#this is such an objective example but like in general. I always try to apologize if I think I made a wrong call in the moment

[ripepineapple]

weird that working with kids gives some people such a big power trip. I had to give a sincere apology today because I told a kid snakes don’t have bones but looked it up and they have 400!! How cool is that!!

[year2000electronics]

i think obsessive/selfish/misguided love or “harmful” love in general as an antithetical theme to gravity falls’ theme of love and family makes so much sense. if you think about it, a lot of the conflict in the show is born out of selfishness and obsessiveness and loving people as objects or means to an end. obviously, you have the big examples like gideon for mabel and giffany for soos, but every time both sets of the pines twins have butted heads, it’s usually been because of that too. just in like, a different way.

stan and mabel are both relying on dipper and ford to stay anchored to them forever to secure their happiness, and even though it’s a totally okay thought to have and dipper and ford weren’t in too much of a rush to consider their feelings, it’s a bandaid solution at best! dipper ends up NOT leaving because that’s the right thing for them but it’s not totally because the pines twins are a “set of two” who can’t be separated. it’s a decision they make mutually! mabel even says that she would be okay with dipper taking the apprenticeship, she just needed a minute to be frustrated!

and then of course you have stan and ford where stan leaving ford meant stan would lose his only friend, but even in their adult years, they clearly still love each other (ford and stan both apologizing profusely every time they land a devastating enough hit) but their selfish desire to have the other admit they’re the “villain”, to have a scapegoat to blame a whole series of factors on, overtakes them and buries that love. even as old men they’re still trying to get something out of the other before anything else (ford’s house and name, stan’s “thank you”). stan and ford want to love each other deep down so badly but this giant means to an end is in the way

you even see that sort of motif with characters like dipper and pacifica, where dipper’s crush on wendy almost always has negative results because, not only can it never be due to the age gap, but every time he tries to court her, it’s usually in the way a prize is to be won. he makes an itemized list of a process that is “guaranteed” to impress wendy, he literally brakes the laws of space time just so robbie won’t date her (as if one single snow cone is keeping him from his success), gets a job at the pool just so he can hang out with her, and jumps at the opportunity to prove robbie is evil. etc etc. and with pacifica it’s clear that her parents’ love is very transactional and conditional. if EVEN that.

so the fact that book of bill is setting up bill to be like a clingy ex to ford- more than that, it’s setting up ford to be the only human bill cares about THIS much! it feels like the ultimate way to tie bill to that theme of how love can harm as much as it can heal. like, he’s always been an obstacle to the pines’ happy ending, but this way, we see his reaction to love in his psyche play out, and you understand why he’s the opposite and obstacle to the pines. the stan twins hurt each other and it takes an entire show’s worth of growth for them to fix it. gideon hurt mabel but him letting dipper and the group into her bubble proves he’s willing to change. bill hurt ford and he throws a temper tantrum and denies everything, trying to use force to get things back to the way they were because in his own twisted way he really does love and care for ford. i’m sure even a traumatized millenia old dream demon could change but for now bill doesn’t! and that kinda makes him and ford’s relationship the perfect tie in to the themes in the show

[spooky-pop]

trolls has a certain vibe to it,yknow? like the scenery, the props, the creatures,the clothes, there's just something about it that screams "TROLLS" and iv tried looking for stuff that gives off this same feeling, but I cant, where do you get your inspo from?

*CRACKS KNUCKLES* You've mentioned something that relates to what I am passionate about- design! Apologies in advance if this is long but I am so excited to dive into this.

When trying to nail down the aesthetic for a type of media in particular it always helps to STUDY THE SOURCE! I get most of my inspiration from the Trolls movies themselves because the whole franchise is such eye candy. So let's look at it!

The general observation is that everything has been designed to look crafted or handmade, or almost toy-like. Everything is so artsy and creative it looks like someone created everything with craft supplies. The takeaway key words I get when looking at everything is: Happy, bright, colorful, soft, shiny, fun, glittery etc. These are what you take and incorporate into your ideas! It also helps when searching for references too!

I absolutely love the Dreamworks cards at the start of each movie. It's such a perfect way to show how they took the Trolls aesthetic and applied it to their logo!

Everything looks felted, painted, embroidered, pieced together, etc. These cards alone tell you so much about the world of Trolls.

Next is observing environments. The designs for all of these locations are stunning not only because they are creatively done but because the things that make them different from each other are so fascinating.

You've got the visuals from around Pop Village/Troll Tree which feels knitted, crocheted, sewn, felted, etc. It all feels so SOFT.

Then I love this environment because it's all POOL TOYS? the vinyl textures? Foam? Amazing.

Then my fave, The Rock aesthetic is full of flannels, denim, leather, etc. I could go on with more examples but I'd be here all day.

I think understanding the design choice behind the world of Trolls is so important because it'll tell you exactly what you should be looking for in your inspo. From this you can take that everything is fun and very artistic. This can influence your styling, your color choices, your textures, etc.

Creating a guide or inspo board gets a lot easier when you can type in key words or names of objects that are relevant to the world and characters you are working to capture!

Hope this helps some! (Again, I'm not great at explaining things, but this is my approach!)

[gerdy-sertorius]

The Definitive Damsel Analysis (if I do say so myself)

(Disclaimer: I know it’s absurdly long, and for that I apologize. I apparently am more unwilling to make cuts than I am to present subpar work. I’m working on it. Only editing I do for my autistic ramblings is copyediting, baby! Whoo! I will be updating this for the Pristine Cut once it comes out and we get even *more* Damsel. Obviously, as I’m sure you can tell from the length, I really like Damsel. There will be all of the bias. It will be great.)

(Author’s Note: For the love of the most high God, it took me like twenty read throughs for me to standardize what I wanted to call the Scorched Grey. Here is a brief list of all the terms I used to refer to her: Scorched Grey, Burned Grey, Burning Grey, Fire Grey, Damsel Chapter 3. Sometimes but not always preceded by “the” or “The”.)

Alright, ladies and gentlemen. I have oft made the statement on here that Damsel is the best route in the game, and this began as me trying to definitively prove that, by microscopically going through the route, I could establish exactly why, it would seem, that Damsel has objective superiority. It sorta… evolved, though, so instead I will be going relatively chronologically throughout, and trying to point out a couple things that all of you know about and maybe a couple things you don’t about the best character in the game. With that preamble out of the way, let’s begin with the goofy stuff, the grab bag if you will. 

This will certainly be more personal taste than anything else, but I do think there’s a lot of miscellaneous stuff that Damsel does better than the other chapters. For example, I am convinced that it has the third best music, behind Tower and her routes and then Thorn. I am genuinely obsessed with “It Was Always That Easy”. The basement has some *fantastic* art, and I think that really carries a chapter that is otherwise generally bland when it comes to actual visual activity. It’s really carried by its genuinely perfect dialogue. 

Overall, and most importantly, this chapter is the undisputed master of the idea of positive ambience. You know elevator music? How it’s there to artificially increase the cheeriness of an otherwise dreary moment, like a hotel hallway or, yanno, an elevator? Well, this is the chapter that does it perfectly. Everything is designed to make it “nicer” than it actually is. The Narrator even takes that into account when describing the basement. The sound design is fresh and relaxing, the music is uplifting, the Princess’s voice is obviously fantastically done, but also the Voice of the Smitten plays a large role in making it feel “good”. It’s something that exists in order to communicate exactly the feelings it wants the player to feel, which is all warm and fuzzy inside. But let’s move on to the actual content, shall we?

Damsel has *the* best Chapter One and it isn’t even close. Certainly not in the horror department, where I think Beast and Nightmare shine, or even in the whole characterization bit, where the award can only go to Spectre and the masterclass that is her Chapter One. But Damsel has something else to it. Damsel has tragedy, almost Shakespearean in nature. Nobody else has it (except Witch, to some extent, but nowhere close to the same level), nobody manages to reach that connection, there and then broken, to honestly feel for both Princess and Slayer. Allow me to paint a picture of a playthrough. 

You are on a path in the woods. At the end of that path is a cabin. In the basement of that cabin is a princess. You are here to slay her. But you don’t do that. That voice itching in the back of your skull, the one you quite literally call Hero, your moral compass even, raises some objections. You don’t want to kill *anybody*. That isn’t something you want to mark yourself with, especially not solely on the word of an individual you just met. For now, violence is a nonstarter.

You enter the cabin. And you hear her voice. And you see her. You even talk with her for a while. The moment is… hypnotizing. Despite the Narrator’s warning of manipulation, well, you cannot help but be manipulated. This is a genuinely nice, sweet, scared Princess who simply wants to be free. You have to save her. It is the right thing to do, it is the… only thing to do. Anything else marks you with the dirtiness of simply being unwilling to help someone in need when you had the full ability to. 

You go to get a key. Unsuccessful. The door locks. Even worse. The Narrator is moving from irritating to downright malicious, clearly enjoying recounting the lock of the door. Disgust for Him has been present since you entered the cabin, but it shifts to anger very quickly. That shift continues with full force as you attempt with what little ability you have to save the Princess, even if you don’t quite know how you will get out. The question does not last long. For the shift to anger shifts once more, to a sort of incomprehensible fury.

For the Narrator has crossed a line. Not only has he taken away any semblance of choice, not only has he raised your own knife against an innocent, someone who has been nothing but kind to you, but you are the one who must bear the shame for it. You are the only one who is doing the foul deed in any eyes but your own. Speaking of, the Princess’s eyes are filled with genuine happiness at the moment, as you are finally giving her the freedom she has yearned for such a  long time. Yet through no fault of your own, you raise the pristine blade, the one you refused to bring down to the basement in the first place. You scramble through the list of options, attempting to find anything that could provide a sliver of hope in the situation, anything without the grim finality of “Slay the Princess”. 

At last, you find one, and are able to bark out a warning to the Princess. That happiness in her eyes is shifted to a look of fear, one directed at you alone, one condemning you with such a sorrowful betrayal that it almost hurts to see. She begs for you to stop, and then she says something that almost calms the internal storm of the player: “Please, I know this isn’t you.” She recognizes that it isn’t us that betrayed her, she understands that we aren’t trying to do this, that we are flat-out trying to stop it. But the eye of that storm is passing, and soon.

And as she takes the blade, as she prepares to do what she must to live, that same look of tragic betrayal crosses her eyes, this time not directed at us, but at herself. She hates that this is her only option, the only way that she can live is to kill another, one with every intention of freeing her and no intention of harming her. And in the end, she simultaneously underscores the tragedy of the moment while confirming our perception that she could never be a threat to the world. As she plunges the blade into our chest, she has failed to even do the bare minimum of making our death painless, something that fills her with even more guilt, tears streaming down her cheeks as she tries and fails to end our own agony. The last thing we see of her are her endless cascade of both tears and apologies, as everything goes dark. 

This… is beautiful. A glorious tragedy, one with limited theming, simply two characters with emotions that feel natural. And, quite strangely, the first chapter has almost nothing to do with the second chapter. But it is still important. I’ll get to that later. Better things await now! For with the end of the tale of the Hero and the Princess, we have a new individual, everyone’s favorite buddy, the Voice of the Smitten. 

I am certain I do not need to underscore just how popular Smitten is. Easily the most fan favorite of the fan favorites, especially solidifying his place within that roster with the Kiss from a Thorn. He is jovial, passionate, he is Don Quixote, complete with the unlimited self-delusion that comes with the territory. There’s a reason people love him. Romantic in a game entitled a love story, the largest of personalities in a game stuffed with them, he is the storybook hero come to life in a game that has just as much reverence for storybook heroes as the deconstructions of them. In short, he is the visage of likability itself, with all the bombast that comes with that. Yet that is only from a wholly external perspective. 

For what I am certain I do need to underscore is just how sinister Smitten is. For all of his likability, the Smitten is also probably the single slimiest voice out of all of them with the possible exception of the Opportunist. This is not a new revelation – people have understood that since the beginning with his frankly disturbing behavior regarding the Princess. What is perhaps more interesting is his relationship with the player. For he is one of the two options that reflect the player at this point within the story. Either the player is trying to do the right thing and free an innocent, or they have somewhat… different motivations. 

The former reflects the Hero. Somewhat naive, in many routes somewhat bumbling even, but first and foremost focused on the external. That is, “how can I make a positive impact on the world around me?” As contradictory as it may seem to how the Hero is presented, it’s something of an intellectualist approach. The Hero is trying to find the best possible world and working towards that with all of his might. It is, one could say, devoid of emotion except that determination to change the world, to make it a better place. While the goal remains the same, the path to get there is fundamentally continuously being calculated. The Hero is your conscience, and as such he must *always* work overtime for that. 

The Smitten is not that. No, he has made no secret that he is the path of passion. Even when he is generally considered to be a better person, he declares that, “Whatever world would condemn two star-crossed lovers to a cycle of violence and despair isn’t a world worth saving.” His focus is internal, it is on ourself and our romance. There is no extensive study into what is the correct option, there is only what would assist in our relationship, which is somehow ordained by the universe. To put it into understandable terms, Hero is a modern hero while Smitten is a Romantic-era hero. 

There’s an important line when going down the stairs that I think speaks volumes about the type of player and playthrough currently occurring. That is “We can still do right by her without all this over-the-top fawning.” *That* is the line of demarcation between the route of the Hero and the route of the Smitten. If you decide to embrace or repudiate the Smitten at that point, I think the route is sealed. I am convinced that the game will continue on in a fixed way based on that philosophy. The point where you must, internally that is, decide if you are doing this out of a desire for what is right, or an infatuation with the Princess. 

Now, of course there isn’t anything wrong with taking the path of the Smitten, and it’s personally one of my top points in the game, but whether you admit it or not, you are long past morality being what decides your actions. That has come and gone. Now, the goal is to express the passion of the moment and delve into your romantic relationship with the Princess. I’ll be evaluating each of the routes differently, loosely organized with a focus on how it reacts to the player. After that, I’ll go on into theming of each route one by one and all that jazz.

The path of the Smitten first. The player embraces that he has been sent to save the Princess from her unjust and foul imprisonment above all else. So that is what he does. He marches downstairs, the blade being nothing but a passing afterthought as it is immediately dismissed out of hand. When it comes to the crucial point of “doing right by her”, the justification is made that two things can be done at once, that you can do this for her and do a little bit of fawning on the way. Doesn’t harm anyone.

And with that the basement arrives, and you see the Princess on the floor. She is perfect in all ways. There is nothing wrong with her. And that’s before you start talking to her. When you do begin talking to her, all of the kindness and innocence from Chapter 1 are magnified to the greatest degree possible. She can do no wrong. And, from a meta standpoint, there’s another thing that stands out – it is really, *really* funny. From everything the Smitten says to the “Then I didn’t end the world!” to the Narrator’s (a villain at this point) growing exasperation at your trust for the Princess, it endears you to the moment even more. 

Because it’s not only that it’s funny. It’s not only that the Princess is genuinely nice to you. It’s something more than that. Something that I am loath to talk about but will anyway. The Princess is incredibly – *sigh* – **cute** within this chapter. This is objective, with science to back me up, I’m sure. But she is specifically designed to be as heartwarming as possible, and every line makes her more and more into someone who should be saved by you, into, well, a Damsel. While it isn’t explicitly stated, throughout the progression of dialogue, the need to protect her becomes more pronounced. You were already primed to like the Princess, you already internally committed to a romantic future. But after stepping into the bear trap willingly, you cannot escape. 

And if you’re anything like me, you are perfectly fine with that. So you take in the moment, you rescue her from her chains and laugh at the way her hands slipped out of the chains and the Narrator’s comical anger at it. It’s all very feel-good, all cleanly written dialogue, and both the Princess and the Smitten are likable, they’re fun, and the Narrator is a fun enough villain for the Smitten and you to unite against. The Hero, if we’re being honest, barely registers, and if he does it’s usually as an extension to the Narrator, as a foil to yourself. And with her finally free, she embraces you, sealing the deal on her perfection. 

And after that, something else happens. The deconstruction begins. You want to see if her dialogue has any more of that saccharine present throughout the rest of the chapter, and are immediately rewarded with the “The princess closes her eyes in deep reflection” and the follow up joke. Hungry for more, you click through some more of the dialogue, but something begins to happen. She begins to… unwind. The Smitten seems to reciprocate in turn, to a lesser extent. In fact, she really starts to return to the horror that this chapter was a nice respite from. So you cut your losses, decide to leave with her, and everything returns to normal. Bathed in the glow of your future, you immediately forget about the deconstruction.

After that, you finally get out of the basement, get a genuinely great moment opening the door alongside the Princess, never think twice about clicking “You’re not doing that.” as fast as humanly possible, and finally await the door at the end of the cabin. You finally get your fairytale ending. The princess goes out into the world together with you. You brought her out. And then she is taken by the Shifting Mound in a way reminiscent of her dying. Even if this wasn’t your first playthrough, it still comes as a shock. For the most part, you were being that Romantic hero, living in the moment with your passion. The thought of this happening was gone entirely. This wasn’t supposed to happen. And it *hurts*. And the chapter is over. 

The route of the Hero has a different point of view on the whole situation. That’s not to say it’s not easy to get drawn in by the hilarious dialogue and sheer cuteness of the Princess – far from it. It is, after all, what drives the conflict within this. For the Hero, and the player that goes along his path, has one bit of information stand out. That the world ended after the Princess killed you. Now, you can naturally be skeptical of the information, but the Princess isn’t helping her case here. Entirely vague, entirely unwilling to mention anything about it. The only thing she seems to care about is getting on your good side. 

Now, you still want to save her. That much is clear. You still don’t take the knife in the beginning, and you saw her Chapter 1 incarnation. She is still a good person, kind and loving. But there are questions raised, important questions. Which is why not all Hero routers get the same ending. There is a conflict between how far you’re able to go before the risk of the world ending eclipses your distrust of the Narrator and your trust of the Princess. If the whole world really does end if she’s free, is it worth it? And as such you get to the major points of the Hero ending. 

The first is the Deconstructed ending. As you question the Princess, you desperately try to figure out what the best way to go forward is for you. And that starts with getting a straight answer from the Princess on what exactly she plans on doing. The operation… does not go well. As you try and push for anything, any sign that she isn’t going to end the world, the same rejoinder comes in, alongside a distorted track. “I just want to make you happy.” The Princess is not an individual anymore, and begins to change shape. But you are locked in with a horrified inability to look away, like one who sees a car accident. And with that, the Princess is a Princess no longer, and the Shifting Mound takes her away. 

There’s also the option of taking the Hero’s advice when confronted with the scenario: to leave. You don’t like what’s going on and you try to do whatever you can to undo the doing. Perhaps surprisingly, it works. And then you’re forced to deal with the cognitive dissonance of the Princess and *that* being the same individual. But you, not without a healthy dose of skepticism, still head upstairs alongside the Princess. In the end, you can’t bring yourself to kill her. Throughout it all, she still has been the beautifully endearing picture of innocence, if a questionable one, and especially with regards to the knife on the table, there is no way you can take it to her chest with no warning, especially after everything you did in the first Chapter. So you leave with her, and the “end of the world” really does come in one fell swoop with the call of the Shifting Mound. You can’t help but wonder if the decision you made was the right one, not really. Like, you still believe she didn’t deserve to die, but maybe, just maybe, it would have been a better ending.

So what if you did kill her? What happens when love *truly* melts away into skepticism. After the continuous question dodging and whatever the… other thing was, this is clearly not an ordinary Princess, it is not the same Princess that you tried to save at the beginning. There is only a sliver of her, a shadow of her former self. Slaying her, well, slaying her is probably doing her a favor. It might be doing the world a favor, too. Maybe she is an individual with malicious intent. And as you take the blade and plunge it into her chest, you instantly know you made the wrong decision. She does not oppose it. She simply lets you kill her with a single tear hanging in her eye, saying “I think this is what you want.” It’s meant to feel dirty and it does, even heartbreaking in the moment, although it is immediately counterbalanced by the effect of the Smitten killing you over it.

I won’t exactly go over Scorched Grey the same way, I think there’s generally only two frames of mind going into it, and that’s either the standard “Hero-Skeptic” framework that I’ll expand on later, or simply a completionist mindset. Plus, it’s technically not The Damsel. Plus I’m lazy. But this is the point where I will try to expand on the theming of each and every route and mindset to go through within the Chapter, and that *will* include the Scorched Grey theming. 

It’s made quite clear from the chapter that one of the primary themes is objectification, the making of the Princess into nothing more than a vehicle to live one’s fantasy into. The taking of an individual and making them into an it. The destruction of humanity by your own desire, and what that says about your desires in the first place. Ironically, this is merely one fourth wall away from the rest of the Princesses, each of them being a piece of fiction that many simply engage with *because* they are an object, but with the Damsel it is directly nodded to within the narrative. One meta-layer is peeled back, if you will. 

Nothing hammers this more home than the entirely jarring line that escapes the Shifting Mound’s lips when you ask about the vessel she holds. Unlike the rest of the fragments, which are all given an indication that they have been fulfilled after the Shifting Mound takes them, the only note she has to say is that the Damsel has “served her purpose”. There is nothing that she wished for, as anyone who has obtained the deconstructed ending can attest to. But even in the more standard runs, she is simply a tool to be used and discarded. And there are three general reactions to this line. 

The first is the hardcore Smitten route’s preferred choice, denial. “The Princess was far more than an object, she had character, she had kindness, she had motivations from the beginning! The narrative is what is wrong, there’s nothing wrong with the Princess. She. Is. Perfect. Not just from a narrative standpoint but a metanarrative one as well. She has depth, she *is* a character.” All in the hopes that if they insist on it enough, it will become true. The Damsel was not designed to be viewed in a vacuum. There are themes that run through her character, and including negative ones, and the denial of them is a far truer denial of the character than any sort of objectification could ever be. 

Then the more moderate Smitten routers get a different response. A slap in the face. They did all of this, they had fun, they laughed with her, they cried when she was taken. They were connected to her, they had a real connection to what she was. One could even accuse them of… loving her. They honest to goodness cared about this Princess, they were invested in her story. Yet, in the end, they also formed her around themselves. They “molded her to love you”. As much as they loved the Princess, that was only because they cut out a piece of the Shifting Mound that they *could* love, a caricature of her true nature. They still took an individual, and despite truly loving her, made her into something that she was not so they could do that very thing. She is not a person. She is a plot device, an individual made to love and be loved with nothing beyond that. She is an object. 

Lastly, those who went on the route of the Hero get that same slap in the face, that selfsame bucket of water poured over their heads, but in a different way. They didn’t try to objectify her. They didn’t want anything of the sort. All they wanted to do was the right thing. Right? Yet even in that desire to do the right thing, they still get that same chilling text from the Shifting Mound. They have built an individual just like those who went on the route of the Smitten. Just a different one. Not one who was built around your “glorious romance”, but rather one built around something of a glorious Romance. The need to be a Hero. The desire to do what was right, to save an unjustly imprisoned Princess. The Princess became a plot device in the end anyway, just one that needed to be saved rather than one who needed to be loved. 

I want to continue off of that. The player is trying to do nothing more than the right thing, he is simply doing what a Hero should. And that determination to do what is right leads to him getting impacted the most by that line in the ending, the line that implies that whatever right he was doing, he was still being driven by selfishness, by that need to be a Hero. That hits the player right within where it hurts, it almost could be said to strike at the one emotional vulnerability of them. To have your hard work, your pain, your desire for what is right to be considered nothing more than the delusions of a Don Quixote tilting at windmills in order to fight giants, just as lost as Smitten, that doesn’t feel too great. It almost minimizes your struggle, and it is genius. You play as a Hero because you want to feel like a Hero, not because the morality of this world means anything to you. It is stripping that meta-layer down one by one.

But objectification is not the only theme present. While it may seem like something of a potpourri topic to throw in, earlier on the server we were talking about the Damsel in particular’s perceptiveness with regards to perception. When the door shuts and locks, it is the first and only time the Princess gets visibly **negative** in any way during the entirety of the Chapter. Even when you kill her, she still does so with nary a frown on her face. Even as a tear rolls down her cheek, she still smiles. But not at the door. The narration points out quite clearly that she frowns. This is, I reiterate, the only thing that happens. And her response is not “we’re stuck down here”, it is not “I’m unable to leave now”. 

What it is happens to be “that’s not supposed to happen”. She recognizes the construct in a way very few allude to within the game. Adding onto that note, within the Scorched Grey chapter, she (correctly) determines the very nature of the construct and that inherent “cycle of violence and despair” inherent to it, even (correctly) determining that the only way to leave was to annihilate that very construct. This is shown even clearer at the other major event at the door. When you ask if the Princess can open the door, the sole question she throws back at you is “Do you think I can?”, and after a response in the affirmative, “Then I can”. In the end, it is quite clear that she is, *heavily* ironically, one of the more aware characters in the game with regards to your circumstance. 

While speaking of the Scorched Grey, I think this route also exemplifies another major theme – the nature of the Princess as a being of perception. All routes exemplify one facet of the Shifting Mound: Spectre represents the gravity of her, Tower her divinity, Prisoner the very incarnation in and of itself of her within the construct, and so on. Damsel has something different, though, and that is that she’s just a slippery little fella. Far more than anybody else, Damsel changes throughout her chapters, in ways more pronounced than anybody else. The Shifting Mound declares that we “molded her to love you”, as I quoted previously. That molding takes stage front and center throughout all of our interactions with her. 

The most obvious example is her deconstruction, which when her sole true motivation (to leave) is discarded, she begins to break down, unable to offer to the player anything beyond the only desire every other Princess has. With the compulsive need to love the player, etched into her core, there is nothing she can do other than try to add to that love, losing herself within the process. But that is not the only time she changes. Because she is willing to give up that freedom in, well, a heartbeat. Attempting to kill her does not lead to any sort of resistance from her. The one goal she had, staying alive and winning her freedom, is out the window despite being (questionably) willing to kill for it in the last chapter. Now, throughout the Scorched Grey, it’s made clear that she did not, in fact, want to die, that she just wanted to be free together, but the complete unwillingness to save her own life is a stark contrast to the first chapter. 

In fact, that perpetually changing nature alongside her being so objectified means that it’s really, *really* hard to figure out her true character. There is very little in her that does not change and very little remaining that isn’t specifically put there by you. She is an eel, wriggling out of your grasp and impossible to pin down, in a large way like the Shifting Mound herself. But… for the most part, there are two facets to her character beyond the already listed themes. And a sharp divide between them. 

Chapter One Damsel and Chapter Two Damsel are not the same person. That’s usually true for most of them, but they also usually have some semblance of similarity between their counterparts. The only exceptions I can think off the top of my head are Spectre and *maaybe* Stranger if you want to count that. The rest of them act as exaggerated versions of the existing individuals shown. Chapter One Adversary likes fights. Chapter Two Adversary likes fights. Chapter One Witch is built on the back of distrust. Chapter Two Witch is built on the back of distrust. Everything lines up nicely. 

That is not the case for the Damsel. The only thing that you can say with both of them is that they are nice and do not want to hurt you. The Chapter One incarnation (henceforth Princess) is a tragedy of a character that doesn’t want to kill you but still must to secure her own life and freedom against a renegade puppeting you. The Chapter Two incarnation (henceforth Damsel) is a Horror-”Feel-Good”-Comedic-Tragic character that shows nothing about the emotional anguish she went through in chapter one. I love both of them, but they have an unmatched disconnect. And I think that sort of adds to the character. Now, there is absolutely a benefit from an emotional through-line (there’s a reason Thorn is my second-favorite chapter), but in this case, only brief touches to the beginning enhance the story. 

The most striking thing is the sense of comedic horror that comes when Damsel just completely ignores any expected trauma from the Princess’s emotional destruction. It, depending on the route you take, either makes you love her character more and more as the humor begins to entrap you, or it begins the process of getting the player unnerved, exactly like the developers wanted. It is a key dividing point in the mindset of the player and the route that they have chosen. The Damsel says nothing about what happened, heck, she barely acknowledges it except to indicate that “You died!” 

Secondly, it sets up Damsel as a sympathetic figure while still allowing her to begin establishing herself. Without the setup from the Princess, the player has no idea how to view Damsel, potentially even seeing her as a less on-the-nose Razor, with her comedically hiding her sinister intentions. The Princess allows the player to begin on a note that the Princess is *actually* friendly rather than simply pretending to be so. At the same time, it’s divorced enough that apart from that frame of reference at the beginning, Damsel is still allowed to shine within her own character. 

Lastly, and most importantly, it sets her up for the Scorched Grey. The guilt at causing the death of an innocent and the belief that you would be unable to cause the death of an innocent yourself leads her to blame the construct and attempt to bring it down, which seals your fate in the third Damsel chapter, the only time where the two chapters meet in a beautiful climax of Passion going too far and causing pain, in attempt of running away from that very thing, morphing into something that not even the Smitten is able to remain devoted to in an awful tragedy of love being not enough in the end. 

Wait, wait, wait. Did I hear “the end” being spoken? At this time of year? Localized entirely within this essay? Well then, it’s time to talk about what puts this saga at pure perfection, shall we? I probably could just use the awesome power of Ctrl + V to get the desired effect, but I still do want to offer my narration, so I’ll compromise and do a bit of both. “Your lover drives a stake into your body. And another. And another. And another. And another. Do I miss your heart because I cannot stand to see it go? But the stakes meant nothing to you. You had a desire, and you set that desire free, you lifting me and me lifting you, forever and ever and ever, consumed by true belief, there was nothing that could hold us back.” 

Do I even need to explain why that’s so good? Definitively the best poem in the end, it isn’t even close, especially when coupled with Ms. Goodnight’s awe-inspiring delivery. Did I say that the Scorched Grey was the perfect synthesis of the Princess and the Damsel? I was lying. This is. Every word so lovingly placed, the language sounds like it comes from the pen of God Himself. It is emotionally resonant, the art is beautiful, I have not run into such a short piece of dialogue that outdoes it. Gonna be honest, mostly just wrote up this essay to gush about it. Even now, it is considered by most everyone to be one of the best lines of dialogue in a game filled with magnificent ones. 

And the other one, that of the Scorched Grey. It’s simpler, ironically. “I kill you. You kill me. Back and forth we go, faster and faster and faster. I kill you. You kill me. Hollow eyes watch from the dry corners of a memory. A home built on all of the futures that were supposed to be, preserved until the moment of reunion. The fire of the heart sets it all ablaze. I kill you and me.”

This, this right here is one of the most slept on ending poems and it’s not even funny. So fantastic at expressing the heartbreak inherent to the Scorched Grey’s character. I don’t know how you can see the line “A home built on all the futures that were supposed to be”, especially with the Scorched Grey dead and charring in a wedding gown, and not feel *something*. It’s not as good as the standard Damsel stuff, but then again, nothing is. It’s still deserving of more praise than it currently receives, and one of my top three ending poems of all time, only edged out by Prisoner. Gosh, this game belongs in a museum. 

Seems I need to debunk some stuff that happens to get a lot of traction regarding those who speculate on Damsel, too. First of all, her character motivation is not guilt nor gratitude. That sort of thing works incredibly well in fanworks, and I’m happy to see it ~~because that means I get to see Damsel in a fanwork~~. It has little to no backing within canon. Damsel is a chapter about the only motivations for the Princess being those put in place by the objectification of the player. There is nothing regarding anything beyond that, and it detracts from the existing, well-elucidated themes that are actually within the chapter. The only sort of substance to them is both Chapter 1 Princess and Scorched Grey indicating guilt for killing you, but that is almost entirely repudiated within the actual Chapter 2. 

Speaking of the Scorched Grey, another thing I saw somewhat extensively is that you somehow “taught her” that killing is the way to love one another, and that’s why she kills you in Chapter 3, and I honestly do not know how that gained any traction at all. It’s pretty clear that she views all the death as a pretty terrible and messed up thing and only kills the two of you to escape the cycle of death. It’s spoken of as a means to an end, not an end in and of itself. I am genuinely confused on how this got started, because it really just… opposes the main *in-narrative* themes of the Chapter??? Like, you don’t even have to analyze it, it’s just within the text, plain and simple. 

Anyway, I deeply apologize for the length of this once again, look forward to an appendix when Pristine Cut comes out. I’ve already played it because my uncle works at Black Tabby, but I don’t want to spoil it for you gents. If my opinions change massively after playing through the new update from today, I will change that too. Anyway, Damsel is the best character, literally does not do a single thing wrong within any of her chapters, has definitively the best Shifty stuff, and you should invest in her. As more people vocally become willing to throw money at anything related to Damsel, the likelier it is that we get Damsel merch. I need it so badly. Please. Anyway, if anything stands out to you or you disagree, I am begging you to tell me to get my act together and explain what I said wrong, so do that. Also please. 

[br1ghtestlight]

bob belcher is autistic and here's why!!

social difficulties. this one is pretty obvious bcuz one of bob's most important traits is how introverted and antisocial he is and how he doesn't like being around people (outside of family) or being forced to make conversation. he spends holidays cooking in the kitchen as an excuse to not have to talk to his in-laws and he's generally very socially awkward because its hard for him to read other people and he gets stressed out easily. when he DOES have people he wants to interact with socially he's anxious that he's doing something wrong and that he'll say something to make them hate them such as phone calls or when he's texting his dad friends ("just try not to be... how you are." "i always try to do that") and seems to have a hard time reading what other people think about him especially through text or knowing when he's being rude or hurtful (like that burger convention episode where he thought he made friends but everybody hated him and was talking behind his back bcuz he misread social signals) he also seems to have a hard time reading other people's body languages and emotions. he also HATES large gatherings and parties as stated in multiple episodes. he seems to calm down and decompress by being alone and focusing on doing his own thing

lack of emotional expression. very similar to tina bob has a monotone voice and lack of facial expression compared to his family members and other characters on the show. while he CAN express his emotions through voice he mostly says what he means or how he's feeling and expects other people to do the same. very rarely genuinely smiles etc (not because he isn't happy!!! it doesn't seem to come naturally to him most of the time)

hyperfixations on specific topics and interests. while obviously bob's main interest is cooking and anything related to the production and growing of food as seen in countless episodes (thanksgiving episodes especially and any episode where he's gardening or growing plants) he does have other hyperfixations too. big examples are CAKE in that one episode and how linda says that bob gets obsessed with "boring things" too like soap carving or that episode where he hyperfixated on the internet cucumber. when this happens he focuses all his energy on the topic and doesn't seem to care about much else as seen in the episode where he gets a juicer for christmas and throughout the episode he's either excited about different juicing combinations or complaining about how he can't use his juicier ("in my head i'm at home juicing right now") while forcing his family to drink his combinations. also that History Of Pepper book that he got super into. enjoys explaining this interests to other people whether or not they seem interested in what he's saying (like in that goddamn cucumber episode)

hyper empathy for and attachment to inanimate objects. this is a HUGE thing for bob as he's always seen talking to inanimate objects around him like food as he prepares it or his kitchen utensils. he uses this to express his feelings and talk through uncertain situations but he also seems to have real empathy and emotions towards them as seen in the episode where he gets into a fight with the turkey banister or when lance the turkey gets shot. he also gets very emotional when he has to work in a different kitchen and apologizes to his stove several times

sticking to routine and resistance to change. bob clearly values his routine at the restaurant with his burger of the day etc and his family seems to have a fairly consistent daily routine with dinner and watching tv afterwards every night. in the seaplane episode linda is upset because she thinks bob's dates are boring because he always wants to go back to the same boring/reliable places that he already knows that he likes vs wanting to try something new that he possibly won't enjoy which is VERY autistic tbh

taking things literally or having trouble with sarcasm. doesn't come up very often BUT in the pigeon episode when linda tells bob to give the pigeon a bath and so he takes a bath with it and she was like NO BOBBY IN THE SINK!!! and he's like i wouldn't fit in the sink? :( thats autism baby

burnout. bob tends to hyperfixate on his job and his love of cooking but if he does this for too long without taking a break it can lead to burnout where he's seen having trouble with running the restaurant and more sensitive/annoyed by other people talking to him so he needs to take a break even if he resists this at first. very autistic experience to Hyperfixate so hard you forget your basic needs and have trouble remembering to take care of yourself

struggles with motor control and following directions. this is a smaller symptom but bob is shown having trouble with tying even basic knots and has an inability to follow maps or written instructions which can be a symptom of autism/developmental disorders. also he has a stutter which similarly is often comorbid with developmental disabilities/speech disorders

occasionally struggles with eye contact (during parent-teacher interviews)

strong sense of justice. bob very clearly has strong emotional responses and a strong sense of justice in situations that he sees as unfair and can react strongly without thinking it through. problems w/ impulse control and high emotion

bob isn't shown stimming very often but similarly to tina i think he mostly has his vocal stims that he uses in stressful situations ("oh my god. oh my god") in the movie he can also be seen groaning for hours at a time and going almost completely nonverbal in a stressful situation much like tina does which means it is likely a trait that she inherited from bob. he also paces around and seems to be predisposed to having shutdowns in stressful situations or when he's very anxious

not directly related but bob seems to think that he's MUCH better at masking than he actually is and i think that's very funny. he's like nobody knows im autistic :) <- everybody knows that he is autistic

[phanyu]

hi! could you please explain this post? im not trying to be mean im just genuinely curious bc I don't really understand what it's about?

https://www.tumblr.com/phanyu/766062371364077568/covert-phandom-homophobia-with-good-intentions-but?source=share

oh sure lol sorry if it's not clear, i kinda just type and send off the first thing that comes to my fingers on this account lmfao.

basically i think ive talked on here about how interesting it is to look back on old phandom content from their "peak" era and realize that even though a lot of it was said with love, and excitement, and the people doing so were quite young, there was a lot of undercover homophobia in those spaces. like the example i gave in my post of when people used to use "tEh bUtTsEcKs XD" as the most hilarious punchline for everything, the way gay sex was talked about in general, the stereotyping. these were ways that people were talking about dnp in the community meant to celebrate them and even if a lot of those people ended up coming into their own as queer later on, it kind of doesnt excuse the downright alienating and bizarre ways that they talked about gay people/culture at the time. again, most were young, it isnt something i think the phandom needs to "apologize" for, but it simply was a thing that happened.

the second part of that post is referring to the fact that even though we think we're mostly past that, there definitely are subtle ways that homophobic ideas continue to seep their way into phandom spaces or how we talk about dnp. this part is just MY personal opinion, but when people joke (especially to non-phannies) about how dan and phil arent together or not together, but instead a "third, secret thing" idk i just find that..... bizarre. dan and phil may have objectively not "hard launched" but they have outright said they are in a relationship in a million different concrete ways, so i find it personally weird when people jump through hoops to avoid saying that. it's fine. it's not invasive. dan and phil are together like whats the joke. i always like to compare it to pj and sophie who have indicated their relationship status with concrete words even LESS times than dnp but ive never seen anybody think twice about referring to sophie as pj's girlfriend or partner. so anyway that was just an example of "covert" homophobic ideas that still exist in the phandom today that we'll probably shake our head at in another 10 years. nothing too big a deal. but i am gonna point it out.

[nikoisme]

Something that I always really like in your art is your use of shapes. They're simplified but still very believable if that makes sense. Do you have any tips on that? Or could you direct me to where you learnt that?

I'm glad you like the shapes! They're one of my favorite things to draw and see in art hahaha. I'm going to explain how I personally do them, so it might vary for others.

So when looking at objects, i do try to break them down in big shapes. I usually hold what i'm drawing as a 3d object in my mind, and then i just try to,,,, rotate it. It gives me a much better sense of how it looks. For example, if i'm drawing a head, i'm drawing it as a box - i can easily rotate a box in my head, so it gives me a stronger idea of how i want to draw it. Also i just try to feel something out. I can feel out the structure of my finger or face just by touching it. This helps me a lot for planes, which comes in handy when i try to render things.

Instead of looking at objects as a bunch of different, smaller lines, i try to break them down into bigger lines that kind of define a shape. For example, if i'm drawing a face, i'm not going to draw each individual slope or curve of a line. While it would look fine, i would have no idea what i'm trying to draw. I'm drawing lines, which are 2d, instead of shapes, which are 3d.

Here's a very rough example

(the angles are a bit different but you get the idea)

With the first one i tried to draw each little curve of the face, but in the other i just broke it down into big lines/shapes. While both look okay, the second one is much quicker to do and a bit more shaped. I want each line to count. So i have one line for the cheekbone, one for the jaw, etc. Also, most of my sketches are just a bunch of boxes, so i have shapes as a fundemental. Of course you can use any other shape, but i personally use boxes because they're the easiest for me to work with.

Then the one that definitely helped out the most was doing a shit ton of figure studies. Instead of focusing on the muscles and the details, my goal is to get the overall form down. For some reason i am horrible at drawing in large scale, so the figures are really small. And I just hold the fact that i want each line to count, breaking things into big shapes/lines and just rotating things in 3d in mind as i go.

These are super rough, and i can definitely spot some mistakes - but the idea is there. Almost each big muscle is a single line. If i have a good sense of the fundamentals, then i can build up on the rest of it.

What helps a lot is of course, practice. I have pages upon pages upon pages of just random poses and heads and other objects in slightly different angles. So something is bound to stick. Also getting a good sense of the fundamentals, aka anatomy. Skulls, muscles, facial planes, bones, you know the stuff. If you understand the fundamental rules, you can break them and adjust them however you like because you know how things are supposed to connect to make sense. Sinix on youtube has some really really great videos on the fundamentals of anatomy and how you can break things down into shapes! Also you can find those 3d references where you can rotate the thing you want to draw.

Also just do whatever shapes you like best! I personally prefer boxes (or squares and rectangled for that matter), i find they suit what i want best. The heads i draw are boxes, the fingers, the hands, the eyes - hell i will break a round object into boxes if i so desire.

Most of this is internalized at this point and became muscle memory, and honestly i never really paid it much attention. So apologies if this doesn't make much sense hahaha! Shapes in general are something i love seeing in art, so i probably absorbed some other things through osmosis (aka i just,, stare at things a lot. I will see a fucking lamppost and go "wow those are some really good shapes you have there" and in my mind i'm already breaking it down like "this is a cylinder, one big line for this side, a box there, some slopes and curves on the other side" so i can reference it from memory later). I mostly fouced on the human figure here, as that's something i draw the most - but this counts for literally any object! I could do figure studies of a chair, why not. My process is the same.

[mdhwrites]

This is a weirdly...personal thing to ask so feel free to ignore it. But when it comes to scenes involving reconciliation between characters, do you think the word 'sorry' is always neccessary?

I've seen such scenes play out with viewers saying 'X didn't even say sorry!' even if 'X' was demonstrably remorseful for what they did. Personally, if someone who wronged me was trying to make amends, and they couldn't muster a simple, singular word, 'sorry,' I'd come to the conclusion that they're not sorry at all, and that they don't really give a shit. But...do you think I'm being too harsh, thinking that way?

Sometimes, remorse for one's actions can come about in ways besides simply saying sorry. I mean, characters' expressions alone can convey apologies in ways words can't. So again, is the word 'sorry' always necessary for a reconciliation scene in stories to actually work?

Absolutely not. I have criticized characters before for barely remembering to apologize but that's because apologies are complicated. One of the first lessons a child learns after learning the word "Sorry" is not to say it if they don't mean it. This is why going "Sorry, but-" will immediately kill your apology. If you lead off with a huge excuse for why you were a colossal asshole, GUESS WHAT! You're still a colossal asshole because you only care about not feeling guilty, not being at fault, and NOT the other person's feelings. Just because you EVENTUALLY remember to say sorry doesn't fix that first you wanted to make it clear you hadn't done anything wrong.

An exceptional classic example of an apology that doesn't even need an "I'm sorry" is when someone breaks something they don't know the meaning of. The wronged person gets upset, the wrongdoer gets defensive, they both storm out, furious and hurt. Then the wrongdoer is told why the thing was important, understands the deeper meaning of what was done and goes out to replace it. Then when the victim sees it, they don't have to say sorry. In fact, "Sorry, I didn't know what it meant to you," is actually the weaker option here because it still includes an explanation. Now admittedly, that option allows the victim to also apologize for not explaining why they were so upset.

The better option is that when the object is seen, the wrongdoer asks about what made it important. "Someone told me your grandma was a hell of a woman. They made her sound preeeetty boring though."

"Oh yeah, then they didn't know her, just like you don't."

"Well, I'm all ears then. What was she like?"

That shows such a deeper understanding of the wrong done, and is genuinely better for showing that the character has understood why the other was hurt, than a simple, "I'm sorry." Using the default can work but if it just sounds like someone reciting what you're supposed to say when you're in trouble... It doesn't sound genuine, does it? Even if it's technically the right thing to say.

Hell, you want a GREAT breakdown on shitty apologies and how saying sorry can just make you sound like more of a douchebag? Pop music is FILLED with this problem and Todd in the Shadows has a great example of it. Check out the video if you have the time.

(Oh god, this is from EIGHT YEARS AGO)

To the general complaint though, it's a lot like how people view redemption arcs. "Did the person get forgiven?" "Are their crimes able to be redeemed from?" etc. like that. Claiming that reconciliation and apologies can only work if a character says sorry is trying to quantify these elements. To be able to check a list that then says whether or not an element empirically fails or not. To make it so someone cannot refute your argument.

That's not how writing works though. What works for one book won't work for all of them. It depends on context and skill. You could copy the greatest apology scene in media and if it doesn't work in your setting or with your characters, it will feel as hollow as a character being forced to say sorry because their parents told them to. Writing rules are fluid like this and we shouldn't try to say something has to, or can't, be included in a scene for it to work.

Sorry if you don't agree. evil grin

======+++++======

I got WAY too much enjoyment out of that last line. XD

I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!

I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past. I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead. If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.

A Twitter you can follow too

And a Kofi if you like what I do and want to help out with the fact that disability doesn’t pay much.

[galaxyofhair]

Realism, Fantasy, and Suspension of Disbelief

Just a heads up, I'm salty-balls right now so I apologize if I seem bitter, I really do want to foster conversation, but I came straight here from the cesspools of Reddit and I am mad at some of the shit people there be saying.

I'm coming to you from the Helldivers subreddit right now because I don't feel like writing all of this only to have the people of Reddit understand precisely 0% of it.

One of things that pisses me off to no end is when something throws up their hands and immediately launches into the very bad-taste, bad-intentions argument of "Well if it's going to be Realistic, then we ought to remove ALL of the fantasy and turn it into a mil-sim you nerd!" or "Well if it's going to be fantasy, then we should just make everyone bright pink/cyan, and have all forward movement be done via front-flip, while magical unicorns ride off in the distance!"

No.

Every story, and I mean every story, involves an unspoken contract between the audience and the writer that creates suspension of disbelief---and this contract always exists somewhere between realism and fantasy. It's not strictly possible for a story to be truly perfectly realistic without becoming reality itself, nor is it really possible for a story to be complete and pure fantasy without losing its sense of cohesion.

Every story is grounded in some realism: whether that's the simple realism of depicting human beings being human, or something small like realistic swordplay or realistic outfits---not even necessarily historical outfits, just outfits that make sense for the setting and therefore confer a sense of "real."

Every story is grounded in some fantasy: Even mil-sims aren't capable of complete realism and require some suspension of disbelief on the part of the player so that we can brush past the things that don't make sense (like having to navigate a menu to dig out an item rather than reaching into your backpack by hand) and get back to the things we're there to enjoy.

Helldivers is a perfect example of this: It's not pure fantasy, it's not pure realism. It's suspension of disbelief is based on a mixture of elements that make it a valuable bug/bot-killing fantasy while also bringing the frenetic nature of war to life in a way few other games are able to.

I try to use alternative words to describe this phenomenon because too often 'realism' calls to mind things that are hyper realistic, or even the pop-culture 'realism' of the 7th console generation (the era of gray/brown games)---and the best terms I can think of are things like verisimilitude and interactivity. A good for instance: The ability to switch the various settings on the gun, or the way that you have to be mindful of tossing out half-full mags creates a strong sense of verisimilitude in Helldivers 2. I especially love that there are animations attached to ever small thing that you do, so you rarely feel like you're menu surfing, you always feel like your little soldier is actually having to put hands on their equipment to use it.

I'll also use the word 'tactile' to describe certain things---like, I love it when a game lets me press buttons, and flip levers, and handle objects myself because it feels like I'm really holding that thing, or pressing the button etc.

And not to get into semantics but like, these are all just forms of realism simply because they help make the game feel 'real' to the player experiencing that game---but again, I think too many people are thinking of games like ARMA and Chivalry when it comes to realism.

At this point, I'm losing the plot---just stop making shitty, bad-faith arguments like this. If bringing the ARs in Helldivers closer into alignment with how real-world ARs work creates a game that feels more real and weighty, then it's probably the right move for that game. Believe it or not, real weapons have a real meta behind them and their designs---a meta that is getting easier and easier to replicate in games as time goes on. Just because the guns are %40 realistic doesn't mean the game is suddenly 0% fantasy.

[loveyourlovelysoul]

Hello. How are you doing?

Can i ask for some advice? What should i do when my friend(s) ignore me or give me silent treatment? I used to react but now I've stopped doing that, it's always me who apologize not her. It has happened in my previous friend group too and they only used me and bullied me later due to my gentle, overcaring and silent nature. It's heart wretching tbh.

Hey :)

It really is, and I am so very sorry you had/have to go through such a tough situation. At times gentle caring people like you tend to give a lot to others (also in fear of being betrayed and abandoned), and because of this they often encounter people who rather continuosly take from them; and honestly takers rarely know when to stop. This is why it's important to build up boundaries, to remind ourselves we're not responsible of making their life better at any cost nor we need to do this much to be accepted.

I don't know the background stories so take all I am going to say with a grain of salt.

My suggestion is trying to focus on you first. Since you had that terrible experience with your past group, it could be that being ignored and "ghosted" brings up lot of issues inside of you, connected to how you were used and abused by those people (and maybe even further in your past, Idk). it could be of help for example to try and check within what you make this silent treatment and being ignored mean about you. Not just the possible consequences that experiencing these behaviours may make you worry about but also what they mean about your persona according to you (eg. this person ignores me -> I probably said something wrong, they're tired of me, they are using me cause I'm too gentle, they have found more interesting people than me, they'll bully me/leave me + I'm bad, wrong, not worthy or lovable, I won't have good friends ever, I will be alone...). Be kind and gentle with yourself in the process, do not give your gentleness away only on the outside. You need it first. And it's so precious, never lose it please. This is tough stuff, so don't be afraid to ask for help and support. (I'll come back to this and your "silent nature" later on).

Another advice I want to give you is to try to build up your self defense. And by this I mean healthy emotional boundaries: try to not let your emotions and thoughts be defined by those of your friends, by how they treat you and how much they respond to you and all. Separate yourself from them. Especially separate your self worth and lovability from them. You are worthy and lovable whether they ignore you or not. If you really need to, when you feel like you are being ignored you can consider the possible options for why you are being ignored (eg. maybe something else is going on with them? maybe since it's not an urgent answer they decided to answer me later? maybe they forgot to answer me?... -it depends also on the situations in which you are being ignored or you are feeling ignored: not saying your feelings are not valid at all, but at times negative past experiences can make us more easily anxious and coming to fast conclusions, so it's also worth to see if we're being objective or not. Please though, don't let others manipulate your thoughts about this: if they're ignoring you, they are and this is why it's important to stay as objective as we can). Just try to not stress over these reasons though or they will only make it worse: even if there's none, still focus back on you and try to stay balanced and not overthink about the possible consequences. Stay present. Your worth is never defined by your friends. Especially by those who cannot help you when you need.

If it's someone you feel a connection with, try to communicate with them about yourself and your feelings, your insecurities too. You wrote that you're generally silent, but maybe you can find a person in a group with whom you can try to connect more deeply (if it's reciprocal) and you can share more with them, ask questions, be talkative.... You can also express your feelings when you are being/feeling ignored by saying something like "Since I had *this past negative/abusive experience* with those people, I feel uncomfortable when you don't answer me or ignore me cause it makes me feel like I did something wrong to you. Can you please help me and tell me if I actually did that or you simply need some time for yourself/have other plans for the time being?" Same goes for the silent treatment: "I'm sorry but right now I don't understand why you're not considering me. Can you please explain to me what I did wrong?". (If you fear being judged when saying this, I ofc understand you but remember that people judge others in fear of being judged themselves, so it's never about you even if it seems so. Relationships need to be safe places for everyone involved imo or they're just useless).

As you start speaking up about your issues like this, try to work on what makes you so uncomfortable like, eg. the fear of being abandoned/judged, possible social anxiety(?)/shiness, not feeling enough to have friends and ending up alone... Which is not the case, please trust me. You will have great relationships also cause of your character (just try to balance it a bit more: eg. "overcaring" can be a bit too much, you can try to be just "caring" of others and use the "over" part for you); take your time to work on yourself, especially protecting yourself. Don't be scared of expressing yourself, your likes and dislikes... this may help you discourage those who may think they can take control of you, manipulate you or even make fun of you cause of your laid-back nature.

It's already far too long so I won't say anything else. Wish you all the best, take care of you<3

[skenekidz]

Hey! Just saw this so sorry for the late response but wanted to respond. I am the “Unpopular Opinions” Person btw

OBVIOUSLY all the respect is meant. You are a genius <3 love your work, this is just some commentary

- Brennan IS a worse person than Killian because Killian really… doesn’t have THAT much agency in his life. Idk maybe I’m being too soft on him but I’ve always emphasized w/ children who make bad/objectively ambiguous decisions as the result of a turbulent life. Therefore, where Killian and Brennan made the SAME level of bad choices, Killian was genuinely a good person who was just trying to be a teenager/live his life in this “Fish out of Water” scenario he was put in. Brennan, meanwhile, came off like he had A LOT more agency and… strength, so to speak, not only in his own life but who he was in general. Therefore it’s a lot harder to excuse him for the stupid shit he puts himself in (like involving himself w/ the Principal’s son AND getting drawn into the bad/rebellious crowd, etc.). Therefore, Brennan is a worse person because generally those people (the reckless people who know they can make different, better choices and CHOOSE NOT TO), don’t tend to make the BEST decisions for their loved ones as well. Like I could see Brennan pulling some real dick behavior and causing shit for the people he cares for. Meanwhile, Killian? I highly doubt it. It’s the difference between “all bark but no bite” (Killian) and vice versa. One is just better.

- I agree on that! I’m just saying that IRL, the friends that stick will stick around. No amount of distance can TRULY crush any friendship. No doubt. Meanwhile… him relying on his friends as his family? Idk. There’s a difference between “My friends are my family” and “my friends can replace my family.” One is a MASSIVE cope and the other is just having close platonic/non-traditional family relationships. I still say Ireland would’ve given him time to grieve, properly, and become a more stable/stronger person. Just because something is harder to do doesn’t mean it’s the wrong choice.

- They are healthier!! You’re so right. And yeah, Staz and Ethan are similar but not the same people BUT… Will ALWAYS gave me the wrong vibes. I don’t vibe w/ hypocrites, and he is a MASSIVE one, considering him and Jude are EXTREMELY alike (Will just have the advantage of not having a horrible relationship w/ his Mother, otherwise I GUARANTEE he would’ve made similar if not the same choices). HOWEVER, the dynamics are EERILY similar. Two soft boys from subtly troubled homes change the perspective of two much more damaged, aggressive boys? Yeah, apologies if this wasn’t the correct read in the slightest, but both couples sort of gave me those vibes tbh. Although not ENTIRELY, clearly, as they are both complex enough to not be carbon copies (I realized this might’ve been insulting and so sorry if it is. I’m not trying to say that at all, they just follow the same TROPES.)

- You were an EXCELLENT writer (I mean your characters than were ten times more complex than mine are NOW), I just think the plot needed the characters to do what it needed them to do and there wasn’t a lot of time for diversions. Also, it really isn’t your fault if they were “a nightmare.” Hollywood/etc. LOVES the dysfunctional friendships. Just look at Riverdale! White Lotus (if you need a more updated example)! Gossip Girl! Literally any superhero movie. It’s just more fun for friends to sort of hate each others guts, unfortunately. ESPECIALLY in Young Adult media. Benji is still a bad friend to Ethan and Gideon tho… I will DIE on this hill (plus Sonnet and Ethan are the platonic soulmates we never got to see).

And that’s it! Thank you so much for your time!! I hope I never veered into disrespectful or rude while writing this. I feel like I did at multiple points so if I have, I am extremely sorry, clearly not my intention. I have a HUGE amount of respect to you and obviously, these are tour books, I just was curious to see if you would hate these tbh. All the love <3 Have a great day/evening!!!!

Cheers :)

This was super respectfully worded and I really appreciate the perspective! As the writer, it's sometimes hard for me to imagine how things can be interpreted differently than I intend, so I appreciate these kinds of honest perspectives. It gives me a lot to consider when writing in the future! Thanks for sharing! :)

[darklordofthesimp]

Hi, military-bad anon here again, hopefully for the last time. I spent the last 24 hrs reflecting over this whole discourse and I realized where I went wrong. I wanted to apologize for my ignorance and for the words I said.

Someone else had guessed it, I had a dumb-american moment, where I forgot that other countries had militaries, and that those militaries are not used for terrorism like the US uses their military (for example, aiding Latin American dictators in their coups, our 20 year invasion of Afghanistan for their oil, and our part in the Vietnam war), but instead are used to help the public in their times of need like natural disasters.

And if I've ever expressed distaste for the US military, it's never against the individuals who are following orders, it's always against the capitalist machine who gives the orders.

That first ask was a culmination of a 30 second word vomit and I just hit sent without much thought. When everyone believed I called service men and women sick, I was confused on how anyone came to that conclusion. After thinking about it and reading it over with fresh eyes, I realized I wasn't as clear as I should have been.

When I said "You're not bad for being sick, but being sick isnt very good for you." I didn't mean service people being sick, I meant people in general being sick. And by "sick," I didn't mean there was something wrong with you in your head, I meant like your immune system was compromised and you've got the flu or something. And everyone knows you're not a bad person just because you got the sniffles. So essentially, what I was trying to convey, is that there are good people who are in a bad situation. (And by "bad situation," I mean in actual war, which I realize now that not everyone is actually fighting.)

It was an attempt at an analogy but 1. It was a bad analogy and 2. I didn't even let y'all know it was an analogy, I just jumped into it, and reading back, yeah I should have proofread.

Also, about the children shows mention, I was just trying to explain how we all know war is bad because it was taught to us from an early age that we should be kind to another. But this was irrelevant as I now know; military does not equal people going to war.

Even calling myself "military-bad anon" is problematic because it's assuming the military is bad, but that's how you guys know me so 🙃

I know I tried earlier to explain myself, but I never actually apologized. So again, I'm sorry.

I'm very exhausted by the entire conversation that ensued after your ask, there's a lot of things I want to say and there's actually a couple of points I want to argue but I really cannot be fucked.

I think the point is that, while I can't answer for what the US Military has done, neither can they really.

Any military is like a handgun. It can be used to protect you and it can also be used to commit a straight up crime, but at the end of the day- it is ENTIRELY DEPENDANT on the person wielding it.

Whoever wields the military decides what it does. The people who joined are there to protect and defend the nation. That's what I know and that's what I'll stand by, whatever the suits and the politicians want to do outside of that main objective is another conversation entirely.

Thanks for apologising about the wording in your ask, I think it'll clear up a lot for most people and it takes a big person to apologise for something being misunderstood so I really appreciate it

[delafiseaseses]

You probably don't care, but people earn my respect through actions I approve of. Acting in a way I think is a good way to act. The way I intend to act.

Those actions am quite simple, these am in the order they pop into me head:

Not letting people walk all over you.

Knowing when to drop a topic and move on.

Learning from and admitting your mistakes and shortcomings.

Practice self-examination. Nothing is more dangerous than refusing to scrutinise oneself.

Don't dismiss other's struggles. Even if they sound strange to you or you think you've suffered worse.

Oh, that's a big one. Suffering is not a contest, don't treat it like it is.

Not starting fights over personal taste differences.

Understanding not everyone is like you and being good with that.

Understanding that people know themselves better than you know them.

Not expecting apologies to be accepted (I don't actually believe an apology you expect to be accepted is a real apology).

General politeness (you can be rude with people who aren't being polite themselves, there's leniency here).

Not name-calling and otherwise insulting people (again, leniency for when the other side isn't followin' this rule).

Slurs are a no-go (this don't apply to self-identification, words with numerous contexts that can be slurs or using terms when discussing said terms in conversation).

Basic respect is a big thing with me. Respectin' pronouns, gender, sexuality, nationality.

Be considerate of others.

General weariness of generailsations (especially of immutable things like ethnicity, place of birth, etc.)

A subcategory of that: Be very weary of being nationalist, even as a joke (I dislike people who insult French people for instance, nationalism is not quirky or funny).

Just don't be bigoted in general. You'll fail at this, because this is a very bigoted world, but strive for reduction of bigotry from yourself everyday.

Don't put words in other people's mouths.

Giving benefit of the doubt to a reasonable degree (there's a lotta nuance there to what 'a reasonable degree' is).

Just, generally don't jump to conclusions.

Don't dilute terms and generally try and use things properly (example: using the term 'TERF' as just 'transphobe' since that's a specific category of transphobe and transphobic ideology).

Knowing when to argue and when to simply block someone (like when you see a TERF, for instance, just remove 'em from your sight).

Listen to a wide-variety of people, hear numerous sides of a discussion. Then form an opinion. Gut instincts and knee-jerk reactions are often unhelpful (and full of bias).

Understand that nobody speaks for everybody in a category and treatin' people as ambassadors for their demographics is a bad thing to do.

Don't make assumptions about others lives or capabilities.

Oh, don't act like your views are all unequivocal 'objective fact' and everyone else is 'subjective' or use 'subjective' as a negative.

At the same time, both sidesing is not always sensible. There are sides that are just plain wrong (TERFs are a good example of this)

Generally think before you speak.

Know you don't need to share your opinion on everythin' or act like your views are somehow better than other people's views.

Don't be mean about spellin' mistakes or poor-wording. At best you'll be being mean, at worst you'll be being ableist or nationalist.

Uhh... I can't think of anythin' else of the top of my head. Why did I even write this? Felt like it. I know basically nobody is gonna be like "Oh boy, I really don't want to lose the respect of Delafiseaseses.". Now, living up to all these standards is kinda impossible, but striving for such things is a good idea. We're all everchanging, complex and contradictory creatures.

And that's good.

[strixcattus]

Conlang Year Days 188–205

It's a little lonely in the Conlang Year tag with my being the only one still posting there. Oh well! This set of prompts focused around various kinds of questions, which was fun to figure out.

Days 188–194: Yes/No Questions

There are a few different strategies of creating yes/no questions that I'm aware of and considered, but most of them outright wouldn't work for Lecizao. I'm generally not interested in indicating questions via tone alone, and my previous conlang, Yvelse, had a pair of interrogative particles, so I'm not in a hurry to use that strategy again any time soon. From what I know of languages that shift word order in questions, the verb usually rises to the start of the sentence, but Lecizao already has VSO word order.

So I created a special phrase used only to indicate questions. In Lecizao, all questions begin essentially with the phrase nai neju, literally "it is," and the verb of the question is put in the infinitive. For example:

Nai neju deiteto tio kalali nosulo tage ne ki kanini kejuni? [be NOM.3SG INF.have NOM hawk*.GEN ADJ.tail red ACC INDEF.PL claw.PL sharp] Do red-tailed hawks have sharp claws? (lit. Is it that red-tailed hawks have sharp claws?)

*for the sake of simplicity I'm just going to be glossing words with particularly general meanings into the specific meaning in context. I think it's just this and tosuko below for this post.

Experimental adjectivization strategy aside (and, hey! the general plural! definitely didn't forget I had that!), the phrase nai neju + infinitive is something that only occurs in questions. Shown here, it's unconjugated, so let's introduce an objective tense:

Nesi neju deimiju tio Keiti? [be.PRES.3SG NOM.3SG INF.sleep NOM Keiti] Is Keiti sleeping?

Contrast with statements like Nesi ne la kala nosulo tage, "It is a red-tailed hawk," where the subject pronoun vanishes once the verb is conjugated. Neju always remains in questions. Also note that the verb miju, sleep, is still in an infinitive and tense is only marked on nai.

That's about it for yes/no questions, so let's take a moment to talk about—

Day 193: Answering Yes/No Questions

Lecizao generally doesn't have any sort of politeness or formality register baked into the language. However, there are a pretty wide variety of question-answering strategies, and not all of them are as formal as others.

Saying yes:

There is no word in Lecizao that simply means yes. Instead, you use the same verb nai to mean "it is," conjugated appropriate for the tense of the question: nesi (present), nani (past), etc. A base nai on its own is a particularly casual "yes," even though you might not always have an objective tense you can use to conjugate it. If you're trying to avoid being too familiar and don't have a tense, you can say nai neju. (You can also say, say, nesi neju, though that's particularly formal.)

Saying no:

There is a dedicated word in Lecizao for "no!" The word is sudo, which is neither particularly casual nor particularly formal, and carries and requires no tense information. You can also form words for "no" by negating the phrases you would use for "yes"— suo nesi, suo nani, etc. Suo nai is the most casual way to say "no."

Like with the non-negated versions, you can use suo nai neju as an especially polite form of "no." This is the most polite word in the set, and it's generally reserved for situations where a negative response needs to be treated with especial care—it's almost like apologizing for the "no" response in the same words as the "no" itself.)

To settle down the levels of formality, here's a list from least to most polite: Casual, the simplest way to answer: Nai, suo nai Neither casual nor formal, appropriate for nearly all situations: Sudo, nesi, nani, etc. Markedly formal, effort is being made to avoid using a more casual response: Nai neju, suo nesi, suo nani, etc. Exceptionally polite, someone in power is about to be unhappy with a negative response: Suo nai neju

Days 195–204: Wh-word Questions

Wh-word questions use the same format as yes/no questions, with two distinctions. The most obvious is that there's a wh-word.

Nai neju ne timiza deinai nesitia? [be NOM.3SG ACC who INF.be NOM.PRES.2SG] Who are you? (lit. Who is it that you are? Sort of.)

The other distinction is that, unlike in yes/no questions, you are allowed to drop the pronoun neju in cases where you would be able to in a statement.

Nani tio timiza kuido deitei ne jia nenejune nodaze duoko!? [be.PST.3SG NOM who INALIPOSS.2PL INF.eat ACC DEF.PL fruit ADJ.stone ALIPOSS.1SG] Which one of you ate my peaches!? (lit. It is who of you that ate my peaches!?)

Wh-words use the case particle that would be appropriate for the missing item's role in the sentence and do not take determiners, etc. I may as well paste the full list here, since it's not that long:

Time: Which Timiza: Who (kotimiza or duotimiza are used for “whose”) Taoli: What Deitaoli: Why (lit. for what) Tioci: When Tieda: Where Tekei: How

Time is a determiner. All the others are nouns derived from compounds using time. I did in fact make the wh-word determiner time on purpose.

Also, one more thing before I go, an example from the sentences that are actually in my doc (all variants on the same statement asking about every conceivable argument):

Nani tio ja tami duotimiza deiselo ne ja tosuko? [be.PST.3SG NOM DEF.SG child ALIPOSS.who INF.break ACC DEF.SG pencil] Whose child broke the pencil?

Children are alienable possessions. Unless you're meaning to say you physically gave birth to the child—Lecizao family terms carry distinctions between relations that you grew up with, and relations that are defined by the physical act of birth—but even if you did, that's kind of weird and gross to bring up in a conversation where it isn't relevant.

[smhalltheurlsaretaken]

You know what? I find it super interesting that the Order wasn’t too harsh on Anakin. In fact, you could even make the argument that they were too easy on him, if anything (which is an interesting parallel with Rael).

There are like a ton of instances of Anakin either not doing his job (and this isn’t me hating on him, I like Anakin, it’s an objective fact) or directly disobeying orders, and never facing any consequences for either. In fact, I don’t think we’ve ever seen Anakin actually be punished for anything (but if you can think of one time in the movies or TCW where he was not reprimanded or scolded, but actually punished for something - please tell me and I’ll amend this). 

Consider:

Anakin loses R2 (after going against Obi-Wan’s advice to leave the system and staying to fight instead), R2 being full of  like half of the army’s intel. 

Consequences: Obi-Wan yells at Anakin for 30 secs and Anakin is sent to get R2, like he wanted to. (s1ep6)

One episode later (after disregarding Obi-Wan’s advice to wait for reinforcements): 

Consequences:

A sigh and a glare, for putting multiple people at risk. That’s it. The transmission cuts off there, Ahsoka says Obi-Wan has a point, and nothing more comes out of it. (s1ep7)

Later (s1ep22):

Consequences for skipping out his meditative retreat (the time off he was given by the Order): none that we see or are told about. We don’t know if anyone was even aware that he didn’t go on his retreat. Also, see his argument when Padmé says she doesn’t have time to go on a romantic vacation:

Anakin, a very important General but still a very young man, was given two weeks of completely unsupervised time off in the middle of a full scale war. 

And again (s2ep):

Consequences for keeping Mace, Obi-Wan and Yoda waiting for hours:

Nothing. Master Windu, the highly respected head of the Jedi Order, High General in the GAR, the boogeyman of the fandom, the ‘mean, horrible, awful Jedi Master who didn’t trust Anakin and didn’t like him and was always scolding him about all sorts of stuff and hated him and was mean’, didn’t have one word of reprimand for the 20 yo kid who kept him waiting all night and didn’t even give the barest of excuse or explanation for not answering his comm.

And this isn’t me setting out to bash Anakin or whatever! I’m not interpreting anything here, just showing examples of Anakin doing things that should earn him a very stern talking to, at the very least - considering his age, his status, and his rank in the army - but where we never see anything actually happen. That’s like the whole Prequels era, really. Anakin is never punished for his actions, until he is (see last gifs). I mean:

Consequences for flying into the command ship during TPM: none that we see or are told about. 

Consequences for going to Tatooine in AotC, then going to Geonosis against direct orders, thus putting Senator Amidala in danger twice: none that we see or are told about. He is knighted a few months after and then given Ahsoka, and the Jedi all seem to think it’s a great idea, meaning people didn’t make any big deal out of his disregarding orders. 

Consequences for flying to the Abregado system in s1ep2 to rescue Plo Koon, against the Council’s orders: Obi-Wan makes a snarky remark to Cody, Yoda makes a snarky remark to no one in particular, and Palpatine lies to Anakin about ‘the Council being furious’ when we just saw that they weren’t.

Consequences for disobeying Obi-Wan on Mortis in s3ep13: none. 

Consequences for lying to Obi-Wan’s face about Rex’s helmet in s7ep2: Obi-Wan passive-aggressively asks him if he’s said hello to Padmé, nothing more comes out of it. 

Consequences for almost botching the Rako Hardeen mission (and unwittingly trying to kill Obi-Wan): Yoda is the one who apologizes to him. 

Consequences for being in a relationship (which isn’t technically forbidden, but it’s still far from ideal, especially considering Padmé is a Senator) and lying about it: the Council hints that they know about him and Padmé in the Clovis eps (s2ep4, s6ep6), Anakin always vehemently claims that they’re only friends. Nothing happens. 

Consequences for being a known troublemaker: Yoda unironically praises him for it (+ the Council members love bantering with him + he gets to call them by their first names.)

Consequences for constantly disobeying Obi-Wan, the Council, Yularen, and basically everybody ever:

For all his troublemaking, Anakin never actually gets into trouble, and I just think it contrasts nicely with the rather predominant view that the Jedi were overly critical of him, unduly harsh, and constantly on his back. 

[zuko-always-lies]

“Undeserved Kindness” and ATLA

There are many characters in ATLA who show kindness to others who have done nothing to “deserve” or “show they earned it,” to even their own deadly enemies. Sometimes this kindness has great personal costs.  Often this kindness fails to achieve its objectives, and it rarely leads to the “undeserving” recipient changing their behavior for the better. However, it always serves to illuminate the character of the giver of kindness, to demonstrate what kind of person they are.

Let us take Aang’s treatment of Zuko, for example.  Aang saves Zuko in “The Blue Spirit,” even though Zuko has spent the past half-season trying to capture him. This doesn't earn Aang any rewards. In the short term, what this gets Aang is Zuko trying to burn his face off, and it unclears how much, if at all, this episode of kindness plays in Zuko eventually switching sides. But do you what? Even if this action had brought no long-term rewards, even if Zuko had never switched sides or if he had died somewhere in a ditch in the Earth Kingdom, Aang saving Zuko would still demonstrate Aang’s kindness and compassion.

Let’s turn to Aang saving Zuko in “The Siege of the North.” This doesn’t lead to Zuko changing his behavior. As far as we see, he never even acknowledges the Gaang had saved him, and he not only attempts to capture Aang at least once after this but straight up tries to kill the entire Gaang in Book 3.  But again, Aang demanding that they save Zuko, despite everything Zuko has done to him, demonstrates what sort of person Aang is.

We can turn to Zuko offering to save Zhao in the same episode, which I think might be Zuko’s most compassionate moment in the show. Zhao is an awful person and just tried to kill Zuko, and likely would again if given the chance.  He doesn’t take Zuko’s hand, and it’s doubtful that Zuko could have saved him anyways. Yet Zuko offering and Zuko trying to save even a mortal enemy says something fundamental about Zuko, just like Zhao refusing Zuko’s offer says something about Zhao.

We can say much the same about Katara offering to heal Zuko’s scar.  Zuko has done nothing to deserve this kindness and has repeatedly done awful things to Katara and her friends, but Katara still feels empathy for him and acts compassionately toward him. Does this lead to any sort of positive result for her? No, and I don’t think scene played any real role in Zuko switching sides. Does this scene still say volumes about Katara? Hell yes.

We can turn to Azula apologizing to Ty Lee in “The Beach.” Azula manages to accomplish her short term objective of making Ty Lee feel better, but this doesn't fix her relationship with her friend or solve the toxic dynamics underlying it. Nor does this net Azula any long-term benefit. Still, this scene says a lot about who Azula is.

And the same can be said for Ty Lee’s decision to of her own volition volunteer to help Azula learn how to flirt. Does this fix her relationship with her friend? No. Does it even end up netting Azula a boyfriend in the short term? No. But it still says a lot about who Ty Lee is as a person.

Finally, we can turn to Azula generally being kind to Zuko in “The Beach”(although there are moments when she’s a bit of a jerk to him, she’s generally pretty nice). Does this fix Azula’s relationship with her brother? No. Does it lead to Zuko showing the slightest shed of kindness to her? No.  Does this prevent Zuko from taking actions which have strong negative impacts on her? No. Does it say volumes on who Azula is as a person, her relationship with her brother, and how she wants her relationship with her brother to be? Yes.

And now we turn to Iroh’s treatment of Azula. Many people claim that he was totally justified to hate her because she was a threat to Zuko, or claim that he couldn’t have “saved her” anyways. That misses the point. Iroh not demonstrating the slightest shed of empathy or compassion toward (and it would have been so easy for the writers to imply that he did) his abused child soldier 14 year old niece says volumes about him. Iroh not demonstrating any regret about what had happened to her says volumes about him(and the show very clearly showed that he felt a lot of regret on how bad his relationship with Ozai had gotten).