#ts analysis

[bitchnuggettt]

The most interesting thing about Janus and Virgil's vague situationship is that they share similar goals in their functions as sides, and something I like to think about is how their end goal is a shared interest in keeping Thomas safe from both internal and external threats. For so long I've seen the idea passed around in fanon that Virgil represents "fight or flight" but I think there's an even cooler alternative here

I can't picture Virgil running, when adrenaline kicks in HE'S what kicks in, and if that means LITERALLY kicking someone to shit and death then yeah, he's your guy. He literally embodies that one anecdote of a mother gaining the strength to lift a car off her child in her panic.

So, I offer this; Virgil is fight, Janus is flight.

Virgil compels Thomas to deck any bodily threat to him, or pushes him to confront uncomfortable truths.

Janus convinces Thomas to cut his losses when all else fails and physically hightail it away from fights he won't win, forcing him to be non-confrontational and cut social ties that inconvenience him. Avoidance to the max.

In the mean tweets video, Janus iconically gets offended at his bluff being called, because no, he is NOT a fighter, not when he can just sic Virgil or Remus on anything he doesn't care to confront. Even his choice of murder via poison is indirect and hands-off. (Realistically, snake venom would be his literal poison of choice but that's a story for another day)

Together, anxceit makes up the two sides of the 'fight or flight' coin

[unhinged-jaw]

I rewatched SVSredux and it has been plaguing my thoughts so. Rambles.

Watching Logan vs Deceit Pretending To Be Logan is So fascinating. This is no drag against Logan, but he allows himself to be talked over. Most of his 'Logan Lowdowns' are him making the soft pixel talking sounds. True to his earlier statement he acts detached to the debate, merely adding information (that is largely ignored). He only audibly gets involved when Patton asks for his input, clearly assuming Logan was going to help make his point clearer. Especially since Patton spends the whole episode struggling to convey his point! But that's another topic for another day.

Conversely, Janus As Logan (who I will be referring to as Dlogan for rn) is Very confrontational. First of all, the entire time Dlogan is on screen he is *speaking*. He sort of manhandles the conversation into his hands. Its very important to me though that how Dlogan does it is *different* than how Logan has taken control of the conversation in the past. Dlogan proceeds to *shred* into Patton's logic. Like, genuinely, he is tearing that poor man apart. He points out when Patton is lying and fumbling. He points out the inconsistencies. *He* is the reason Patton ends up freaking the hell out! Patton and his extreme opinion on the whole thing is put directly into the light and it shows every single inconsistency.

The difference between Logan and Dlogan is *genuinely* fascinating. Dlogan is very persistent that he will not be ignored. He shoves himself to the forefront and is very aggressive. But! If you weren't paying attention you really wouldn't notice! You would just think (in Remus words) that he "reached his listening to others limit". But he didn't! Janus has the wheel here!

ALSO there is a moment where Roman goes "I thought you didn't care about this stuff Logan" (Paraphrased) and Dlogan sort of brushes that off. But it is noticed by the other sides that Logan suddenly seems to care more about the debate. Fun call back!

Bonus also, Logan goes from "giving relevant information" to Dlogan pushing the topic of Self Preservation and whether or not Thomas *should* go to those extremes to be morally good.

Genuinely fascinating and fun all around.

[sapphicscience]

thinking about @milfygerard 's assessment of the TTPD set as a kind of performance art, and specifically the icdiwabh performance. the way a crowd chant is incorporated into the song, but the chant ("more!") is designed to make the audience feel guilty for participating, but at the same time compelled to participate. this is a weird pull but it actually reminds me of certain video game mechanics—specifically it makes me think of spec ops: the line, which I haven't played but which I've watched a few video essays about, and is a game that essentially makes you do war crimes, and then makes you feel bad about it. (here is a whole article about this type of mechanic in video games.) the message is clear: you are complicit. but in order to play the game, those are the choices you must make. it's a bizarre paradox to navigate.

in the realm of actual performance art, it also calls to mind a much darker piece: rhythm 0, in which the artist provided 72 objects (some innocuous, some dangerous) and then stayed completely still for 6 hours while the audience did whatever they wanted to her. this is obviously a very different and ultimately much more extreme situation—this artist places herself in a position of intense vulnerability, allowing herself to be repeatedly assaulted—while taylor remains in control the whole time: the people "forcing" her to perform are actually her employees, and the audience participation is based on a song she wrote. but at the same time...abramovic provided the weapons on the table herself. and the message of taylor's performance is in essence the same as the message of abramovic moving through the audience after her piece ended, looking at them as they refused to make eye contact: look at what you've done to me.

but both pieces are complicated by the fact that this work is voluntary. here's a blade, cut me with it.

[loganslowdown4]

Today I was thinking about how the dark sides are represented as ‘villains’ because c!Thomas thinks that that side of himself is reprehensible. Like he sees completely in black and white. And because of this, any thought or action that comes from that side is immediately villainized, to the point where they act and even look like cartoon villains.

His point of reference for ‘bad guys’ has always been from his experience with the media he consumes, like cartoons or video games. It’s actually an immature way of looking at himself.

I get the wanting to separate good from bad, and this works for the big moral yes or no questions. But there gets to be a point where we grow up and realize that most instances in our lives have shades of grey answers, which is actually why Janus and Remus are there. We eventually just accept those sides of ourselves as part of us.

And eventually, they become more mellow and we realize they’re just there for self preservation. It’s not selfish to look after yourself if you have to lie about something. We’re not bad because we have intrusive thoughts. Being bothered by them literally shows us what NOT to do. In their way, they are a form of moral compass.

Neither sides are there to make him comfortable, but being comfortable leaves you vulnerable when you need protection. So Janus and Remus aren’t great sides but they aren’t ‘villains’ either, as Thomas sees them. They deserve acceptance just as much as Virgil does, because, like Virgil, they’re working to protect Thomas just as much.

Just some food for thought today! 😁 Also check out the colours in Thomas’ tie whoa 👀🤍🖤

[thenewromanticspod]

our queer analysis of cruel summer is out now

[patrice-bergerons]

One of my favourite things about fitzier is that (early series) James keeps accusing Francis of being overly dramatic (e.g. "dramatic opening shot", "who is this friend? does he also write melodrama") with zero self awareness, as if he isn't the most dramatic commander to ever grace her majesty's navy but, at the same time, he is right. Francis himself was made to stand on the edge of a fearsome cliff, overlooking the sea under a steely sky with the wind billowing in his coat. He slams his fist on tables. He broods. Yes he has great points but he never gets the tone right for corporate meetings and neither does he try. What I am saying is fitzier is what happens when you pair a theatre gay with an emo goth gay and force them to work together.

[let-roman-bite-someone]

watching Have I Grown? and i’m cackling at how the set is well-lit for all the other sides, except for this dramatic mf

it’s not a dark side thing either because remus is also in regular lighting, like the rest of the sides

but i can’t also help but wonder if this is part of janus’s powersets. when he shapeshifts into patton

the lighting is normal for a second and then it goes back to being dim and ominous when he goes back to his original form. we see this happening in the other episodes too and at first i thought it was a dark sides thing but no, turns out it’s just a janus thing.

[part-time-zombie]

The best part of seeing the other sides in virgils room and impacted by its effects is realizing what happens when they each get anxious, and what their anxieties are about.

Roman is worried that he said something wrong, or that he didn't do a good job. He's scared he's messing things up.

Patton is afraid of losing the people he cares about.

Logan... poor logan is just worried that he'll end up boring people with what he has to say. He's so insecure about others criticizing his work that the idea of people getting frustrated with him talking is his most prevalent source of anxiety.

And this is what happened immediately after he said that...

[prod-1989]

clara bow being described by one of her directors as “pitifully eager to please everyone” and taylor calling herself a “pathological people pleaser” in you’re losing me. clara bow being a very famous 20s star, a personification of the roaring 20s, and taylor who’s arguably the artist of our generation… oh my heart. MY HEART, TAYLOR.

[thermodynamic-comedian]

i bring a sort of "sanders sides poses some genuinely interesting questions about identity and how we define and seperate parts of ourselves" vibe to the club that nobody likes.

[tentacle-therapissed]

After Roman says ‘I thought I was your hero’ and Thomas says, ‘you are’, Roman looks over to Janus and Janus nods.

Janus just told everyone his real name moments ago in order to prove that he is both capable of sincerity and willing to be honest with the other Sides so they can start seeing eye to eye. His glove is still off and he is currently in an uncharacteristically vulnerable position that he willingly put himself in. He nods to Roman as if to say "Yes, as the person intrinsically in tune with Thomas’s lying, I can confirm he is telling the truth."

But Roman is looking at Janus as the embodiment of Thomas’s deceit. He’s so used to being played and manipulated by Janus’s lies and faux camaraderie and has now become so on edge that he can’t understand how anyone else could possibly trust anything Janus is saying. He sees the nod as a confirmation that c!Thomas was lying about Roman being his hero and scoffs in shock and betrayal.

c!Thomas looks utterly bewildered at this reaction,

and Janus's smile fades as he realizes how Roman interpreted the nod.

And when Patton says 'we love you', Roman assumes that's a lie too. In the Puzzle Song Roman needs to be reassured that no one hates him, heavily implying this is an underlying insecurity of his. Assuming this is the case, it wouldn't take much for him to believe Patton's 'we love you' meant just the opposite.

Roman's self esteem is so fragile that he takes the others listening to Janus personally. Because if Janus was right, that means Roman made the wrong call in sentencing Thomas to the wedding and doomed them all. If Janus was right, that means he let Thomas down- and it was revealed in Am I Original that Roman is terrified of letting Thomas down.

So now he's convinced (and let's be real, Janus's dig at him for making mistakes didn't help) that he isn't Thomas's hero anymore. Devastating stuff :)

[sapphicscience]

having been interested in religious themes in taylor's music before, i just was kind of startled after listening to ttpd (minus the anthology) for the first time in a while and realizing she has two very similar sentiments expressed wrt religion in different songs on this album: "you ain't gotta pray for me" in bdilh and "your good lord doesn't need to lift a finger" in i can fix him. they both refer to this same scenario of people disapproving of a romantic partner and the narrator saying "no, actually, your prayers and invocations of god are unnecessary, i've got this under control."

there's almost a sense of being above god, or at least not needing god, which fits with the idea from the prologue of this relationship being a "manic phase." this also possibly represents the natural progression from the religious themes in would've, could've, should've, in which the narrator feels forsaken by god, or like her experiences have made her turn away from god...it kind of makes sense that a person would then progress to "well fuck you, i don't need you anyway."

[agirlwiththoughtsandnegativity]

‼️I think a great message Taylor put in ttpd is that she’s mad at the fans…and good for her. Many fans still don’t see her as human, as a real person, just some toy they can manipulate to entertain them and fit their narrative. Many fans think their entitled to her personal life too: the letter for her to stop dating matty (yes I think Matty sucks but that was just weird af), speculation on who each song is about, the extreme discourse after her and joe broke up, the gaylor shit, even the talk about her and Travis. Taylor is finally saying it is weird to talk about REAL PEOPLE like that, like they’re tv show characters or your little toys. None of us are entitled to Taylor’s personal life and it is extremely odd to believe you should have a say in it. As Taylor says, NO the fans cannot come to the wedding, because we’re JUST FANS. Even now, some swifties need to see Taylor doesn’t know you, she’s not your best friend, not your sister. She makes music for us. She’s not trying to be a little circus for you to direct.

anyways, taylor is a real human, not a puppet. her personal life is hers, not your circus. and taylor doesn’t know you. she appreciates the fans for giving her her career, for listening to the music, but she has never met you; she. is. not. your. friend.‼️

[milk3ad]

rewatching older s1 sasi, the sides are ALL mean to each other. even patton for a bit. like ppl like to shit in logan, or roman, or virgil for being mean, but the truth is no one was actually nice to each other. virgil definitely got it the worst, but he was also mean as hell too. i think the change happened after accepting anxiety where everyone made a bigger effort to be nicer (patton’s change came a bit before). maybe that says something abt how c!thomas views himself more negatively or how the sides learned how their words affect each other. i’m not certain. but i hate seeing ppl claiming one of the sides is mean, like they all were…

[mayfly-stampede]

so, in the manga…

did Vash really have a romantic interest in Meryl?

spoiler alert: Trigun manga, Trigun Maximum

In the case of Meryl, there are several signs she has developed feelings for him. She accepts it and lets Vash be himself.

Mmm with Vash it’s hard to answer…

We see they’re good friends…she can be a bit tough with him but Vash always smiles to her.

I think that’s really sweet and he acts like that with everyone…

BUT

When Zasie kidnapped Meryl, Vash goes to rescue her and yes, that is something he could do for anyone who needs his help…but in Trigun Maximum chapter 28 when Vash suffers remembering all July’s tragedy…he thinks about Meryl in danger and keeps going.

And when he finally finds her in chapter 29, the worry and fear in his face is undeniable.

Then, there’s something really interesting FOR HIM happening after that.

Meryl witnesses July’s tragedy in a memory…and then she begins to be afraid every time she sees Vash in his angel form.

After seeing her so frightened, Vash says he feels like crying…

That could have separate them…

BUT

Vash receives a revolver from Meryl, being really surprised that she still wants to look after him, and smiles…relieved.

Meryl continues by his side, even after seeing his scariest power…and cares about him no matter the circumstances.

If we look for a romantic relationship…I think this is more complicated than that.

Oxford Languages defines romance as a feeling of excitement and mystery associated with love.

We can’t say Vash is excited or nervous about Meryl…All we see is Vash nervous about Meryl crying most likely because he doesn’t know what to do, but that’s all (and that’s really cute).

Instead of that, Vash could be more oriented to “love” instead of “romance”.

But for someone like him, who is 150 years old, full of sorrows and regrets…what does “love” mean?

Cambridge Dictionary says:

Love is used to describe all strong feelings of closeness and care between two people.

After all they have been though together, they developed really strong feelings for each other, especially closeness and care.

And there is this moment, one of the most precious to me in this relationship.

Almost at the end, Vash is going to confront Knives but he makes a promise to Meryl before he leaves.

(Yes, we know he was a bit late but remember he was really injured, he had to heal at human speed at that time…but he was already on his way when he was found again).

He could have made promises many other times in his life but here he doesn’t only says he will return. He, who never asks nothing from anyone, asks her to wait for him.

Ok yes, he may be capable of love all humans…but he has always been a lonely wolf. He has friends, but he always travels alone.

It is until he meets Wolfwood and Meryl that he wants to stay with someone.

And Meryl is the one Vash wants to wait for his return.

[glitter-stained]

Let's build Jason a bookshelf !

Pride and Prejudice - homeboy is an Austen fan canonically, we need at least this one.

Hamlet -do I need to say more? Do I?

Water for the elephants: He won't admit it, but the book reminds him of Dick, and he reads it any time he misses him. It's angsty enough to maintain a front while actually being a romance with a satisfying ending.

The Outsiders: It's not just that the story is relatable and really well written; it's the themes of loyalty, grief and heroism, and the imagery and hopefulness shining through, and it's the way Johnny reminds him of Roy and sometimes, after Roy's death, he will close his eyes and picture the two of them together in an abandoned church, in that quiet space safe from the war raging outside, reading Gone With the Wind while Roy provides uncharitable commentary about the characters' decisions.

Under The Whispering Door (TJ Klune): This one was gifted to him by Tim because "the main character is an asshole ghost, I thought you might relate." Of course, these idiots could talk to eachother about emotions and go to therapy, but why do that when you can bait your brother into reading a story that will help him process a bit of his relationship with his own death and the family? The worst part is, it worked great, and Jason is so upset that it became one of his favourite books. (The part about the stages of grief is scientifically inaccurate, though. He would know.)

A compilation of TS Eliot's works: Maybe it's because I'm a big fan of TS Eliot and Jason, but every time I reread one of his poems, I think about Jason and I'm sad. The Hollow Men, in particular about the fallen soldiers from WWI, hits so hard as a Jason poem, especially when you consider he lived through the explosion but died of smoke inhalation.

Flowers for Algernon: After losing Bizarro, Jason rereads it often, sitting on rooftops, every time the sky is bright enough to see the stars. He reads it out loud, and the words burn his tongue and taste bitter every time every time, but he likes to pretend his friend is listening, and feels a little less alone.

The Oresteia: This one belongs to the list Jason has read many times and should probably read less, because he projects the tragedy onto his real life and it's a bad influence that comforts him in the idea that he was doomed from the start and might as well burn the remains of the bridges with his family. Good luck trying to pry it out of his hands though! He also loves the idea of being seen at his worst, in the midst of all his hopelessness, and being loved anyway, cradled with unwavering devotion.

Frankenstein : He's a huge Mary Shelley fan, both as a person and a writer. As for Hamlet and the Oresteia, he definitely projects maybe a little too much of some of the characters, but hey, not everybody can brag that they relate to the Creature on such a visceral level.

What else would you guys add?