow stuff. I can handle a little melodrama, fine... but why is Darkstar so flat, I wondered. It felt so incredibly—uncharacteristically—clumsy to have this hurried introduction of a character, and have everyone in the chapter rush to tell the reader how dangerous he is, just so he could do the "dangerous guy" thing and run off to become the next MacGuffin of Dorne.

That is, if everything, or anything, that we were told about him is true.

If we understand that not all we're told is true, then GRRM hasn't actually spent a whole chapter telling without showing. Instead, he's been consistently playing with the same notions of actual reality vs. stories and lies that the rest of the Dornish plot revolves around (and the rest of the series, for that matter, but I'm staying focused here).

In addition, all of that telling we got about Gerold Dayne wasn't at all for the purpose of giving us a quick, surface level introduction to the character (which makes sense, because George is otherwise so good with character). Instead, all that telling is part of a larger, longer plot about Doran's scheming and lying, and Arianne's own susceptibility to Doran's stories.

Finally, and most of all, it all sets up one of GRRM's favorite things to do: a subversion of a character in a twist that involves a sudden change of perspective.

If Arianne and Doran have spent 4 (or 5, including TWOW previews) chapters now telling us what a nasty guy Gerold Dayne is, won't it be a shock once he's granted Dawn rightfully and is named the next Sword of the Morning? What's even better is that, looking back, it will be clear to see how much he isn't a nasty guy—he's actually a pretty good candidate, dutiful, smart, aware of the consequences. He's the kind of guy to take care of himself, keeping his mind and blade sharp, and to be considerate of those lesser than him, as with Myrcella or Garin's army. He may not be a nice guy, but being nice and kind are not always the same. That character of Darkstar, the knight worthy of Dawn, was there all along—except that it was all obfuscated under Arianne internal narration and Doran's repeated lying.

After all, he is of the night... which sounds super edgy, but is foreshadowing too. What comes after the night? The Morning.

Being "of the night" might not be Darkstar being an antihero, but instead being anti- heroes, he's against the concept of the overinflated hero. Like Sandor Clegane, who starts to seem more and more a true knight despite despising knights, Darkstar may be set up to take on a legendary mantle, like Sword of the Morning, despite his utter disdain for legendary heroes, like Ser Arthur and Garin the Great.

And actually, I suspect that Darkstar is quite familiar with Dawn already—after all, despite his cool words about Ser Arthur, Gerold Dayne does seem to recognize the greatness of Dawn. I expect that he's seen its value for himself.

Gerold is the type of man to take himself seriously ... and while that's very easy to make fun of from a reader's perspective, it's a very admirable quality in a knight. It's the same trajectory Jaime has been on: everything used to be a joke to him, but no longer: Jaime is learning how to shed that shield of humor and to take himself and his honor seriously. Can we begrudge Ser Gerold the same?

Rather than hunting down a villain, Areo Hotah, Obara, and Balon Swann are on Doran's truth-suppression mission. For after all, as Lady Nym pointed out, loose ends make for exposed lies. If I replace some of the names of her cautionary message from The Watcher:

If Gerold Dayne is alive, soon or late the truth will out. If he appears again, Doran Martell will be exposed as a liar before all the Seven Kingdoms. He would be an utter fool to risk that.

And so Doran sends his unbeatable Hotah, with his massive and lethal axe that already killed one Kingsguard and might well kill another. How is Gerold Dayne going to match up against that?

Well, he'll have a great sword.

[sarasade]

On Claudia, Viren, Aaravos & Claudia's Character Arc

This post is mostly about Claudia's character development or should I say character deterioration.

It's highly likely that Callum will be the one to take down Aaravos- like it all goes back to Harrow's letter in s2 and chains of history and the themes of free will vs destiny and such. Aaravos possessing Callum is all about that. He's literally taking control of Callum's faith. There is clear antagonism there that's in a direct conflict with who Callum is.

But at the same time Claudia is the one who's got the biggest personal beef with Aaravos. He exploited her grief, manipulated her and used her father to accomplish his own goals. If Aaravos didn't exist Claudia wouldn't have spent two years of her life in a complete stagnation waiting for her dad to come back from the dead instead of moving on. It seems like Aaravos has been molding Claudia into his personal minion through dark magic during the time skip as well.

Taking this into account it would be really satisfying to see Claudia snap out of it and take her revenge. Characters having a personal connection to the villain always makes a story's climax more gripping. More personal the better! And everything between Aaravos and Claudia is VERY personal.

That's why Viren worked so well as a foil to Callum and Ezran in s 1-3. Especially Ezran whose rightful place as the king he tried to take. He was basically their shitty, power hungry uncle who turned against them. Side note but if Viren is still alive I hope he makes a return as Ezran's foil.

Claudia helping to take down Aaravos would be emotionally satisfying. All the elements for that are already there. Of course Claudia should come to some kind of realisation about the way she's been used by Aaravos before she can take that turn. I doubt the show's got the time for that but it's an interesting possibility to think about.

I really like how the plot around Aaravos manipulating Claudia is done. Even Claudia's own father didn't do anything to prevent it from happening although all the signs of Aaravos having sinister plans for Claudia were there from the beginning: Aaravos calling Claudia "an asset" and encouraging Viren to lie to her in s3 therefore enabling Viren's worst impulses while also using them to his benefit. It's SO EVIL (and I love it). Viren isn't that much better since he always had some kind of excuse to ignore the red flags. At this point of TDP's run I'm convinced that Runaan's "Faith worse than death" line about Aaravos' mirror is finally paying off. It means that the consequences of Viren's actions have hurt Claudia, the only person Viren loves unconditionally, in an unfathomable way.

I think Claudia's arc is relatively subtle and very well done. It balances between Claudia being a victim of manipulation and neglect while also giving her agency to influence the plot as a whole. My only complaint is that Lost Child short story should have been implemented in the show itself and not just be extra material. I have some other grievances but those are mostly fandom related.

How some fans, especially in YouTube reviews, talk about Claudia's downfall like it was inevitable because she's always been fucked up or talking about how "trauma isn't an excuse for bad behaviour" is strange to me. Like, yeah, it isn't an excuse but it's simply just bad media analysis to instantly jump into condemning Claudia's actions, like she's a real person who uses trauma as an excuse to hurt other real people, instead of seeing it in the terms of a character study. Claudia clearly uses trauma to convince herself that what she's doing is right but never tries to manipulate anyone else by using it as an excuse. Think about her and Terry for example: she usually refuses Terry's help instead of trying to garner sympathy from him. This character trait is one of the many reasons why she felt obligated to keep her family together as well. She's extremely stubborn and not very self-conscious about her trauma brain but she does understand why others would see her actions as objectionable. I think this character type (usually a woman) has been given the playful nickname "trauma bitch" in the internet lexicon. Anyway god forbid if we actually empathise, reflect on and engage with unpleasant or problematic characters instead of instantly condemning them.

TDP is about how people can always CHOOSE a different path. Viren's dark magic hallucination in season 5 stated this very clearly.

In Claudia's case it's more interesting to think about WHY she DOESN'T choose differently. That's where all the meat of her character writing lies.

Claudia's arc is what happens when the desperate actions of someone motivated by trauma around abandonment are taken to their logical conclusion in this fantasy setting. It's a fictional story, it has metaphors and shit. Fantasy genre has used necromancy and extending one's life by magical means as a story element to explore humanity's relationship to death many times. The metaphor for loss and regret basically writes itself. Ursula Le Guin has used this trope in The Earthsea books, Peter S. Beagle's The Last Unicorn has done it etc. Everything can't be a one to one comparison to real life (trauma rarely makes you want to kill your friends with dark magic irl. idk that's just me though) and there needs to be a level of abstraction involved in a fantasy story. Abstraction and metaphor, paradoxically, can reveal a greater truth about the world. (I'm probably accidentally quoting someone here but can't remember who.)

Anyway the rest is great. When you think of it all for a moment it's pretty fucked up how Claudia has been used by Aaravos. It's not some tiny part of Caludia's story. It IS her story. And Viren set that norm for her. Viren too has abused Claudia's trust. It's a complex subject and probably requires its own post since Viren, Soren and Claudia's situation reflects some pretty realistic dynamics real life troubled families have. That's why the characters compliment each other's stories so well. Viren is a more realistic character after all when Aaravos is more over the top and symbolic and less of a real person. Aaravos is one of those villains who embodies the opposing ideology of the heros. We (still) don't know almost anything personal about him so he matters mostly in relation to other characters.

Thanks for reading this Claudia propaganda! I've had so many of these in the drafts. Anyway TL;DR

[realbeefman]

your analysis of house md is so fascinating and it makes me wonder, what's your take on the g*od doctor? I find it hard to reconcile that they're by the same person but maybe there's an obvious reason behind-the-scenes why they're so different that I'm not aware of

had a long discussion with my mom (who has actually watched the good doctor in it's entirety, unlike me lol) about this ask.

i think it comes down to the intention with, and context within which each respective series was created. i'm assuming your ask is referencing the way autism is portrayed in each series, so that's what i'll focus on here.

house md is created in 2004, in an era of television where the antihero protagonist is becoming increasingly popular - house is coming out of an era of television that created iconic, enduring characters like walter white, tony soprano, and don draper. house very much belongs to this antihero craze, and he's written to intentionally be an asshole, who acts like an asshole to everyone around him, and continually ruins his own life.

house md isn't created to be an uplifting, heartwarming piece of television, with an autistic main character who is just trying his best in a horrible, ableist society. we, the audience, aren't meant to interpret house as autistic at all.

this is explicitly told to us in 3x04, "Lines in the Sand." (brief summary for context: the team treats a severely autistic 10 year old in the A plot, while in the B plot, house performs shenanigans throughout the hospital in an effort to annoy cuddy into giving him his old, blood-stained carpet back.) in this episode, cameron, acting as the audience, interprets house's behavior as him being resistant to change, which in her (the audience's) mind, is proof that he is autistic. however, the narrative reinforces again and again that no, actually - cameron is wrong, because he really is just doing this to get a rise out of cuddy. this is eventually reinforced when wilson, the voice of narrative reason and in this episode, the voice of our dear showrunner mr. shore, lies to cuddy about house having "asperger's" (autism) before later telling house that he isn't autistic - just a jerk who wishes he had an excuse for behaving like one. the episode ends by reprimanding the audience for having come up with such a theory - the answer is simple, he isn't autistic, just a jerk!

in stark contrast, we have the good doctor himself, shaun murphy.

the good doctor is an adaptation of a k-drama by the same name, and airs it's first episode in 2017. the american television landscape is an entirely different place, and antihero protagonists simple aren't in vogue anymore. attitudes towards disability are, on a surface level at the very least, changing, and america's tastes have changed as well.

shaun murphy breaks out onto the screen as an intentionally autistic character, in an era of television in which our hearts are meant to be warmed. unlike house, shaun's autistic traits aren't something that have been unintentionally included in the writing of his character, the fact that he is autistic is literally his defining character trait. shaun isn't meant to be a standoffish jerk, who goes about the hospital reigning abuse upon those around him and attracting lawsuits like a malpractice magnet. shaun is a severely autistic man, who is incredible at his job, and most importantly, we are supposed to like him.

so, on the one hand we have house, who the creator's didn't intentionally write as autistic, who was written in an era where douchebag's with a penchant for offensive behavior was vogue, and on the other hand we have shaun, whose autism is the reason we, the audience, are supposed to root for him.

while i do think there's a whole other laundry bag of complaints to address in the way in which the good doctor treats shaun as a character, and particularly in how the show itself portrays autism, i think those critiques are best left to somebody who has done more than a cursory overview of the show and a consult with their mother, and fundamentally, i do believe authorial intent is the major contributing factor to the difference in how these shows portray autism.

[theroundbartable]

This is a complaint, so I'll leave you the option to just skip past, otherwise I'd be quite hypocritical. You have been warned.

I must say, I am quite upset with the Bridgerton fandom here on Tumblr.

Yes, the fandom. Why? Because every 10th post or so is someone complaining. And you guys really do complain about everything.

You complain about a lack of racism in the show with the black Queen. You complain about individual characters who are written to make mistakes and create drama. You complain about the drama IN the literal drama. You complain about a lack of romance in season 3, about a lack of sex scenes. About certain plot points being resolved too soon even though there will likely be more than three seasons. You complain about queer characters (this is the queer website, if this upsets you go to bloody twitter), about men being rakes in a society where every man is a rake. You complain that the series isn't exactly like the books, even though the books have their flaws too. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Tumblr is known to celebrate works and creativity. Not to nitpick and slander. That is the whole fun in it. If you could at least write your complaints as criticism, or analysis, I'd be far less upset. Because then you'd be contributing to the fandom, rather than mocking everyone who enjoys the very things you disliked.

Fandoms should be warm and welcoming. Instead, I feel humbled and cold every time I take a look at this fandom because I need to be wary of every single person behind every post, about everything I comment or defend. This fandom is a landmine.

Perhaps I'm too sheltered by healthier fandoms. But I feel like half of you are just here to provoke. And you don't even realize that this whole show obsession you've got going on, is disproportionally high und unhealthy for all parties involved. That leads to toxicity within the comments, the posts, and within the fandom itself. Instead of passion, instead of inspiring each other, you're recreating twitter arguments, feuds and fights.

I was originally surprised that the Bridgerton fandom consists mostly of edits and gifs. Barely any art. The fics seem tame, rarely shared. But it makes sense, in a way. You don't support each other. You don't lift each other up and you don't even realize how you are killing yourselves (you=fandom).

And this upsets me. Because I know you can be so much better than that. Because most fandoms here ARE better than that. It breaks my heart to see you sucking the joy out of this show. And out of yourself too.

[truthseekerthedragon]

Status Update + Thoughts on Media Analysis

Hi there, folks. For those of you wondering what I've been up to recently, my next big project is a thoughts post, kind of like the TFoH one, but instead of covering a Wings of Fire book I'm talking about a video game instead: SANABI, an excellent Korean indie game that came out recently. I'll be talking positively about it, which is a nice change of pace from the TFoH post where it was mostly me seething in rage at how awful it was.

The post is gearing up to be extremely long. Unlike for the TFoH post, where I only had to talk about the story and prose and such, in SANABI's case I need to talk about the animation, visual design, soundtrack, and gameplay on top of the story itself. After all, video games are a fundamentally different medium from literature (but still art). Honestly, I'll be lucky if I can get the post out in time for February 10th, Korean New Year's. Hello there to all my fellow Koreans, by the way.

Not only is this game absolutely fantastic—I can think of very few complaints I have about it, and the positives greatly outweigh the negatives—it's not very well known, at least not in the Anglosphere. One reason I'm typing up a thoughts post about this game is because I want more people to learn about it and check it out for themselves.

Spending time writing about SANABI while listening to the game's banger OST also means I've gotten contemplative thinking about the nature of media analysis. Analysis is always going to have a subjective element to it—there are definitely people out there who hate SANABI as much as I love it—and we might even have differing opinions on the same element.

Take cutscenes, for instance. SANABI has a lot of them, utilized to show character interactions and advance the story. While I love the story with all my heart, I'm sure there are people who don't give half an iota about the (excellent!) characters and hate cutscenes with all the wrath of a thousand stampeding buffalo since they interrupt gameplay. As a writer, I'll always be more inclined to see a video game as another medium for storytelling, as opposed to the interactive side of things, so there's always a personal element in these analyses.

We also have the good ol' industry wisdom: "Cutscenes are objectively bad, you should have as little of them in your game as possible!" And while I can see why cutscenes can be detrimental to gameplay, I don't see cutscenes as the spawn of Satan, but rather as a tool used to enhance the video game. They're a tool in the same way that tropes are; when used well, they can make for an excellent experience. Okay, lemme try and figure out what the point of my rambling was... um, tropes and elements are tools, and don't trust anyone who tells you that you should never use semicolons, period.

I've also thought about media comparisons, which I see a lot in the realm of analysis. While I really enjoy things like case studies where similar tropes or story beats in two different stories are examined (heck, I did this in my TFoH post), it's possible to take this a little too far, especially in the realm of expectations. For instance, I've heard about people criticizing Rain World because they played it expecting an experience similar to the Ori games. Well, guess what, Ori and the Blind Forest and Rain World are completely different games. Ori is a platformer and puzzle game, while Rain World has platforming elements but can be described much more accurately by the term "ecosystem simulator."

While digging around, I found out that people often compared SANABI to Katana Zero, another indie game. And the two games do have similarities, but every game offers a different experience, and if you boot up SANABI (a grappling hook platformer with action elements) thinking it'll give you the same experience as Katana Zero (a hack-and-slash game with platforming elements), then of course you'll be disappointed! So maybe don't walk into a game, or stories in general, expecting it to be exactly like another story you like. Every experience is different.

I think I'm done rambling, at least for now. SANABI is cool, go play it or watch a playthrough. (But please avoid spoilers! It's best to go in not knowing anything.) And happy winter holidays, everyone.

[a-student-out-of-time]

hey mod hope ur doing ok, if it helps I think the way the story is going rn is very interesting, and yeah I can understand why some other anons would be annoyed with the Kisaragi Foundation for hiding information, but they're shown to not be perfect or know everything (they're flawed like the rest of the cast), so they thought it'd be better to tell the gang more details until they were done their current mission, mb if my words don't help

//Thank you

//To be honest, my issue isn't so much with the story itself, it's that some people will simply never be satisfied with what answers I provide. Even when I try to explain things like they asked, it's still not enough. It feels like a lose/lose situation, no matter what I do

//"These characters are hiding something from us, and that's why we can't trust them" *(They tell the truth and why they did it)* "Well, since they lied to us, we still can't trust them"

//Like...what do you say to that??? Especially when they start making up what happened not based on what happened in the story, but from personal experiences with lies and applying the exact same logic here, when they're completely unrelated

//There comes a point where "objective analysis of what happens in a story" becomes "projecting personal biases on the characters and making things up out of whole cloth"

//I was actually forced to cut a lot of what I had in mind for the opening of this arc. I was gonna have all kinds of reveals, connect the dots and show people how it all fits together, and I thought that would be fun.

//Instead, I got bombarded with angry asks either saying I forgot that we covered this before, that I was just trying to do damage control for Sunako and co., that this was just trying to answer all of Review Anons complaints, etc.

//And through it all, barely anyone actually paid attention to what was being said. I can't even respond to asks like this normally, because that sets people off too and then it becomes a case of "Oh wow, why even let us ask questions then"

//Because I can't move the story forward if nobody is actually trying to help me. Getting fifty asks telling me we covered this before doesn't help me, and yes, we did cover this before, but I was providing greater context to the whole situation and how it relates to the entire situation

//But no, I had to get straight to the answer just so all this would stop and i could actually tell the story like I wanted. Everyone who actually gave a damn about what's going on, you're the real MVPs, you really are

//I didn't forget anything, I've been working on this arc in the back of my mind for months now and I've got people who helped me hash out all the details.

//All I ask is that I be allowed to actually tell the story I'm trying to tell, and that people pay attention to what's being said. Is that an unreasonable request?

[analogskullerosis]

Here’s what I think, for whatever it may be worth. I think your videos on Nickelodeon shows are meandering drivel that take forever to form any kind of meaningful analysis or thesis statement. I think there are way too many unnecessary tangents and a better writer would’ve been able to condense a good 1/3rd of your newest video’s runtime into something more meaningful and more easily digestible. I can respect the hustle and the work and the niche you’ve found with the Nick videos, but I personally didn’t enjoy it. Those feelings aside, I’d love nothing more than to see where you go AFTER this.

As for the “ruining video essay culture” complaint, I agree with you that a claim like that is really dumb and doesn’t mean anything. I wouldn’t lose sleep over that if I were you. I don’t know what the proper classification for your video would be, but my mind wouldn’t immediately think “video essay.” “Overly long analysis/review” or “the ramblings of an insane man who fell down a very odd rabbit hole” are probably better classifications.

In response to the length complaint, I do think your videos are way too long, but that’s more of a systemic problem with YouTube itself rather than anything specifically on your part. The current YouTube atmosphere and it’s algorithm basically force creators to have to produce really really long videos about niche topics in order to boost Minutes Watched and engagement in order to survive on the platform and actually make a living off of it. You’re not the first guy to make a super long video off of something like a Nickelodeon sitcom people only kinda remember, and you probably won’t be the last. It’s the current nature of the beast and while I might complain that 9.5 hours is needless and way too long, I at least have enough sense to understand why a video on the topic would stretch to that length, whether I like it or not.

Honestly, I’ve personally never enjoyed your videos about Nickelodeon shows, but I’ve enjoyed a good number of others that you’ve made in the past. When you’re good, you’re really good. You say you’re hoping to be able to move on and I really hope you get to as well. I think there are a lot more interesting topics you could cover and I think breaking away and doing something new could possibly help combat any of the negative feedback you’ve received from the Twitter/X crowd. I think it would also help you to be able to take on something that doesn’t ask as much of you.

In short, I think a lot of the replies and reblogs you’ve gotten on this post have shown that people are finding positives in your work and you should focus on those voices rather than the more negative ones. It’s a tall order, but I think you could really benefit from trying to not caring so much what other people think of your work (and hell, you can even start by disregarding this now overly long reply, if you so choose). It’s not always easy to block out the negative feedback. Some nasty comments can really stick around and haunt a fella (I’ve been there). Creative people are always terrified about how others will perceive and take their work, so I understand your need to ask how people are feeling about it. Lucky for you, it seems that a lot of people are enjoying it and treating it as a great End of the Year Event™️.

If you take the time to read this, I hope this reply comes across as constructive.

Take some time to sit back and enjoy the end of the year, Quinton. Interested to see where 2024 takes you. ♥️

Hey tumblr

Well, as per usual, "X's" response to my latest video has been a bunch of viral tweets about how I'm ruining "video essay culture" (whatever the fuck that is) by making content that's too long or something. The people of X seem to think that I only do plot recaps, and also that too much of my videos are intermission analysis segments.

How are you guys liking the new video? I know Sam & Cat part 2 was controversial even here. I'm hoping part 3 has gone over a little better. I spent about a year on it, and I've been eagerly anticipating the ability to move on.

[blueskittlesart]

Okay okay big ask - rate every loz game you’ve played (by stars or in order I don’t mind)

ok lets go!! i rated them on both story and gameplay seperately bc those r 2 different ratings in my mind lol. they're in the order i played them except aoc at the end bc it's not main-line. i also left out games i haven't finished yet (nes zelda, zelda II, ALBW)

OOT: gameplay 9/10 | story 1000000/10 video game of all time. i mean this with 100% sincerity playing oot was fundamental for me. gameplay gets 1 point off tho bc i vividly remember crying because i couldn't make the camera go where i wanted it to the first time i ever played it

MM: gameplay 7/10 | story 10/10 i think this game is a perfectly cohesive sequel to oot in basically every way possible. the navi thing makes me insane obviously but i won't dock a point for it because i understand narratively why the choice was made and like. it works. the only complaint i have with this game is that the gameplay itself was super difficult for me both now and when i was younger--not the dungeons specifically, but the timer being there and counting down in real time was so anxiety-inducing for me that it distracted from the story. I do actually like the timer from like an objective standpoint and i think it was really well-implemented i just can't enjoy it fully because of my own hangups lol

BOTW: gameplay 10/10 | story 1000/10 perfect game. i don't feel the need to elaborate. i genuinely think in like 10 years this game is going to be the modern-day oot in terms of industry influence

ALTTP: gameplay 8/10 | story 8/10 okay this is my first less-than-perfect story score and i want to make it clear that i am obsessed with the story of alttp ok. obsessed. but i can recognize that a lot of what i find great about this game comes from my own analysis and is. not actually super present in the source material. and it is the 3rd loz game ever released and. well. it shows. that being said i think of all the 2d games to play you should play this one

LINK'S AWAKENING: gameplay 6/10 | story 0/10 sorry i. did not like this game lol. too much retro-style gameplay and not enough interesting story to make up for it. i also vehemently hate platformers so the sidescrolling dungeon segments made me want to kms. the story also does not actually happen like. within the game's own canon bc it's all a dream so i couldn't bring myself to care. i never even beat this game bc the final boss pissed me off too much

TP: gameplay 8/10 | story 0/10 fuck this game. the story sucked. it was poorly written and disjointed, a huge mess thematically, and 90% of the non-dungeon gameplay felt like needless padding. i've said it before and i'll say it again: twilight princess was an oot remake written by people who did not understand ocarina of time and got all their information on the loz franchise from youtube videos with clickbait thumbnails entitled "10 DARK SECRETS nintendo doesn't want you to know!!!" that being said the motion controls were still better than sksw and it had some of the better dungeon designs in the franchise. fuck that fishing minigame tho

SKSW: gameplay 4/10 | story 10/10 ok to preface this i played the original wii version which is why the gameplay rating is so low. i would rather die than play through this game on my shitty old wii again holy shit. that being said the story was phenomenal and i'm really glad it got a remake with a functional control scheme so hopefully more people will see that

WW: gameplay 6/10 | story 9/10 this is a hard one for me. again i need you to understand that i played the gameboy version and therefore had to do the gameboy triforce hunt which is why the gameplay score is so low, but there were also some quality-of-life things like the hitbox sizes and some of the dungeon design that pissed me off a bit. as for the story, there are pieces of it that i could analyze obsessively for hours on end but there are also pieces that are kind of clunky to me in regards to the overall lore so it gets a less-than-perfect score lol

(bonus because it isn't really a main-line loz game) HWAOC: gameplay 8/10 | story 6/10 sigh. i want to like this game way more than i do. the gameplay is genuinely fun at times if a bit underwhelming compared to the game it takes its setting and characters from, but it never claimed to be a mainline game so i don't fault it too much for that. the story could be SO GOOD and there are some pockets of greatness in there (the sword-claiming scene, the scene where zelda's powers activate, general extra characterization of the champions, etc) but they just had to throw in some timeline fuckery and the most boring hot-topic-wannabe villain in the fucking world and ruin it for themselves. agh

[candied-cae]

Fuck you and your shitty misogynist AND racist Yen headcanons. The actress isn't white, asshole.

Firstly, I'd like to say I love how Anya has played Yen. I haven't gone over it on this account yet, but you will never see me complain about more diversity in media. Anya loves Yennefer and performs her beautifully with such a heartfelt attachment to the character, and I love everything about the performance itself. I don't care that Anya is an Indian actress and Yennefer in other mediums is white, I haven't read the books nor played the games, so they mean very little to me. And it's really good that we get to have an Indian woman playing an undeniably beautiful and powerful character.

I've never criticized Anya's portrayal, only the writing of the show's dialogue and story line. I don't really ever complain about actors, only directors because at the end of the day they decide what goes on the screen and how the actors do their jobs.

Secondly, I'm not entirely sure which take of mine you're referring to Anon, so let's review all of my discussion posts about Yennefer, shall we?

There's this one - where I critically examined Yennefer's character, and how I really want to love her but the writing is making me dislike her. In which I acknowledge several parts of her that I do like, but how overall it's rubbing me the wrong way morally.

There's this one - where I criticize how the writers have set up Geralt and Yennefer's relationship, in which I blame both of them for not having a healthy relationship and now the story is going to have to push the "a child will fix us" narrative which personally irks me as a child who grew up seeing my mom with bad boyfriends.

But I'm assuming most likely it's this post and this one since you bring up racism. Which, I will be the first to admit that no matter how much self education and accountability I do, it's a life long commitment to unlearn the systems of oppression that are taught to us. BUT- to the best of my knowledge- me loving Francesca's line doesn't come from Sexist or Racist unconscious biases.

I feel I explained it rather lengthily, especially in the second post, but my feelings about Yen are about Yen, not Anya. The Continent has shown us no racism nor colorism, except for in the bounds of humans vs. elves and dwarves. In this case, Anya being Indian is not a struggle Yennefer faces, but Yennefer aligns herself as a human, someone at the top of the system of oppression. All of which is canon material I pulled directly from the show, not headcanons. And then tries to manipulate elves into freeing her of consequence in the same way that white people use DNA tests to absolve themselves of racist criticism. Again, I explain this point repeatedly in the posts.

So I do apologize if my message was unclear, but my criticisms of Yennefer's character have everything to do with the show's writing, and nothing to do with Anya's race.

But if there are further complaints about my analysis of The Witcher, feel free to leave me with better hints as to what you disagree with, and I'd be happy to have a conversation or write more detailed explanation about why I think what I think. Personal aggression just distracts from the conversation.

More Witcher

[gale-gentlepenguin]

ML Analysis: Love Rival: Why Kagami works but is still hated and why Luka doesn’t but is loved

Now this will be my most controversial Hot take, a lot of you already saw the title and are already organizing your complaints. I don't care, you are free to do so. 

In a previous post, I discussed what makes a good love rival and if you want a good explanation of that, click the in bold link. 

This is a VERY LONG POST, so I am posting a read more. I would love to hear your thoughts on this analysis. Do you agree? Do you disagree? Did you want to include something? Let me know.

I think in order to organize this post I will be splitting it up as follows.

Why Kagami Works as a Love Rival

Why She is Hated for it

Why Luka Doesn't Work as a Love Rival

Why He is Loved despite it

Final thoughts

So lets get to it

_______________________________________________________________________

Why Kagami Works as a Love Rival

Kagami Tsurugi was introduced in the episode Riposte, where she is established as a straightforward, no nonsense fencer that wants to be the best. 

Her introduction is solid, she establishes her base and what the audience is supposed to know about her from the getgo. We also get the impression that Kagami when introduced would be a rival to Adrien, as they are competing in Fencing, which makes for a nice twist when they end up getting along and Kagami begins the task of being a Love rival. She starts off as a foil for Adrien, but then the reveal is she is actually a character foil for Marinette.

What also helps Kagami is that the show is mainly from Marinette’s perspective, so we get to see Kagami as Marinette does, as someone that is competing for Adrien’s affections, cementing the Rival aspect of the Love rival. Kagami clashes with Marinette causing Marinette to in turn be more upfront with her feelings and push harder to try and win over Adrien. This is something a good rival does, pushing Marinette forward and making her have to try. This rival aspect of Kagami’s character give Marinette urgency, which is something that is needed in order to drive Marinette towards a conclusion, whether it is to pursue Adrien or move on. 

Now as a love interest, Kagami establishes her relationship with Adrien in a different way then Marinette. Kagami’s straightforward nature allowed her to tell Adrien how she felt much earlier on, she pushes and asserts herself. This contrasts Marionette’s approach to wooing Adrien, and also has an interesting parallel to how Chat Noir handles his feelings towards Ladybug. Acting as a mirror towards that relationship. While Kagami is not flirtatious like chat noir, she is upfront about her feelings. She puts it out there and is understanding when Adrien isn't ready to respond, much like how chat noir is with ladybug. But the difference being that ladybug and Chat noir’s dynamic has a bit more complexity to it. Regardless, Kagami checks the boxes needed to be a true love rival.

Now the last and most crucial part about Kagami is the character at the core. Cause in the end, we know her and Adrien’s relationship wont be endgame, and interestingly she will be better off afterwards. Ikari Gozen does an excellent job filling in more information about Kagami’s character. In this we get to see that Kagami’s life doesn't revolve around being Adrien’s love interest, she is someone that has her own struggles and wants to find freedom in her own way, be friends with people, but she is awkward. Her development from this and Loveater shows how much she has grown on her own, how she has come to see Marinette as a friend, how she understands that there is more to life than just fencing. She wants to prove she is good enough, and wants to show she is worthy of friendship and love. Those are themes and traits that can be cultivated and grown. Kagami’s greatest appeal is that she can grow beyond her role as a Love rival, and that is why she succeeds.

____________________________________________________________________

Why She is Hated for it

Now despite all of these great qualities Kagami has demonstrated as well as how perfect her character is for such a role, the fandom is mixed about her, some even down right hating her. Interestingly enough, the reasons they dislike Kagami is not because of her character. Especially when you consider the rise in popularity of Marigami. Its because of 3 other factors outside of Kagami’s control. Over-saturation, Writing, and Fandom trends.

Over-saturation seems like an odd choice but it perfectly describes the situation. In season 1, we are introduced to two other female characters that were reoccurring characters AND were romantically interested in Adrien. Chloé bourgeois and Lila Rossi. Now both of them can be considered antagonists, and that is kind of the problem. Two reoccurring female characters already have a thing for Adrien, and both of them are jerks (that being the lightest term I can use). Now we know Adrien would never end up with a bad girl, but that impression starts to stick and make it seem like a pattern. That Adrien only attracts bad people (excluding Marinette). By season 2, when Kagami was introduced, it just seemed to the fans like, “Oh great, ANOTHER one”. Despite Kagami being a good character, and someone that actually cares about Adrien outside of the shallow aspects that Lila and Chloé were invested in, fans were ready to write her off and, with how the show was written, you couldn't really blame them at the time. 

The second is a bit more obvious, the shows writing. The largest offender being Frozer and Oni-chan. While Oni-chan was salted on by fans a bit excessively, I have no real defense for Frozer, Frozer was an awful episode and everyone involved should feel bad. Kagami suffers like many ML characters do from poor writing, now this doesn't destroy her character like many would like you to believe, but she gets portrayed in a more negative light when the intentions are not meant for it. Its a bit harder to explain, but just know poor writing and assume Zag interference was what caused issues.

The Last one is something that is a bit more controversial, Fandom trends. Now in season 2, fans really, REALLY, did not like Kagami. The first two reasons having a large impact on that, but what really made it hard for Kagami, was the fandom itself. Since she was introduced first, certain lovesquare shippers LOATHED her appearance, HOW DARE she jump in and disrupt the love square! There are more words that were used, most of which are very degrading towards women and I would not want to repeat. Kagami took the brunt of the fandom backlash, the one that ‘Ruined the Lovesquare’. And when season 3, or as I call it, the season of Salt, fans really hit her hard with hatred, the Adrigami fandom took a lot of salt from toxic stans, some of which didn't like adrigami because they hated Adrien and didn't want him to be happy. It is gross to think about and its tragic that she is hit hard by hatred simply for things outside of her control.

_______________________________________________________________________

Why Luka Doesn't Work as a Love Rival

Luka is the alternate love interest of Marinette and was introduced in Captain Hardrock. He is Juleka’s older brother and is a guitarist.

His introduction is not terrible, but it is not as strong compared to other characters, but I do believe it sets the mood for what he is as a character. His character is the friend’s nice older brother musician, thats kind of it. It sounds like I am being mean but that sums up his character. He isn't really a foil to Adrien or Marinette in anyway, there is no shocking twists or clever parallels to be made, its just Luka. Simply put, Luka doesn't work as a Love rival.

Luka isn't a rival character. He isn't competing with Adrien, he doesn't clash with Adrien in anyway that would help him develop. Adrien and Luka get along fine, there is not a single bit of tension or conflict between them. This isn't a good thing when they are suppose to be competing for the same girl. I already hear what you are thinking, ‘But Adrien likes Ladybug.’ you're right, why isn't Luka interested in Ladybug then? Why is there no clash with chat noir? The point of a Love rival is to push another character towards something, to be a measuring stick. Luka doesn't do that for Adrien, and that is why the rival aspect fails for Luka.

The next course would be the love interest part. Surely Luka is someone that works well as an alternate love interest for Marinette? You are somewhat right, he does work better as a love interest for Marinette rather than a rival for Adrien. But that doesn't make him a good love interest for her. In my take on Love rivals, there needs to be three criteria met to be an effective love rival/love interest, an unequal development of both character, a differing connection that the two share, and a character underneath that can exist outside of the relationship. Luka fails to meet 2 of these criteria. The unequal development of both of them, Marinette has shown some development from her interactions with Luka but the reverse is not provable, we have yet to see Luka really change because of his relationship with Marinette, we don't know how much Marinette has helped/hindered Luka with his struggles, the best argument I could think of was that Marinette helped him be more bold in silencer, but really that sort of falls flat because he has shown bold actions outside of that. Captain hard rock said that he wasn't really good at expressing himself with words, but he shows pretty capable of doing so with people outside of Marinette, like his sister, or expressing anger to Bob Roth, so I don't really see how that works. The other criteria he fails to meet is having a character should the relationship end, Luka’s relevance is tied to him being the other guy for Marinette to choose, we as a viewer have no concrete reason as of yet to see him grow or change after the split. It doesn't help that Luka has even encouraged Marinette to go after Adrien on multiple occasions. People say thats because he is truly selfless and ‘Because he cares’ but really it just shows how little interest he has in trying to win her over, it almost comes off as insulting to Marinette. The only thing that Luka managed to pass was by having a different dynamic with Marinette than Adrien had with her. But that dynamic is shoulder to cry on. I guess that explains why salt fics really try to make Luka into Adrien.

Luka’s character in itself isn't awful, he isn't a bad person or anything of the sort. He is inoffensive and thats the problem. A love rival is suppose to be a point of tension, one that pushes, one that causes development, a force that at its core is meant to help the characters grow, and Luka just isn't the character to do that. He isn't a love rival, or a love interest. Luka is a wall, a wall put in between the two main leads in order to cause a divide without causing tension.

_______________________________________________________________________

Why He is Loved despite it

Luka isn't a love rival, and yet despite it he is one of the more popular characters in the fandom. It was something so mind boggling to me, what did this character have that made him so well liked in the fandom? Why wasn't he as hated as Kagami was during her introduction? I found myself coming up with three reasons why this was the case. Luka was so loved because of Necessity, writing and Salt.

 Much Like Kagami suffered from Over-saturation, Luka had the Opposite problem. Marinette’s other love interests all ended up losing interest by the end of the episodes they were in. Nino, Nathaniel, Theo (though it was for ladybug). All of them just got paired off with someone else shortly after. Marinette didn't have another person outside of Adrien that was potentially going for her attention. This necessity allowed for Luka to slip in and fill the gap. The fandom saw him show up and were excited! With Kagami *ruining* the lovesquare, they needed someone for Marinette to help mend her should kagami ‘Win’, and Luka won by default. So Luka was the one the screeching fandom saw as there answer.

The next key that helped Luka was the writing of the show. The problem with the writing in the show is that often the writing will clash and hurt the strong characters of the show. Luka, as someone that does not have any strong defining features is flexible and easy to write for the writers. It makes it easy for him to be written in a way that wont infuriate people because of bad writing. He is able to coast by without having his character be in jeopardy. In a way, he has nothing to lose.

The last factor is of course salt. Now in fandoms, salt is used as a means of criticism or used to describe problems with characters. Luka is someone that people don't really have a problem with, which during the season of salt, made him perfect for all those fics where they needed someone to be on Marinette’s side because Adrien was ‘the devil’ or Lila was an extra mean jerk. Luka didn't have any problems that were agitated by salt, so he was the perfect replacement for Adrien when the writer wanted to hate on the blonde. Luka was the substitute, he was the easy fix that took little effort to include. He was a nice older brother that already liked Marinette, perfect fix for any situation. Its rare to see Luka written in a negative light without his character being warped so far that he is a completely different character.

Luka is loved not because of the things he is, but simply because of the things he is not. He is used more as a means to an end rather than as a character. In the writing, he is more of a wall, while in the fandom he is more of a stand-in. At the end of the day, I don't know what is more tragic.

_______________________________________________________________________

Final Thoughts

Kagami and Luka are characters that were introduced in order to spice things up and add development for the main characters. I find that in some ways they do achieve that goal, but in other ways they fail. One of them embodies the spirit of a Love rival while the other embodies the love obstacle. Regardless of this analysis, your thoughts on Kagami and Luka are your own and you can love and appreciate them as you see fit.

______________________________________________________________________

If you want to support my insanity. Buy me sushi please 

[illusioncanthurtme]

(I'm kind of responding to this, as well as the responses people have left on this post)

I can't make some sort of in-depth analysis, just due to the fact that I haven't actually watched it since it came out. Tbh, most of what I know about it comes from the parts I remember, screenshots and stuff, and what other people on tumblr have said about it.

So do I like it? I have no idea. It's been too long. I could rewatch it, but I am willing to admit upfront that the reason I love iz (and why ive been really into it lately) is mostly - or at least has has its roots in - nostalgia. So I'm hesitant to rewarch florpus, because I know it's going to be really different from the invader zim I know and love. And I'm enjoying this nostalgia trip, and I don't want to tear myself away from that by seeing these nostalgic characters in a different context. And I think that's the root of why people don't like it much: it's just doesn't have the same vibe as the old iz.

That being said, different doesn't equate to bad. People have pointed out that not only the art style is different, but also the personalities of the characters, and the nature of the writing, etc. And at face value, I think it's purely that way because this is a MODERN iteration of invader zim. It's not going to be like the OG (dark, gritty), because that's not how cartoons are now, that's not the trend. (Thats not a complaint - cartoons will always have select styles, visual and writing, that get made into feature shows, and the norm will continue to change and cycle.)

Today, cartoons/animated movies make the emotional journeys of their characters the focal point. You see this with the moment at the end with membrane. People are saying that was ooc and maybe Not Good considering how neglectful - amongst other things - membrane is towards dib/gaz. Which i get, but also, i feel like the florpus membrane is probably supposed to be an overall better guy. For the writers purpose, for them to make a heartfelt dad and son moment, they wanted a good dad who realizes his wrongs. Does that really fit the vibe of the og show? No, but I feel like florpus is less of a real "canon" continuation of the original, and more like "au where invader zim is a show made today."

You see that in the art style - everything being round obviously, but also the backgrounds. The sky was never blue in the og, and I've been wondering if that's because of pollution or something - that the sky is literally darkened from human impact on earth. And that would have been too dark for the florpus, because it's a *modern* animation made for kids.

I feel like I'm rambling a bit, but basically, I'm saying that the difference between the two is solely because of trends, and how cartoons have changed. If you went to an animation company today, and pitched a cartoon where an alien tries to take over earth, even IF your pilot was all dark and gritty, and your aliens nemesis was all annoying and maladjusted, they would still take the concept and massage it until it fits the mold of cartoons today. Which is bright and round and has blatant emotional exploration of its characters.

If you're like me, and find comfort in the nostalgia of the og iz, the florpus isn't gonna be super satisfying, which is fine. That wasn't the purpose of the movie. I think florpus by itself was probably a perfectly fine movie (again, I haven't seen it in a while, but I remember liking it), but if you try to get the same sort of enjoyment from it as you do the original, you're going to be disappointed. It's a good movie if you agree to acknowledge the disconnect between it - and the show.

ETF is very different from the series but i kinda enjoy it?

Like, the atmosphere of the setting is way less grim and macabre, and we even had some very aww emotional moments (because it's a film and films have a different episode structure). And well, i'm a sucker for happy endings, so it was nice to see Professor Membrane and Gaz have some touching moments with Dib. (i just wanna them to heal ok) (it's a start at least)

Basically i like to see the differences between the series and ETF as if they were the consequences of the timeskip.

Gaz very explicitly worrying about her brother's well being + Dib imposing himself on his father because both of them (Gaz and Dib) are more mature, the sky is more beautiful because idk maybe it's some invention the Professor made to help the Earth??

ETF gives me a hopeful, somehow healing and comforting atmosphere, and it feels nice

But then again, i'm a sucker for happy endings and healing

Now about the designs, i liked the colors in general, but it's my most vibrant and "happy" color style.

I really liked Dib's ghost shirt, since i study character design a lot, this says a lot about him. I just didn't like the red sneakers so in my re-imagined version i draw him with a black all star (i like to leave the goth boots for when he's older). And now he has more hair lol (i like to leave the undercut for when he's older too)

Gaz was the one with the biggest redesign, and just like Dib i liked her new shirt. But in my re-imagined version i mix her design from the series with ETF, i like to imagine her with a long-sleeved striped shirt underneath.

I don't have much to say about Professor Membrane's redesign, but i liked the small changes, he's not so skinny anymore and has more hair too

Also ETF gave me things i always wanted to happen:

- Alternative realities

- Professor Membrane being a good present father

- Touching moments between the Membrane family

- Zim discovering the mission was a lie

- Zim (almost) winning for real

- ANIME IZ!! (my 13-year-old self can rest in peace)

- The trial scenario

So yeah, i really like the movie, i had a lot of fun.

It's a great film to end the IZ franchise to me.

also tell me your opinions! i wanna hear it

[apenitentialprayer]

Hey! I just wanted to say that I thought the asks you answered were interesting. I’m not a Christian but I do a lot of writing and art that uses Christian ideas. I mostly focus on fallen Angels and their struggles with a loss of innocence. They do have some redeeming qualities in my writing at least amoung each other and how they still have emotions and suffer. I thought that your analysis of evil and free will was interesting. I don’t usually see the sort of morally grey view on good vs evil in Christian discussions. So I wonder if you have thoughts on these characters? Especially a character who is very evil but tries to protect another fallen angel who is more innocent and hurt. And does their suffering make up for anything they’ve done? Especially the weaker character who has never really done much wrong except willingly fall.

Maybe a strange ask lol, but I just am interested in a Christian perspective on these things. I thought your other answers were very thoughtful!

I'm glad that you liked my other answers. You might not like this one, though. Trigger warning, there's a pretty gory analogy in the second to last paragraph.

I do think fictional depictions of fallen angels who experience moments of goodness or even moments of redemption can be incredibly compelling - Tamara and the Demon comes to mind where such a character is brutal and violent yet kind of tragic ("not an angel or a demon, but a tortured soul").

But Christians don't see these beings as fictional things; they are a spiritual reality. And the reality is much more bleak, because angelic fallenness is not the same as human fallenness.

Humans are children who think they're adults; creatures limited by time and space who think they know more than they really do; beings who are ignorant of but hopeful for whatever the redeemed World to Come will be like. The fact that we live in time, and the fact that we only get to see an itty bitty part of God's overarching plan, means that any act of rebellion isn't final, is capable of being fixed, is subject to change based on new experiences and shifts in perspective.

But that is not the case with the angels; they are much smarter than us, they don't exist in time the way we do, and they are already capable of seeing exactly how they fit in the divine plan. And what is there to do when God creates the best possible plan of salvation for the world, and there are angels who demand that it go their way, or no way at all?

If we can call demons tragic, it's because they have an over-inflated sense of their own importance at the expense of the rest of Creation, and in embracing that over-inflated sense of self they lose themselves in that process (kind of the opposite of what I said in that first post about the problem of evil, where a human being who consistently subordinates himself for the love of others will ultimately grow into his truest self).

A demon is the closest thing we have to real life cosmic horror; a bleeding wound, a rabidly deranged animal, a miniature god throwing a tantrum and deciding that he must impose his will on what he can and destroy everything else. If Hell stands undivided, it is not in the sense that Heaven stands undivided; if Heaven is a community where individuals come together in love to serve one another and grow into a family, Hell is a mouth that draws as much as it can into itself and where the strong dominate and degrade the weak - and the weak's only complaint about the system being is that they should be the ones on top doing this to others. The problem is that God is the source of all goodness, all beauty, and all truth. And these beings so despise their connectedness to God that they close themselves off to these things. It's like a man removing his own organs with a box cutter to show he isn't dependent on biology to live; the reasoning is insane, and what you have left when you remove these things is nothing pretty.

Hell is the progressive deterioration of anything good in you, the growing isolation of becoming more and more sure that you are the only person worthy of the designation of 'person', of deciding that an eternity of loneliness done your way is better than an eternity of blissful relationships where you have real accountability. And a being that insists on needing nothing can only be offered nothing - and can only give nothing.

[deepspaceclawstation]

I watched Discovery S4 Episode 2 that came out today and I have to say, they are really stepping up the game here. I don't know if there have been any behind-the-scenes changes in the writers' room but whatever it is, it's working great!

(Discovery S4 spoilers, please skip to avoid. Blacklist tags are "#ST Discovery spoilers" and "#ST Discovery S4")

This season on a whole has better dialogue and the plot narrative flows really naturally. I like that they seem to have paid special attention to character beats - their actions and motivations, and even their reactions are a lot more natural now. I also like that they have further established distinct emotional maturity levels and technical skill sets for each character, yet there is no disbelief involved in seeing this diverse cast come together to solve problems. This has been my complaint with Discovery since day 1, that the plot and character actions seem convoluted, so I'm very happy with the vast improvement.

I like the way they represented Federation and allied authority figures! We see Admiral Vance's family after the Ep 1 Archer Dock scene, which was a nice touch. President Rillak is an interesting character (and my wife) who is at odds with Michael without (yet) being presented as outright wrong or 'evil' and I'm really excited to see her dynamic with Michael grow and how her storyline plays out. Really like that President T'Rina of Nivar was present at the anomaly threat analysis meeting, it solidifies Nivar as a strong ally to the Federation (I'm keeping an eye out on the Rillak/T'Rina tag on ao3, I have a strong feeling about it).

When did Saru get so wise? He's really stepping into that Space Dad role and I love it! Tilly's facing some existential crises but I'm sure she'll get through. Adira and Gray are adorable as always and have some fun stuff going on. First Trek on-screen mention of transitioning Let's Go!!!! Book suffered a tragic loss and ngl I had tears in my eyes in the Ep 2 private comm link between him and Michael. I don't like Stamets much but they toned down his gruffness a bit so he's tolerable now. I don't know who had the galaxy brain idea to pair him with Book but their scenes together were unexpectedly touching and the attempted parallels between them make so much sense.

And now to the star of the show - Michael! I have always been pretty indifferent towards Michael Burnham, mainly because I could never get a sense what the show wanted to do with her. Was she a criminal, a child stuck between two cultures, someone struggling with parental expectations, or just someone trying to deal with loss the best way she can? Of course, all these identities need not be mutually exclusive but somehow Discovery never managed to bring them together in a cohesive manner. Until this season, that is. S4 Michael is more emotionally mature than her earlier counterparts, while still having that mischievous spark in her eyes. She's responsible, she's self-aware, and she now has Character FlawsTM. I don't know what exactly it is that has shifted, but I can finally get behind Captain Burnham.

There were also some nice easter eggs like Hugh referencing Picard (I'm not tagging for Picard spoilers so won't go into detail), and the reveal of Archer Space Dock with Archer's theme playing in that scene. I am pleased that Discovery has finally learned how to poke fun at itself as is evident in Stamet's airlock joke, and Saru acknowledging the convenience of Bryce's unexpected sky-surfing (?) hobby. Some may feel that Stamets letting go of his resentment so soon was a cop-out but I am satisfied with the way it was handled, it had just that touch of awkwardness involved that made it plausible.

That said, I was scared for a bit when I started Ep 1 because tbh the butterfly people planet scenes were excruciating to watch. I was not a huge fan of the humour and the whole trade exchange didn't seem well thought out in-universe ans it really took me out of the scene. It seemed like they were trying to imitate the beginning of Into the Darkness and it just didn't work for me. Thankfully, it lasted only till the 'cold open' (pre-theme song) and I've not encountered a single awkward scene since then, a far cry from the embarrassing maudlin sentimentality of S2.

I never thought I'd be praising Discovery this much, but it seems it has kept up with the time-honoured Trek tradition of falling into stride after S3. I just hope they don't stretch out the season-long arc too much or they risk losing steam halfway through the season like in S2, which started similarly strong plot-wise. Very excited to learn more about the anomaly and the emotional and political ramifications of the Kweijan tragedy.

[number-1-kuaidul-fanboy]

Overanalyzing Paradox

So I have this series on Quotev where I analyze villains in certain categories and since this blog is all about Yugioh (which I haven’t been watching lately due to being more focused on writing lately but I promise I’ll get back to Zexal soon), I figured I’d put it here too. Also, this is purely based on Paradox’s appearance in Bonds Beyond Time, which I've seen both the dub and sub for. I have not seen 5Ds and didn't want to wait until I saw Paradox's apparently super minor part in it to make this analysis. If I have something to say about his portrayal there, I’ll say it when I see it. Anyways, here I go overanalyzing a minor children’s anime villain with next to no villains for the SECOND fandom now. (Okay but Paradox low-key cute though. Where my homies at?)

Backstory/Motivation 9/10

Yugioh really likes giving its villains insanely sympathetic backstories. Pegasus got his eye ripped out and lost his wife, Marik was imprisoned and abused, Bakura's village was massacred, Yubel was twisted into believing that showing love is the same as causing pain, you get the idea. Paradox's backstory is that everyone and everything he knew died in an apocalypse which he blames the game Duel Monsters for. How founded that accusation isn't completely clear. In the sub it's more up to interpretation and Paradox is "experimenting" with the timeline but in the dub he's completely convinced Duel Monsters is the cause of suffering. In both versions, he believes he's the good guy and is saving his future from destruction, which is actually really interesting. His motivation isn't really evil, it's actually understandable and even heroic at first glance: it's the way he's going about it that makes him evil. Stealing those cards, murdering Pegasus (and tons of innocent bystanders), and dooming entire generations of people to being erased from existence is going really far. But he merely sees them as necessary sacrifices to his "noble" goal. That's honestly horrifying and kind of realistic.

Design 8/10

I love anime designs. They're just... So over the top. I mean... look at him. Look at edgy blond Christmas tree man with big muscles. I'm not sure how to even approach this. I think he looks silly but in a fun way, just like the movie he's from: silly but fun. He's not meant to traumatize children (unlike SOMEONE) he's meant to be the villain of a silly fan service movie so the design works for that.

How they posed a threat 8/10

This is an odd complaint but I think they make Paradox TOO much of a threat. If the protagonists lose to him, then all of their eras in time and even the Duel Monsters game itself will cease to exist, giving the protagonists no room to fail. So Yugi, Judai, and Yusei, three characters with radically different dueling styles and no experience dueling alongside each other, are magically able to duel together without much issue because the plot demands it. It's pretty forced writing. Still, messy writing aside, Paradox is an effective villain and he does pose a more larger threat than most Yugioh villains, putting the entire existence of the card game our characters hold near and dear and the universes of GX and 5Ds at stake.

Character 8/10

I am... more attached to Paradox than I probably should be. I sympathized with his story the way he explained it in the dub. In the sub, I was at first disappointed that he was more of a jerk and uses the word "experiment" to talk about what he's doing to the timeline, somewhat implying that he's committing these atrocities just to see what happens. It seems a lot more callous than the dub, where he acts much more certain that Duel Monsters is the cause of his destroyed future. His motivation is still the same however. He wants to prevent his world from being destroyed and he will do anything to achieve that. In the sub, that desperation drives him over the edge and makes him lash out when the protagonists start to gain the upper hand. (The dub doesn't portray this scene with as much severity.) He's brutal, his voice is crazed with anger, he flat out demands to know what Yusei thinks he can do to save the doomed future. It's startling, especially after how nonchalant he seemed throughout the rest of the film. However, it makes sense. During the duel, the protagonist trio insist that the future isn't set in stone and they can change it, but Paradox has seen for a fact that this is wrong. He's from the future. He's from a future far beyond their time, where Yugi, Judai, and Yusei have already lived their lives and passed on and that future has gone to shit. Paradox knows they haven't changed anything. He knows that history, the way it is now, caused a future where everything and everyone he knows has DIED. Of course he's freaking out. From his point of view, he's the only one who can or will do anything to save his destroyed world. It's very interesting and I kind of wish he'd been redeemed.

Overall Score: 8/10 Great Villain/Character