#using it as an example as to why modern cartoons such

[dazeddoodles]

The group of three mean girls thing is crazy because I remember like...maybe one scene of Amity, Boscha and Skara together and that's it.

It's that and the main character having two friends for me. I can't believe Dana copied Fairly Oddparents because the main character in that also has two friends.

So many examples of that post were just *two characters with completely different personalities standing similarly* and *the most vague/basic/common trope in existence*

[renthony]

In Defense of Shitty Queer Art

Queer art has a long history of being censored and sidelined. In 1895, Oscar Wilde’s novel The Picture of Dorian Gray was used as evidence in the author’s sodomy trials. From the 1930s to the 1960s, the American Hays Code prohibited depictions of queerness in film, defining it as “sex perversion.” In 2020, the book Steven Universe: End of an Era by Chris McDonnell confirmed that Rebecca Sugar’s insistence on including a sapphic wedding in the show is what triggered its cancellation by Cartoon Network. According to the American Library Association, of the top ten most challenged books in 2023, seven were targeted for their queer content. Across time, place, and medium, queer art has been ruthlessly targeted by censors and protesters, and at times it seems there might be no end in sight.

So why, then, are queer spaces so viciously critical of queer art?

Name any piece of moderately-well-known queer media, and you can find immense, vitriolic discourse surrounding it. Audiences debate whether queer media is good representation, bad representation, or whether it’s otherwise too problematic to engage with. Artists are picked apart under a microscope to make sure their morals are pure enough and their identities queer enough. Every minor fault—real or perceived—is compiled in discourse dossiers and spread around online. Lines are drawn, and callout posts are made against those who get too close to “problematic art.”

Modern examples abound, such as the TV show Steven Universe, the video game Dream Daddy, or the webcomic Boyfriends, but it’s far from a new phenomenon. In his book Hi Honey, I’m Homo!, queer pop culture analyst Matt Baume writes about an example from the 1970s, where the ABC sitcom titled Soap was protested by homophobes and queer audiences alike—before a single episode of the show ever aired. Audiences didn’t wait to actually watch the show before passing judgment and writing protest letters.

After so many years starved for positive representation, it’s understandable for queer audiences to crave depictions where we’re treated well. It’s exhausting to only ever see the same tired gay tropes and subtext, and queer audiences deserve more. Yet the way to more, better, varied representation is not to insist on perfection. The pursuit of perfection is poison in art, and it’s no different when that art happens to be queer.

When the pool of queer art is so limited, it feels horrible when a piece of queer art doesn’t live up to expectations. Even if the representation is technically good, it’s disappointing to get excited for a queer story only for that story to underwhelm and frustrate you.

But the world needs that disappointing art. It needs mediocre art. It even needs the bad art. The world needs to reach a point where queer artists can fearlessly make a mess, because if queer artists can only strive for perfection, the less art they can make. They may eventually produce a masterpiece, but a single masterpiece is still a drop in the bucket compared to the oceans of censorship. The only way to drown out bigotry and offensive stereotypes created by bigots is to allow queer artists the ability to experiment, learn through making mistakes, and represent their queer truth even if it clashes with someone else’s.

If queer artists aren’t allowed to make garbage, we can never make those masterpieces everyone craves. If queer artists are terrified at all times that their art will be targeted both by bigots and their own queer communities, queer art cannot thrive.

Let queer artists make shitty art. Let allies to queer people try their hand at representation, even if they miss the mark. Let queer art be messy, and let the artists screw up without fear of overblown retribution.

It’s the only way we’ll ever get more queer art.

_

Like this essay? Tip me on Ko-Fi, pledge to my Patreon, or commission an essay on the topic of your choice!

[abyssal-author-and-artist]

oh shit i just realized i forgot to post the trans dipper essay

oh well, better late than never!

Introducing - Why Mason "Dipper" Pines is Trans and Why that Matters - an essay I spent more time on than I did my actual college project today

Mason "Dipper" Pines from Gravity Falls is trans. Trans masculine, to be specific. Do I believe this was intentional? No. Do I believe that there's a seriously convincing case to be made? Fuck yes.

So first off, he's just like me frfr, which is pretty compelling in and of itself. But that's not enough for a whole essay, so we move onto our second point - character designs. Dipper is designed like, well, like every modern-era trans man I've ever drawn who isn't goth. The shorts, the one shirt in the one color, the absolute insecurity. He even does the hunch of the back! Also, I think I heard somewhere that the vest is to make his shoulders look broader, which I'm not entirely sure is canon but I am accepting this whole-heartedly. It's such a trans move of him. He's too young (and it's summer so it's too hot) to wear a dysphoria hoodie so he picked a vest. (I say too young because dysphoria hoodies usually cover your chest and Dipper and Mabel probably haven't hit puberty.)

The second part comes directly from science. According to this article, and many others, sex in identical twins is complicated, but most identical twins will be born the same sex. There are cases where this isn't true (which might be the case for Mabel and Dipper) or they might be fraternal, which is also pretty likely. However, looking at them when they were younger (and listening to their very similar voices), it's likely they were identical and both girls. That's not to say I dislike trans Mabel - every trans woman I draw dresses like her, so I do love her being trans as well and them hitting the age of like. 10. and swapping genders is incredibly funny and adorable to me.

So, we can't reliably use the aforementioned evidence, then, can we? After all, identical twins can be different sexes, although rare, and we don't have any proof they are identical beyond their visual (and when they were younger, audible) similarities. Well, first off, I'd say that's pretty compelling evidence already. In a cartoon, especially one as detailed and beautiful-looking as Gravity Falls (the art is good and I will die on this hill), visual language makes up for a lot. And Alex Hirsh has gone on record saying that he very much wanted Jason Ritter and Kristen Schaal for Dipper and Mabel respectively, to the point where he would have canceled the show if Kristen hadn't signed on, so I wholeheartedly believe every character (with the exception of Grenda and any other characters who had last minute va's picked) had their voice actors picked very specifically. I can't find whether Jason Ritter voiced younger Dipper, though, so that's a dead end.

Now, that's all well and good, but it's a lot of visual language, isn't it? Why don't we move into something more based in the writing itself?

So the first and most prominent example of Dipper being transgender is the episode Dipper vs Manliness. You know it, you probably have emotions on it, it's the episode where Dipper is trying his hardest to be a man's man. The episode was supposed to be about toxic masculinity and how to be a real man is to stick to your morals. It's a good lesson and in my opinion, holds up even in 2024. Pretty good. Does a great job of what it wants to do. Now, Dipper vs. Manliness has been dissected to hell and back already as a transgender allegory, so I'll keep this brief: the episode centers around Dipper being mocked for not being manly. While Mabel and Stan still see him as a man, albeit an effeminate one, it gets to Dipper. He proceeds to do anything to prove himself a real man. If viewed as a trans allegory, Mabel is teasing her brother and not realizing how deeply it actually hurts him (whether accidentally because she fails to realize how insecure he is over it or because she hasn't been there before, depending on how you want to headcanon it). As for Stan, I like to pretend he's supportive but regularly forgets Dipper was ever a girl, so he makes a serious slip up because of that (and/or he's regurgitating stuff said to him. That hits harder if you also headcanon trans Stan, which I am warming up to). Dipper proceeds to try and prove himself a man, crying when he takes even one more blow to his self esteem/sense of identity as a man, and eventually gets comfort from his family when they realize just how BADLY they messed him up. He is affirmed as a man and the episode ends. Everything that can be said, has been said - including that you don't have to act toxically masculine - or even masculine at all - to be a real man. Remember this part, it will be important later.

So, other trans moments for Dipper come a little sparser. Dipper vs. Manliness is the example for a good reason. But still, there's other moments. The short Voice Over from one of the short story compliation episodes is another one that's commonly referenced as a metaphor for voice dysphoria. Yes, Dipper's voice is cracking in ways common for a cis pre-teen boy his age, but the pitch and tone of his voice can also be seen as his more feminine voice peeking through. Taking the potion can be seen as taking testosterone or other hormones. Granted, this falls apart when you consider that Dipper is later discouraged from taking the potion, because that could be read as Dipper being discouraged from transitioning, but on the other side of the spectrum, it could be read as Dipper being affirmed as a real man despite his voice. From that perspective, his family prevents him from taking (possibly dangerous) homebrewed hrt. Also, the euphoria he gets when it does change his voice is just. Absolutely adorable.

Now, my favorite resource for Dipper acting trans is in the episode Headhunters. He's asking Manly Dan questions and Manly Dan calls Dipper a girl. And MAN the discomfort on Dipper's face. He immediately attempts to correct Manly Dan, but is shut down and the episode moves on. I think that for such a short moment, it does a good job of making Dipper seem trans, though. He is called a girl and feels extreme discomfort around it. He does not like being called a girl. He is not a girl. But he's not shocked or surprised or even really offended - he's resigned. He's used to being called a girl. Sure, he hates it, but he doesn't cry or scream or anything. Sounds to me like a trans man who's absurdly used to being misgendered but still hates it. That pain never goes away, but sometimes all you can do is flinch in discomfort, try to correct and move on, like the episode does.

For a (mostly humorous) video of more of Dipper acting trans, check out this video.

So I think we've made a pretty compelling point for Dipper Pines being trans masc here. Looks pretty good, yup, this is a great essay, let's wrap it up. Oh? What's that? The name of this essay?

Why Mason "Dipper" Pines is transgender and why that matters.

Well, let's dive into section two of this essay - why does Dipper being trans matter?

Someone could easily say it doesn't matter. Just fun fandom headcanons, that's it, wrap it up now. Nothing more to say. Dipper is trans and that's just a fun reading of his character.

But I don't think that's the case. I think that Dipper being trans means so much - to trans fans of the show, to fans who have never seen or spoken to trans people before, and to queer fans of Gravity Falls and similar shows. (I personally am a Steven Universe fan who really valued the representation there, so Gravity Falls and all it's queer coding means a lot to me.)

First and foremost, I'm not going to keep you in the dark as to why you're remembering my earlier point. As a recap, it was this: Dipper vs. Manliness, and by proxy, Gravity Falls as a whole, says that you don't have to be traditionally masculine to be a real man. For a show that spends a lot of time mocking a kid commonly headcanoned to be a trans man, that says a lot, and a lot of stuff I think more people need to hear.

You do not need to act like your gender to be your gender.

You do not need to present like your gender to be your gender.

You do not need to fit some rigid box that society enforces to be who you are.

If you are a man, you are a man, trans or cis, regardless of how you act. (And the same goes for women and nonbinary people! You don't have to fit a mold.)

You don't owe anyone anything.

You don't owe people masculinity. (Or femininity or androgyny for that matter.)

I think that's part of the reason Dipper vs. Manliness ages so well. Dipper reads as trans, especially to queer fans, and his story in that episode tells us that we don't have to be someone we're not for people to take us seriously as who we are. At the end of the day, the really masculine thing is staying true to you - a sentiment echoed and reversed in The Last Mabelcorn, where the most feminine thing you can do is to stay true to yourself. I can't find it right now, but I could swear that there's a That GF Fan video explaining my point a little better. The point is, there's nothing that makes you more of whatever your gender is than staying true to yourself.

Additionally, if Dipper really is trans and someone sees themself in him, that can help them explore their gender or explain it to other people. Young kids who have never interacted with trans people before can see Dipper and grow up to connect the dots - or grow up to have him crack their eggs.

I know I'm new to the fandom and I was already out before watching the show, but he really helped me explore my gender. I like dressing like him - he's very relatable, even though I'm old enough to be in college now. I see him as a very anxious, slightly paranoid trans kid, and I see a lot of myself in him. He has a lot of issues, and a lot of issues that aren't trans specific but definitely hit harder when you are trans. He makes me feel seen on a level that I never thought a cartoon character could do.

Honestly, here would be a good place to put a rant about representation in kids media - queer kids under the age of 12 exist and struggle. I liked a girl (before realizing I was trans) in fifth grade, so about 9 years old. There are kids who experiment with their gender when they're younger than that. We're here and we exist, and every single time a character in children's media is made and is prevalent, another kid is able to really see themself.

That's really the point of this section. Dipper is trans. That matters. People - mostly queer kids but people of all ages - see themselves in him. He's here and we see him as queer because it's validating. It feels so good to hear Stan affirm him at the end of Dipper vs. Manliness, because it proves that at the end of the day, you don't need to present as super masc or femme or androgynous to be who you are.

Gravity Falls, through coding Dipper as trans, sent a message:

You are seen. You are loved. You are valid.

Thank you for reading this all. Trans Dipper means a lot to me, and I love writing him and seeing him in general. I want more of him because Dipper being trans means the world to me.

I love you all. Have a wonderful day. Remember to stay true to yourself.

[artist-issues]

I have to make one more point, because I think it's very important.

The words used in Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs for the cure to her curse are: "Love's First Kiss" not "True Love's Kiss."

It's not "a kiss of love that is the most genuine from your one true soulmate." It's "the long-awaited culmination of giving your heart to someone for the first time."

In modern adaptations, like Once Upon a Time or (the much more forgivable) Enchanted, we change the phrasing so that it's all about this magical idea of soulmates. But in this first cartoon, it makes much more sense to be about a FIRST kiss, not just a kiss from "the most special" someone special.

Snow White is the youngest Disney Princess. Her young age is not hidden or matured like some of the other princesses--she is fourteen, she moves like a little girl, she's drawn with the baby-roundness of a little girl, and she's called "the little princess!" by the only character who is an example of a regular subject in the Kingdom: the Huntsman. So, one) she's very young.

And two) she's totally innocent and pure. Those two traits are all of what Snow White represents in the movie. That's what the Queen really doesn't have: innocent purity. The Queen doesn't want anyone to know she's a wicked witch consumed with herself; that's why all her magical wares are kept in secret catacombs. But like I've said before, Snow White hides nothing about herself--she doesn't need to--she's an open-hearted, innocent child who boldly and sweetly tells everyone that she's wishing for love and has found it in her Prince.

So she's 1) very young and 2) innocent and pure.

All of this makes the most sense for Love's First Kiss, not "True Love's Kiss," for the same reasons that her "being awoken by a kiss without consent" in this story is actually totally correct and right. (Because she already gave her consent when they met; she promised him her her heart by sending a kiss on a dove, and he promised his)

What I'm saying is, the story is about a little, innocent girl's first, pure experience with love. She wishes for love, has a longing for the idea of love, and is even promised love by the Prince but has to wait and wait and wait until that promise is fulfilled.

That's why the song is "Someday" My Prince Will Come. That's why the title of the kiss stresses being her FIRST, not her TRUEST. It's this idea, not if soulmates, but of waiting until the time is right for love.

It's in Song of Solomon. "Do not awaken love until it pleases." In our modern age, we just run around getting as much "experience" with love as we can. With all of that stupid "experience" comes the added need to figure out which experience is the best and truest one: hence, we change the phrase to "True Love's" Kiss.

But classical fairy tales and the Bible knew better. It's not about figuring it out for yourself. It's about waiting patiently and purely until the time is right, not forcing it, and trusting the other person until the commitment is fulfilled. In fact, I hate to even say it, but the Queen convinces Snow White to bite into an apple that is poisoned by telling her it will fulfill her wish—which is for true love—and which, if it had been true, would have been a shortcut to getting her Prince to come.

Anyway, the point is, Snow White is wishing for the One she loves; The Prince has One heart tenderly beating only for her.

Only him fulfilling his promise and carrying her to this suspiciously heaven-like castle can wake her from her sleep.

It's all about a trust placed, a promise fulfilled, a patience rewarded, a purity purifying--not a worth proven.

Love's First Kiss is way better than True Love's Kiss. It's the first kiss that should be the truest, because it was patiently waited for.

[justletmeramble1701]

My favorite part of My Adventures with Superman so far is how they handle the trunks.

When he first gets the suit, it's trunkless, making the audience believe it's going to be another Superman thing that is trying to make the suit look cool by ditching the trunks no matter how important they are to the design. Then, Ma Kent sees the suit and goes, like, "Ya know, it's missing something," and gives him the trunks! This gets me more hyped for the show than anything else.

This shows that the creators understand the importance of the trunks. Of course, there's the design aspect. Generally, if the Superman suit is broken down into its value scale, the red is the dark tones, the yellow the light tones, and the blue the mid tone (sometimes the red and blue switch and, when the yellow is replaced with black, one of the other colors, usually the red, has to become the light tone). Since classic Superman is an inspirational character, the light and dark tones tend not to be that far apart, so that causes the blue to look very muddy if it is not broken up by something, in comes the trunks.

The red trunks and the yellow belt break up the blue by adding both the light and dark tones in the middle of the design, making it pop more. There are ways of doing this without the trunks, but it tends to move away from the classic design. Common examples are adding black and/or white, putting more red and yellow throughout the suit, or having multiple shades of blue (which the cartoon's design also does).

The trunks also represent something very important tonally, Superman is inherently goofy. That's why a lot of modern designs tend to forgo them. They are a reminder that Superman is a silly character tied to the childlike idealisn of a non cynical past. This scene is the show telling us that it believes that the silliness of the base concept (idealized sci-fi) is a key component of the character. It proves (along with the overall tone) that the show is going to allow itself to be goofy, which is great.

[pruneunfair]

My feelings on: part 8, Tears on a withered flower: the most annoying fandom to date so far.

I ask if this one was really that great since I've been seeing it all over the place on tiktok and Instagram and reading it myself, I can see why it would garner an audience because it's another "working woman finds a better man after her loser ex cheats on her with a stupid damsel girl" type story. It's kinda good but in my opinion: it's not THAT good but there is only 23 chapters I read so far so I'll let it marinate before I actually start going after it for the plot.

What I really wanna talk about is the fanbase of tears on a withered flower because while the manhwa community does have a problem with internalized misogyny this specific fanbase takes the cake.

I don't like saying the term "glazing" but it's the only way to accurately describe the way they treat the FL Na Haesoo because they are absolutely feral. First off, I've seen them lose their shit over other fans simply saying "I think that this female character has a prettier design then Hae soo." And these stans reply with the most immature and even down right laughable comebacks. I took some screenshot of a tears of the wither flower slide show to give you an idea.

"Hae soon is the main character for a reason."

Who's gonna tell them that protagonists can be written poorly?

Trust me, I'm sure no one's jealous of a fictional character.

Okay the context basically was that Hae soos coworker was just being real with her based on what she knows about Hae soos life and apparently fans took that as her being jealous and when people who actually read the god damn plot and use their critical thinking to point this out, the stans basically go "nuh uh" and continue to scream even louder. Personally when I read that chapter i took it as brutal honesty, from her perspective Tae Ha was hitting on a married woman and the two barely knew eachother. A little harsh but she's not jealous of Hae soo 😭 like we barely know this girl!

I think the most complained about aspect of tears on a withered flower is the anatomy, specifically the anatomy of all the characters your supposed to really like/care about.

I don't mind that Hae Soo is built like that cause while her anatomy definitely is unrealistic it's also a cartoon comic and cartoons have lots of bizarre forms of anatomy that don't always need to be accurate. With that said I don't find it a coincidence that the FL who is the most fleshed out and only grown woman who isn't meant to be disliked or made fun of is a tsunade cup sized babe with big thighs, a tiny waist, a nice butt, and a baby face.

Yeah I'll say it: Hae soo is another example of authors wanting to make a non conventionally attractive woman since she's supposed to be older (like 33) who is also overworked so she doesn't take care of herself but in the end they didn't have the balls to actually go through with it so they not only gave Hae soo an amazing figure and hair but they also gave her a clear face, tiny lips and barely noticeable eye bags which I still can't tell if they're even eye bags or just her eyelashes.

When anyone even dares to point out that Hae Soo's design is weirdly propionate compared to the other female characters you get hid with the "Your just jealous that you can't have a man like Tae Ha!!"

look i don't mind disproportionate anatomy in cartoon comics but if you give me character designs with more accurate proportions, I'm going to choose the latter for prettier looking designs.

Another thing about this manhwa was the dialog. I like it at times because it can be so poetic.. and then they just throw in some comically evil sentences for the villains that most sane people would not make the public aware of in a modern day setting. It's not something that really annoys me I just thought it was fun to laugh at every now and again while reading.

conclusion: I think the best way to describe tears on a withered flowers fanbase is kinda like how Netflix treats Bigmouth. No, TOTWF is definitely no where near levels of uncomfortable as Bigmouth but it's in the way that it really isn't as good as everyone claims, it's okay at first and then it got old and some people started opening up that the thought Bigmouth was garbage only for a bunch of stans to barge in with "You just don't get it!!" People won't let it go, they keep insisting it's the best piece of work to exist and anyone who doesn't like it is a jealous loser.

[cf56]

Why are the Warners treated as pariah characters by WB?

I mean in real life. Despite Animaniacs being one of the most popular cartoons of its day, with a strongly enduring legacy, the Warners are almost never acknowledged when they could be. They never appear alongside WB legacy characters in cameos or games, or when they do it’s just barely noticeable background appearances. It’s still unclear if they will actually be added to Multiversus, for example, or if those little nods in promotional material were just stringing us along. Shouldn’t they be one of the first picks?

There’s a huge crowd of WB cartoon characters in Teen Titans Go. No Warners, just a verbal mention by Starfire. In Space Jam 2 you have to break out the magnifying glass to find them. They’re just never there in anything. You could have them in the background in one of the many modern Looney Tunes shows or Tiny Toons, but no. They’re ignored. It’s a trend that has continued basically from the moment the original series ended to today. If not for the reboot, there would be almost no recent acknowledgement from WB that they exist. And it was Hulu that did 99% of the marketing for that.

What could the reason be for this? Is it because Tom Reugger is disliked by Hollywood? Is it because the show takes so many shots at the company? Is it because of the adult audience/jokes? It just seems to me that the Warners should be a natural addition to the cast of WB legacy cartoons, but they’re just not.

At least it’s faithful to the in-universe lore I guess.

[sarafangirlart]

Honestly to anon that is worried about writing Greek myth retellings, take it from me who does enjoy writing the same things and reading about them, just think your choices through first.

Of course, we have to respect the fact that these myths didn't come from nowhere and are in fact a part of a people's culture. That's why so many have issues where huge important aspects of the Gods or myths are changed. Making Hera an adulterer when she is literally the goddess of marriage? Yuck! Making Ares support the nazis even though those monsterous assholes colonized and oppressed the Greeks? Get out of here! Making Perseus and Medusa fall in love even though the story is about a son rescuing his mom (and future wife) by slaying monsters? Literally why?

I think the biggest issues with most modern retellings of the myths is that they use the same basic boring themes. All the Greek Gods (who are men) suck, there's no nice man, and every single woman is a victim with no agency. And that's not the case in the Greek myths. Couple that with the lack of Greek culture and influences in most stories (literally it's rare for them to even take place in Greece at this point!) and you have a story that I'd feel would be more engaging if you just created your own fantasy mythology and Gods.

-🌟Anon

YES! THANK YOU!

Like I swear I’m more lenient with adaptions making changes than ppl think it’s just that these retellings keep testing my patience.

For example I absolutely hate the Clash of the Titans remake, but I love Perseus (1973) which is a Soviet cartoon from the 70s (it doesn’t even have an English sub or dub) even tho it makes changes bc at least they make sense in the context of the story, at least I understand not adding Athena and Danaë bc this is a 20 minute film and they can only cram in so much story. I cannot however, forgive the Clash of the Titans remake for removing Athena and Danaë bc it’s clearly misogyny, Danaë is fridged to make Perseus sad and Athena isn’t there to help him bc we can’t have the masculine action hero get assistance from a powerful woman that isn’t a love interest.

[magnetictapedatastorage]

Claims to be A-Life... dies anyway

it's wild when you look at old A-Life games that were at times so ridiculously, comically advanced that they barely ran. Artificial life games weren't even particularly aimed at mega nerds! No, they were also aimed at kids who wanted a puppy!

or... some kind of alien thing.

The PC game series of Creatures 1, 2, and 3, Petz 1-4 (unrelated to the later console games series) are prime examples of this genre. Creatures leans more heavily on the science element, but still had a meticulously crafted art style of cute huge googly eyes and big smiles that used pre-rendered sprites. Petz used a very unique 'slap together orbs until you've got a dog' art style.

It's absolutely wild that that genre has withered away. Sure there are tiny indie games that have some similarities, modern petri-dish style games like Gridworld don't quite hit the mark, and it's obvious why:

It's missing the mass appeal. It's missing the googly eyes. This is never in a million years going to pass muster to a kid who asked for a puppy for christmas. This isn't to disparage on the Gridworld dev (singular), it's just a bit odd that the mass-marketed type of A-Life disappeared from the mainstream.

The shallowest argument would be that the dominant art style changed, or that 2D games are no longer popular, but that's not an argument, because it would be possible to make a similarly cartoony animal system in 3D (Spore! Spore has that! but NOTHING EVOLVES IN THAT DISAPPOINTMENT-), and because there are plenty of 2D games still.

I dunno man. Both Creatures and Petz have small, scarily dedicated fanbases wringing absolute miracles out of decades old engines. But what happened to the zietgiest of A-Life? Why, when AI is on the upswing stronger than ever before, is nobody saying "put that shit in a cartoon cat... we'll all be millionaires!" like they used to?

[mask131]

How do you feel about shipping greek gods? (for lack of a better word to describe two or more people being together in a relationship I just used shipping)

Well... It depends? I don't know? Xp

The thing is that the Greek gods are horny gods, that cannot be denied, so you know, they already almost all slept with each other at some point so there's a lot of "shippng" material that's for sure.

What I would say is... it depends on why the shipping is happening, for which purpose? It is for a purely fictional storytelling, or just for personal enjoyment? And I would point out two precise things that are important to show you're not just making stuff up randomly (though I will say making stuff up randomly is allowed, and can sometimes be bloody genius - but that will be for my point B, the person who is making stuff up should know themselves and be clear that they're making stuff up)

A) Always be aware of the characterization, traits and features of the Greek gods before "shipping" them so that you don't end up making some sort of HUGE misunderstanding or misinformation thingy going on. I'm going to take an obvious example, but for example shipping Poseidon and Athena, or Athena and Ares will require it to be with full understanding of their rivalry and/or hatred for each other (so you know, perfect for "rivals to lovers" fic) - though again, with Athena there's also the need to understand she is this virgin goddess that is like a huge asexuality symbol, so you can slide romance in there but none of "Venus' craft" if you know what I mean. And for you it might seem obvious but for example there was this deleted scene of the Clash of Titans remake which was talked about a lot because Athena appeared in there and she was like this very sensual and sexy goddess that tried to basically seduce another god, so you know, the basics of mythology are not always there.

(I'm speaking here mostly in terms of you know, fic and personal artwork and whatnot to bring my example, but you know it can also apply to if you want to, I don't know, publish a book or make a cartoon or whatever)

B) But the most important thing to maintain there, and what is ALWAYS important when dealing with ANY mythology of any kind: be conscious of the differences.

The thing is that, as a creator facing myths and legends, you can basically do almost anything. ("Almost" because there's still stuff that you can't do unless you just want to look like someone who doesn't know shit about the source material). Myths and legends are here to be exploited, interpreted, reused and reshaped and redrawn. I'll go on a side-rent here but there was this post criticizing "modern retelling" of Greek myths in video games, novels and comics, and it concluded with "Just don't touch the myths again, let them as they are". And while I did understand why the person would dislike these modern works (though I do not agree with the entire selection), this conclusion is just wrong. If medieval scholars and Renaissance artists and World War playwrights had not constantly reinvented the Greek myths, it wouldn't be part of common culture as it is today. Heck, Greek mythology itself relies on a bunch of authors from various countries (because they were city-states you know) and from various centuries making WILD reinterpretations of "canon lore" and "previous takes" on gods and legends (remember that a lot of things people claim is part of "Greek mythology" come from stuff like theater plays and philosophy essays... Not really as sacred as the Bible). So to demand mythology to stop being represented and depicted is just... you know, wishing for its death and the stop of its cultural richness.

On the other hand here's where the problem lies: there is so much misinformation and popular misconceptons and erroneous cliches due to how it was all handled carelessly or without any knowledge of actual material (there's especially this whole wave of bringing in Christian ideals into the Ancient Greek world, from Disney's Hercules to Netflix's Blood of Zeus - at least season 1 I didn't watch season 2), that people need to be literaly taught again the simple basic. I know it sounds stupid but the whole "Medusa is a monster, not a girl turned into one" I literaly knew as a kid just because I read guides and books about the Greek myths - not fictional books, just, you know, manuals and encyclopedias and stuff. Yet, this thing found in any basic "101 to Greek mythology" absolutely baffled a lot of people... It shows how, again, people are somehow willing to take more from, I don't know, Internet posts (*cough cough* yes I'm doing Internet posts *cough cough*), cartoon series and novels than from just actual books presenting Greek mythology, not in a fictionized way.

Anyway sorry for the rant X) But my point is: one is allowed to do anything and reinvent all things however they want, as long as they have enough knowledge and understanding of the source material. It is my personal logic but, if someone can defend their choices in a way that shows they actually do know their stuff, are conscious about what they changed and recognize that they modified things, then I'm fully okay with it. To still go the shipping route, if someone says something like "Oh yeah, Aphrodite and Hephaistos are in love and the best couple ever", I can accept this if the same person does, you know, recognize how in the myths Aphrodite cheats on Hephaistos and/or Hephaistos divorces from her. "Yes I am aware of that, but for X reason or X purpose I decided to change it". Then I'm fine, you know. But if the person starts saying stuff like "I didn't know that" or "I don't care, it's not like it's important anyway", then I'll have a problem.

On a final note for the "shipping" - again I don't know for which purpose or on which level this all takes place so I am doing a BROAD answer I hope is vague and general enough - there's a little something very important to remember: the relationships of the gods are all very important. As in, on a symbolical level, there's always a sort of meaning down there you must get, you know? I talked about it before but the relationships of PosEidon, Demeter and Zeus are reflection of more primal Earth-Sea-Sky relationships. Why did Hermes and Aphrodite had "Hermaphrodite"? Because while Aphrodite is the symbol of feminity and womanhood by excellence, Hermes was originally a symbol of the phallic power (see the penis-by-the-side-of-the-road thing), so it makes sense they would create a being uniting male and female genders.

And there's a distinct evolution when it comes to the "incest" of the gods. I need to talk about it because the Greek gods thrive on incest, you know, but it is something people tend to not realize - that Greek mythology has a sort of "chronological evolution in-universe" of how the incest works. The most brutal, raw and obvious forms of incests (daughter-father, brother-sister) actually belong to older and more primordial generations of gods, reflecting how they come from an earlier time of more chaos, less civilization, and also less people: Ouranos and Gaia, the Titans, the first Olympians... But when you move by the second-generation Olympians for example, you realize a step is taken forward and the incest is not direct anymore. They still sleep with each other, but it is more "uncle-niece" and "half-sister, half-brother" or "cousin" relationships. You won't see Apollo smooching his twin sister. You don't see Ares sleeping with any of his two sisters either. And that's because, under the rule of Zeus, by the age of the Olympians, a new form of civilization and order starts encuring, one which starts to remove the most brutal and violent primal pulsions of the gods, one which moves towards the very present day and human civilization where incest is not allowed. It's a little detail people can miss, but as with everything it is very important. (And if you start telling me about "how Zeus slept with Persephone", correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's an Orphic belief, or at least comes from some Orphic fragment, and people should also start realizing that the Orphic people were weird - even by typical Ancient Greek standard - and were doing their own thing on the aside. Though, it still works with another thing prevalent throughout Greek mythology as a whole - this very interesting, ambivalent role of the first Olympians like Zeus or Poseidon, who are the rulers of this new, orderly, civilized world, and yet still end up bringing over habits and elements from the older, more brutal and chaotic past, much to everybody's problem. You know, that's when Zeus and Poseidon tend to cause trouble for everybody - if the gods had a psychology, you could write a whole thing about "generational trauma" and how despite building a new world free of the chaos and disorder of the primal gods and "bad" Titans, the older Olympians are still reproducing the same habits and patterns as their previous generations, which is the very reason there's some of the conflicts in Greek myths. But we're getting too far ahead Xp)

All of that to say - you can ship, but know that in Greek mythology, shipping will have consequences.

[transguygardner]

Taylor’s Guide for Getting into DC Comics

decided to make an official post for my method on getting into DC Comics

I don’t know anything about DC Comics and comics continuity scares me

if you’re intimidated by how many comics there are and all the different timelines and continuities and oh my god there’s so many characters then i suggest starting with watching Batman the Brave and the Bold

what it is: it’s a three season 22 minute cartoon from 2008. it focuses on Batman teaming up with a bunch of different heroes and is generally episodic in nature

why i recommend it as a starting point: at this point pretty much everyone has heard of batman in some shape or form. so this gives you a familiar character while being exposed to an enormous cast of different characters. it doesn’t give you the origins or much explanation for many of the characters or how they all know each other which is much like reading modern comics! so it helps you get used to not knowing who everyone is and not getting an origin story every time someone shows up. it also shows you pretty much every corner of the dc universe so you gain some passing familiarity with someone from every niche even if its by name only

some of its flaws: since its an adaptation there are things (many things) that don’t line up with how things are (or ever were) in the comics. which brings me to my next step

READ THE WIKIPEDIA PAGES OF CHARACTERS YOU’RE INTERESTED IN

i’m not talking about the wiki/fandom pages. i’m talking about wikipedia. this will give you some broader context for the characters both in universe and in the cultural landscape. also if you don’t feel ready to read the comics yet/don’t know where to get those comics it will give you other adaptations of that character if there are any. it could also mention another character that you also think is interesting and then you can read their pages

when you’ve done that then you can move onto

I know what character I want to read but how do I know what to read?

your two best friends are going to be googling “[character name] comic vine” and “[character name] dc wiki”

both comic vine and the dc wiki keep lists of character appearances. the dc wiki has them linked at the bottom of each character page while comic vine has them linked at the top

whats the difference between them?

comic vine keeps every appearance of the character under the same list even if its from a different continuity. they also list trade paperbacks and other language reprints under the same page. comic vine sorts it by series so you will see the series that your chosen character has the most appearances in first. which might not always be issues about them

the dc wiki separates out the character appearances based on which continuity its under. so characters will have multiple appearance lists depending on when it was published and if it was for an au or not. for example: bruce wayne (new earth) and bruce wayne (prime earth) are two of the MANY different pages with appearance lists for batman on the dc wiki. vs comic vine where they’re all under bruce wayne. the dc wiki does not include reprints and trade paperbacks under the appearance lists and sorts it alphabetically

so which one do i use?

personally i’d start with the comic vine list. its easier to get the relevant info from and then use it to answer these questions

does your character have a solo series?

a solo series is anything that’s named after that character. sometimes they’re duo series (batman & superman, blue & gold, fire & ice: smallville etc). if yes start with one of those. if you plan on reading everything and don’t mind older writing styles pick the oldest one and move through the list of solo series. if you are turned off by the older writing styles start with the oldest one published in or after 1986. if you just want to read more modern/current stuff start with one labeled “rebirth” at the top

is your character on a team book?

if your character doesn’t have a solo or you read the solos and want to read something else see if they’re on a team book! team books are just what they sound like. books that focus on a bunch of characters that are operating under the same team name. if you read their wikipedia page it probably mentions if theyre on a team. you can also double check with the dc wiki (check the [character name] new earth and [character name] prime earth pages to see if they’re affiliated with anyone)

if they’re in multiple volumes of the same title team book i would generally start with the oldest. again skip any from before 1986 if you can’t handle the older writing styles. and if you only want the really new stuff start with ones with the rebirth label on them

my character doesn’t have a solo or a team book!

so you’ve got a few options.

look up a reading guide (which honestly you couldve done for the other characters too but i think it’s better to learn how to choose which ones to read yourself since they don’t always have reading guides)

start at their first appearance then go from there (if comic vine has your character listed with 250 or less appearances this is a decent choice especially since anywhere from 10 to 25% of those will be reprints)

choose based on the artwork (good art/art you like can get you through a lot of bad writing)

generally all of these are good options to take. with option three just be wary if the writer is tom king since he is known to take extreme liberties with characteristics

tips and tricks

if you really like the writing or the art on a book take note of who wrote it or who drew it. if you search “[creator name] comic vine” it will pull up a page similar to the character ones and you can check what other stuff they made. following a creator’s career is a good way to branch out your reading list and helps you identify what you do and don’t like

if there’s a specific kind of character you want to read (divorced, fire powers, alien, etc) you can check the category pages on the dc wiki. just find the page of a character you know fits that category (maxwell lord for divorced for example) scroll to the bottom. expand the categories and click on the one you’re looking for. you’ll find a list of characters with that tag on them

some characters are just confusing so don’t worry about it. hawkman, hawkgirl/woman, and supergirl have three of the most confusing continuities in dc comics. so if it seems confusing don’t let it stop you

you really don’t have to understand the nuances of continuity in order to enjoy comics. that has never stopped a writer before. so it shouldn’t stop you!

you can read comics with the dc universe subscription or comixology or going to your local comic shop. some used bookstores also have comic bins. if you google “read comic online” you should probably find something. make sure you have a good adblock though

thats basically it. just rinse and repeat with however many characters you want!

final notes

personally i think reading stuff from oldest to newest is the most interesting way to read comics because then you can see how the character has evolved over the years and find out which writers like to collaborate with previous ideas and which ones like to bulldoze it all down

1986 is chosen as a dividing point because that is when DC’s first MAJOR continuity reboot happens. it’s Crisis On Infinite Earths and basically just combines all the different DC earths into one. so there’s a lot of explaining whats going on in those earlier books. you CAN start with the 70s stuff if you want but generally its easier to start with the late 80s if you don’t want to go all the way back

books labeled rebirth are chosen for the people who want to start with the now because that is the start of the last major reboot and will introduce you to the modern interpretation of the character. which imo isnt always the best since a lot of the modern interpretations are more shallow. but to each their own

[physalian]

On Writing Characters That Don't Or Can't Speak English

This such a fun dynamic, honestly and more fantasy and sci-fi should implement it. You don’t even have to design a fantasy language, although writing that character’s un-written dialogue constantly as narration might get old.

I haven’t done this with any real-world languages or cultures but a tiny advisory: Take care in how you describe the cadence, tonality, and gesticulations of characters meant to represent real world cultures speaking in their languages. You can get unintentionally discriminatory very quickly, so do your research and hire sensitivity readers.

With that said!

There’s a few points I want to cover here.

1. How your characters communicate without dialogue

This also concerns characters that cannot learn the dominant language, whether they’re a fantasy character that just can’t make those sounds, or they’re deaf or mute or have another disability that makes verbal communication difficult.

You have so many options and you can have so much fun with it. You can make your own version of a sign language or a code language that only your core characters or a group they belong to can communicate in. Create your own pidgin or medium of communication, like a soundboard of different tonalities or a thought-to-speech translator like a Speak n’ Spell, or an Etch A Sketch, or have a magic hologram subtitle display before them. Or like the Q*Bert dialogue bubbles in Wreck it Wralph where the translation is never given, only the detailed response so you can fill in the blanks.

One of my favorite cartoons is Transformers Prime. It’s based off the character designs from the Bay live action movies, not the original cartoons, so the machines they transform into are modern and updated and there’s a few references to the Bay movies’ lore sprinkled about, but not a required watch for appreciating the show.

In it, Bumblebee carries over his inability to speak due to a damaged voice box. I imagine he now communicates in a series of beeps and bleeps because the cartoon didn’t want to pay the licensing fees for Movie Bee’s jukebox dialogue, but it works way better here. Why? Because, I think, and I do not suffer from any speech impediments, that it better conveys the struggles of a disability.

Bee never speaks and his dialogue is never subtitled. The audience is only clued into what he’s saying when other characters respond to him in an unambiguous way so, like Q*Bert, you can fill in the blanks. He isn’t universally understood, either, only one human and the other transformers can understand him, so when he’s with other humans in a dangerous situation, their inability to bridge the language gap becomes a very real problem (that no one ever blames Bee for).

Also, Bee is never once insulted, belittled, demeaned, or mocked for his speech impediment and he’s a badass character in his own right. He’s not “the robot with the speech impediment” he’s “the badass sportscar scout with a heart of gold, and who also has a speech impediment”. The only time it’s talked about negatively is by the main villain, who’s trying to be an asshole about it, but even then, Megatron never thinks Bee is less capable for it, he just thinks everyone is lesser than himself across the board (Megatron is also responsible for his disability ‘cause Bee was captured and his interrogation went poorly, if you needed another exhibit of the Big M’s sadism).

Bee’s damaged voice box is almost never central to his arc, either. He gets one two-parter where he loses his ability to transform and takes it super hard, since he’s already damaged and sees himself as less useful than the rest of the team without this critical ability.

Again, I don’t have this disability so I can’t comment on how respectful it actually is to those who do, but from an outsider’s perspective, I think Bee is a fantastic example of empowering disabled characters and giving them substance beyond their disability—cannot comment on how they ended his arc and resolved the impediment, or that it was resolved at all.

2. How you describe those unwritten words

Doubling down here: Do your research so you aren’t stereotypical and insensitive, please.

Still going off the assumption that you aren’t just writing this dialogue in the other language for now, like a character who only speaks in Spanish and you have the dialogue there in Spanish that I may have to translate separately, like in Spiderverse, or the Gaelic in Outlander, neither of which were subtitled for non-native speakers.

Since you don’t have the dialogue there, you are relying entirely on tone of voice, gesture, volume, and facial expressions, so dial your descriptions of those up to eleven—especially if this is a character who over-gesticulates to better get their point across.

You can also have the characters they’re closest to pick up on a few of their common or significant phrases to convey the connection and friendship they share.

In Outlander, at least the first season when they’re actually in Scotland (easily the best season), there’s entire scenes in Gaelic and all you have as an audience member is their tone of voice and gesticulations, and sometimes you just have to presume the gist of the scene because an English speaker isn’t present and they only give the gist a few scenes later. One in particular comes at the end of the season after an extremely traumatic event that happened to Character A, arguing over why he wants to end his life to Character B. One would think that this gut wrenching dialogue would be critical to understanding the scene but the two actors go above and beyond conveying the critical emotions behind what they’re saying, so the words don’t even matter. If you were deaf, you’d understand the scene as effectively as someone who doesn’t speak Gaelic.

Can’t confirm but I think they did this very much on purpose because Gaelic isn’t getting any more commonly spoken and you’re meant to feel a little alienated by it and only those who know Gaelic can get the full scene, like it's just for them. Can’t confirm the accuracy of the dictation or translation of the language, either, but the ‘alienating’ effect always leaves me utterly fascinated by the language. You cannot ignore the Gaelic to just drone through the subtitles, you have to pay attention.

3. How that character bumbles through the dominant language

This one is for non-disabled bi or multilingual characters or those who could learn the dominant language but haven’t had the time or opportunity. Depending on the character’s skill with the language, they can Spanglish their way through with awkward parsing still using their native languages grammar rules.

I can’t speak to this, I only know very clunky Spanish. I can say my efforts to speak in Spanish are always done in excitement as I get the chance to practice this language, and then the pressure to translate on the spot has me forgetting words I definitely know how. I get by, even if my conjugations are botched, and me, looking as I do, definitely catch people off guard when I respond to them in Spanish, generally followed by smiles at my attempts.

Just recently I had to perform tech support for a family in my apartment complex. They needed to print a thing and the printer wasn’t connecting. We gestured and pointed our way through getting their files onto my USB drive and plugging that direct into the printer, and doing one copy at a time, it was a whole thing with me bumbling through printer tech support in basic Spanish because they didn’t know a single word of English. But by god, we did it.

4. The conflicts that arise from mismatched dialogue

On a more big picture level, miscommunication through to a mistranslation can range from comedic to critically life-threatening, and it can be a recurring hurdle for the character or team to consider and plan for.

Comedy wise, mistranslations can be hilarious. Characters blanking on the word they need and being entertainingly frustrated, or taking a roundabout way to get to the word they need by piecing it together. Characters who don’t get a joke that only native speakers would know, or translating a joke in their language that isn’t as funny in another language without the other parlance.

Or just two characters who have to cooperate to survive and who don't have a common language to make that cooperation easier. I *love* gratuitously violent action movies and just the action genre in general, even if the story is cheesy or dumb. One of those movies is Alien vs Predator. In it, eventually, Protagonist 'enemy of my enemy's her way into an alliance with one of the Predators, against the much larger Xenomorph threat.

He doesn't speak anything other than growls and she only speaks English and though the movie overexplains many things (probably because the producers didn't trust the audience like the writers did), they have several moments together where he has to give her critical survival information, like "I have a failsafe bomb with a very short delay we need to run right now" and "Use this meat shield to protect yourself against their acid blood" and "You're an honorary Predator warrior now I must do this ritual for you" and can only mime his way through it, and through the power of gesture and charades, they make it work.

Drama wise, I live for big problems coming unexpectedly from small, human mistakes. One translation error can snowball into some horrible consequences.

—

Big picture, though, you do your fantasy or sci-fi world a disservice by not considering multiple languages, even if you don’t write them, or multilingual characters and the problems and world biases that arise from these different groups. Dead languages, rare languages, languages associated with the villain group or minorities. Languages that only one character is fighting to keep alive, or a language that, when spoken, comes with some sinister side effects (like Parseltongue or the Black Speech, the language of Mordor).

It really adds to the immersion when you have an expansive story that doesn’t just assume English/Common is the law of the land, or that all your fantasy/alien species can or want to speak it.

[blackbullet99]

I don’t understand why Zutara shippers are so obsessed with hating Aang (or Kataang).

I understand they wish Zutara was canon, and that’s perfectly valid. I get why people ship it, and even though a good chunk of the toxic side of the ZK fandom say some pretty racist stuff, the ship is harmless. But the hate is vitriolic. You got to people like the-badger-mole, sokkastyles, longing-for-rain and they spend more time whining about Aang and his relationship with Katara than they talk about Zutara. They say the most objectively untrue stuff about Aang, Katara and Zuko as if making false claims about these characters is the only way to make their ship look good.

For example:

“Zuko did some bad things throughout the show, but Aang is worse because he never supported Katara and sexuality assaulted her. Not to mention Katara never had feelings for Aang, he was practically her son that she had to take care of”.

What ZKs actually sound like:

“Zuko did some bad things throughout the show, so we have to make Aang look worse by comparison to ensure that Zuko is a better match for Katara, despite his own problems, because surely a poorly timed kiss is the same is sexual assault. We falsely believe Aang never supported Katara because he didn’t agree with her seeking vengeance of the person who killed her mom, unlike Zuko who helped her out, meaning that one single episode must mean he’s the only one who supports Katara. Lastly, we have to find a way to make Katara’s obvious affection for Aang problematic, so let’s blow her motherly traits way out of proportion and say that any time she shows Aang affection, it’s a mom coddling her toddler, and yes Aang is a toddler because he’s BALD. So what that they kissed, they’re a mother and child. Also Katara emotionally supporting Aang is bad, she actually hates it. Dude trust me”.

They reason I bring this up is because I don’t understand why they have to be so bitter, it just makes them look pathetic that these people, some fully grown adults are so butthurt about a non-canon pairing from a 20 year old cartoon. Their media-illiterate ramblings don’t prove Aang and Katara are a bad couple, they just make it painfully obvious to anyone with a brain that these types of pathetic ZKs are just seething and coping.

Sure, you might say “I’m not one to talk” seeing as Kataang is canon, but let me tell you, I have my fair share of non-canon ships that I love.

I love Ichigo X Rukia, I think they have great chemistry and strong bond, I wish they were endgame, they felt like the heart and soul of Bleach. But I don’t hate Orihime, such a sweetheart (plus she gave us the Leekspin meme) her and Ichigo are cute, I just think Ichigo and Rukia are better.

I love Black Widow X Captain America from The MCU, they would’ve been a cute couple, they had good chemistry, they kissed for corn’s sake. I don’t care that much for Steve X Peggy, they’re kinda cute, but whatever, although I do really like Captain America’s ending. I don’t like Nat X Bruce, seeing as it came out of nowhere, but whatever, it didn’t last long anyway and I have nothing against either character.

If anything I’m more prone to getting annoyed when a beloved canon couple are broken up, all the build up thrown away and replaced with another character whom has less chemistry with the original. Case in point, Haley and Andy from Modern Family, they were so cute, they had great chemistry and there was so much build up, only for Andy to leave in the season where he and Haley become a couple. Then later Haley and her initial on again off again guy Dylan get together and I gotta say, I don’t like it. But I have nothing against the character, Dylan’s a sweet guy who genuinely loves Haley and matured a lot, and they’re in no way a bad or unhealthy couple, there are people who genuinely like them as a couple too. I do think Haley’s character was kinda done dirty, but that had absolutely nothing to do with what guy she ended up with.

The moral of this story is, you can like a non-canon ship and even dislike a canon ship without making up ridiculous reasons why and acting like a spoiled entitled brat like the vocal minority of ZeeK freaks from the the toxic side of the fandom.

[ghostofbambifanfiction]

2 🩷 11 🧡 15 💛 26 for any fic you want 🤎

I'm going to go with CYOA on this, just because it's the most recent thing I've updated, and therefore fresh in my mind.

How did you come up with the idea?

Thanks to you lot! I love choose your own adventure games and I really liked the idea of challenging myself to go into a story with absolutely nothing concrete planned and make it all up as I went along, as well as asking my readers to contribute fun details. So I posted a bunch of polls on Tumblr and it was my lovely followers who ultimately decided that Lily and James had never met in person and that Lily worked for James’s mother. I had no ending in mind at all, no idea that Lily was going to wind up living in James’s house, hadn’t dreamed up Skylar yet... and yet I think it truly is my favourite fic out of everything I’ve written now. Who knew that when I asked you guys to decide Remus’s job that it would wind up having such a huge impact on the overall story? Not me, and likely not you until just now.

What was the most challenging aspect of writing it?

Honestly, aside from one or two James chapters (oh, James, you little troublemaker you) that fought me a bit, there haven’t been any challenges? The whole process has been an out-and-out pleasure.

Talk about the characters’ struggles & how you decided on those

Again, a lot of it just arose as the story went on. What I really love about this fic is that, because it takes place on a day-by-day basis, writing it feels very much like the progression of real life, and the sheer length of it has given me room to poke into details that I always knew about the characters but never had space or time to give words to. Like Lily, for example, always likes to be seen as unerringly infallible, but why is that? What made her that way? How does Petunia factor into that? Her parents? Her ex? Petunia was jealous of Lily in canon for being a witch so how do I translate that into a modern AU? What if I had the time and the space and the freedom to write Petunia as a person, rather than as (one of my favourite terms that I use a lot) a cartoon villain? Maybe Lily’s not always a great sister either? So everything has pretty much progressed in that way. Not just for Lily, but for James too. In his friend group he is the leader, but something I learned whilst writing this fic is that I make him pretty passive with other people, particularly his mother. So then I decided to explore that. I’m discovering things about them in real time, and that’s so fun. I know this is a romance fic, but for me it also feels like a story, on the most basic level, about being human.

Share your favorite detail

Gosh, there are a lot. Here’s one, though: I’m still really pleased with myself for coming up with Lily’s odd little kink for being scared by bad dreams or scary movies. I’ve no idea where it came from; it was really one of those moments where it felt like she had sprung into existence and demanded that I write it for her. It’s so weird, but somehow very her? I think it’s really cute that what it ultimately stems from is a desire for comfort at a moment when she’s feeling frightened or anxious but also logically knows that she’s not in any danger. So I find it pretty heart-warming. Even though it’s really bloody strange.

Fic Asks!

[wfagamerants]

I have made it very blatant that I am a fan of Toad.

If you followed me for a while, you also likely have heard me vent about the claim Toad and Captain Toad are different characters, citing multiple contradictions to this claim in the games themselves.

I’m not here to deny official word or push my preferences (though I do have them), rather I want to give my perspective on the whole thing in full and delve a little into how Nintendo handles main members of a Mario species in general.

First, it’s important to recognize that Nintendo is loose with a lot of stuff. Many different people work on these games and you can see different takes on how to present certain species quite frequently.

When we think of Toad, the main way we think of him distinguished from other members of his species is the red spots and blue vest combo. In a large number of games that is indeed the case.

Most spin-offs, Super Mario 3D Land and Luigi’s Mansion Dark Moon, only to name some. Those make it simple, red spots and blue vest Toad is THE Toad. Other red Toads have a red vest.

However, not every game makes it so nice and simple. The pre-GameCube games had ALL the basic Toads rock the red spots and blue vest combo. THE Toad was distinguished more by role, being the only Toad in the game or as in Super Mario RPG, being the only Toad to have Toad: in his text box, even in the japanese version I might add, to indicate he is the main one you keep meeting.

The modern games aren’t without occasional screwyness themselves though. Odyssey reverts to the idea of all generic Toads using that look and then you have things like Sunshine or the Baseball games, where there is no red spots & blue vest Toad, but a red vest Toad is identified as THE Toad in things like the manual:

It’s weird, but it should be said the 2000s were still a bit of a transitional era for Mario. It took until 2004 for short sleeves Wario to be consistently used in spin-offs for instance and Peach still had her old dress in Paper Mario The Thousand Year Door. You saw oddities like that around a fair bit.

The only time the Toad thing ever came up again in later years is Puzzles & Dragons SMB Edition and even that one has THE Toad on the cover, despite him having a red vest in the game,

Something that is even stranger given that by then they had stock Red Toad renders around and Nintendo is so overprotective of Mario as an IP, that them letting this slide is notable.

While this kinda stuff muddles things, it doesn’t take away from the fact a THE Toad exists. It’s seemingly more about the iconic visuals, than the detail. That visual of a single red Toad being with the rest of the main cast.

Something that still persists to this very day and will, with the distinctions we prefer to go for (only one blue vest, red spots Toad) even be present in the movie, which Nintendo is directly involved with.

It’s a thing that extends beyond Toad and has been present with other characters representing their species as well. Kamek being the most blatant example of it.

Even prior to Yoshi’s Island, singular important Magikoopas such as a particular Yoshi’s Safari boss, a right-hand man Magikoopa in Super Mario kun’s Super Mario World story or the eeeeeevil Koopa wizard Wizenheimer in the Super Mario World cartoon, had already appeared as important parts of Bowser’s troops.

It’s with Yoshi’s Island that one particular Magikoopa, who was the one who raised Bowser no less, was introduced. While this had no distinct name in Japan, where all Magikoopas are known as Kamek, the localization either consciously or by lucky accident, kept his name as Kamek, giving him a big distinguishing element from his species.

The idea of Kamek the main Magikoopa is one that persists to this day and it makes a lot of sense why. Given his shown connection to Bowser in his debut game, there is no reason to assume the most prominent Magikoopas aren’t this particular one and localization was happy to keep the concept around.

In Japan meanwhile, Kamek the character is not a foreign concept, but many materials do not make a formal distinction between the character and the species. It’s there, just more vague. You can sense that in localizations too, with how there are a couple notable oddities.

Mario Party 9 has a playable Magikoopa who is referred to as such in american localization, is called Kamek in other versions, like the german translation. Whether this is meant to be the character or a generic member of the species is genuinely not clear. Not helping matters is how european translations sometimes call generic Magikoopas like in the first couple Paper Mario games and as recent as Bowser’s Fury, Kameks.

A particularly noteworthy example is Giant Kamek in Super Princess Peach. His status as a boss, the one to guard Luigi no less, makes it easy to take him as Kamek transformed, but then you look at the Glossary:

A Kamek. It’s meant to be a generic member of the species, in a new form.

The truth is that Mario is a very, as I like to call it ‘’function over flavor’’ series. It’s more about the function, such as a main red Toad or a main Magikoopa and not so much the finer details like whether the vest color is correct, even if many games DO take that into account.

Because of this, I think the thing to look for is consistency, whatever fits the consistent image is the most likely answer. We will never know in some cases if the character in question is a generic member of the species or the main one, but that is because Nintendo themselves often don’t put that much stock into it.

On that note, while localizations, despite greater efforts to define things can fumble too, I don’t think that means they don’t ‘’count’’. I generally don’t agree with the idea that only japanese sources have any say with how to interpret Mario stuff, because the series does not have the lore consistency to give that idea weight.

On top of that, we have seen that western influences have affected the franchise at large more than once.  The western Super Mario Bros 2 is the most obvious example of this, with how many elements of it have made it far into the franchise. Most notable though are the Koopalings, who didn’t even have names in the japanese version of SMB3 and adapted their localization given names.

This kind of stuff isn’t like say, Monsteropolis in the US Mega Man manual or the US Sonic CD manual clumsily trying to treat Amy as Sally. This stuff is still with the franchise today and as the movie shows, still matters.

THE Toad is a thing in the movie and as is Kamek. Both clearly defined as such and while the New York backstory is not a western invention, it was more emphasized in the west and that’s back too. It’s even Brooklyn again and I’m not even sure if that was ever specified in japanese material or direct confirmation from Miyamoto.

Mario is not a story centric series where only the original text matters. It’s a extremely loose canon, where what the west did, still matters to this very day and is of equal importance.

With all this in mind, let’s talk Captain Toad.

To understand my point on what I mean with contradictions regarding him and Toad being separate characters, we need to look at what Captain was like in the Galaxy games.

In these games, Captain Toad as a name did not exist, with him being only referred to as ‘’the captain of the Toad Brigade’’ and being specifically shown to be a self proclaimed captain at that. Even his inability to jump was invented later on and is contradicted by many level set pieces he shows up in, as well as this:

Even the headlamp, one of his defining visual features, wasn’t treated as anything that special, with BankToad being able to get it at a certain level of deposited Star Bits in Galaxy 2.

He wasn’t really talked about in any official materials and didn’t even get an official render of any sort, but you know who did and is on the cover of Galaxy 2 no less?

Toad. I have seen the argument that this could be an error, but for that to make it all the way to the cover, the first thing someone would see of the game when buying it, would make that a very massive one. Additionally, Toad also has a render for Galaxy 1, even though he wouldn’t have any presence in either game aside from a Save File icon and a cameo in the story book opening of Galaxy 1, if he’s not Captain. The only existing bios for Toad or Captain in these games, even identify them as the same character.

It does line up with what I said about consistency. Sunshine gave us a group of 5 Toads in different colors, with the red vest and red spots one being singled out to be the main Toad. Galaxy introducing a similar group and making the red Toad, in a franchise where a red Toad is one of the main characters, THE Toad, like in Sunshine or the Baseball games, makes sense because there is precedent.

Then many years later came 3D World, the game where Toad and Captain were supposedly clarified to be different characters, co-existing at the same time.

This is also the game where the main playable Toad is a Blue Toad. THE Toad, has never been portrayed that way before or since, to the point where every time Nintendo reuses one of the Blue Toad renders in this game

They are recolored to fit his proper appearance, because this has NEVER been how he has been portrayed. The game really emphasizes the playable Toad being a blue one too, with how the credits scene even shows Captain with a group of Toads, missing a blue one.

This flies heavily in the face of past established consistency, where between Sunshine, the many spin-offs or Luigi’s Mansion Dark Moon, THE Toad has always been distinguished as the red one, because that’s the first one, who established himself as THE Toad.

One could point to his blue color palette in NES SMB2 and I have seen arguments that it’s an homage to that. We don’t have official word on this, but I find that very hard to buy, because he was never supposed to look like this. When he WAS depicted that way in art, everyone was portrayed with their in-game colors:

And in every other case, everyone had their proper colors:

3D World doesn’t do either. The idea of a homage rings hollow when Mario, Luigi and Peach are the same as usual and those couple spots needing to be recolored to not confuse him with Mario, also doesn’t really make sense, given how drastically different their body types are. 

It goes so far the official Super Mario website even lists red spots specifically as one of Toad’s defining features, which would make him being Blue Toad in 3D World even stranger:

The game also lacks any kind of red spots and blue vest Toad, which 3D Land ensured there was only one of, to identify him as THE Toad. You know who had an icon like that in the reveal trailer though?

Captain Toad. Completely new art no less, that stuck around in the game to be in the reveal trailer, less than half a year away from release.

Also, yah know how you can find Captain Toad in levels and sometimes get a collectible out of it?

Toad did the same thing in 3D Land. Even in terms of gameplay function, the two are extremely similar. Similarities between the two are a running theme from here on out.

Prominent red Toads who throw turnips, give out stars, have Toadette as a partner, act as leaders to other Toads and have been depicted with fairy partners (though in Captain’s case only in concept art).

It is baffling how much they have in common and you can tell that even more by how much the two are linked.

Captain Toad Treasure Tracker has an amiibo bundle, amiibo functionality and a pre-order bonus, centered around a character that, according to some sources, you don’t even play as.

All by Nintendo themselves btw. Same with say, this video title or german eShop description for the game, which refer to the main character as Captain and Toad interchangeably.

This even extends to in-game content:

And an Odyssey developer interview:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVNYfoFcrZY

Then you got Mario Maker call Toad Captain:

Smash let's Toad’s spirit evolve into Captain, which is tied to gameplay AND in-line with stuff like Shadow becoming Super Shadow or Alm and Celica becoming their adult selves. The game even makes the distinction that THE Toad exists in the tips, where Peach’s Toad is THE Toad and Daisy’s (who is blue ala’ 3D World btw) is a Toad. 

And then you get Mario Kart Tour, the only spin-off Captain Toad is in and the same one where someone like Peachette can be an independent playable character distant from Toadette OR Peach, so yeah. He even shares most of his animations with Toad:

A trait mainly seen with the simpler alts. Pit Stop Toad has more unique animations than Captain has.

VS Tour promos even group him with Toad, right next to him. Same happens with Peachette, who is correctly placed between Toadette and her alts.

Hillariously enough, even LEGO gets in on this, by giving Toad a treasure hunting themed expansion:

As I said, it’s not my intent to ignore official word. Officially, Captain is regarded as a different character, I’m just pointing out how much the games themselves don’t support that and how it requires a lot of justification and ignoring of past patterns to get there and explain away the mountains of counter evidence.

I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss every source that speaks against those claims either, these are just people trying to make sense of the mess Nintendo has left behind and I could just as easily point out that the original confirmation Captain is a separate character, also came with Toads not truly being mushrooms. A claim that contradicts a lot of past descriptions of the species, dialogue mentioning things like spores and Toad showing spore abilities at multiple points.

Not saying this invalidates the entire thing, just pointing out this is a nightmarish mess if you want to maintain consistency.

It’s why Movie Toad is exciting to me.

Giving him the backpack, Captain’s most defining feature these days and thus possibly silently merging them, is to me, the best and least complicated thing they could do. 

Time will tell if this will affect anything, but Nintendo allowing for this at all does tell me they are fine with the characters being linked, which I hope translates to good things for him. Toad has a lot to gain from being Captain, while Captain really struggles to be his own thing, because he IS Toad in all but official word.

[artpoint420]

A Long Winded Analytic Defense of Nermal Cat from Garfield -DRAFT

I’ve said before, Nermal isn’t that bad, y’all just mean.

Go ahead. Hate me. Send me to Abu Dabi. But I am a Nermal apologist. I think Nermal makes a good addition to the Garfield cast and he's even a bit of an interesting character, the world's cutest kitty cat yet the most overhated.

I can understand why he's hated, certainly. I'll admit he does deserve some hate.

HOWEVER

As a cat crazy individual, I will never hate a cat. That's my main reason for not hating Nermal. In fact, I want to adopt Nermal so bad but he's just a cartoon character at the end of each Monday (and everyday), unfortunately. There are other reasons I defend him too and here (and next parts) I'll give a detailed overview/ analysis of all Garfield media Nermal has been in, the role he plays, his dynamics with the other characters, and his behavior.

PART 1: THE COMIC STRIPS (early era Nermal)

Let's start with the obvious, his first appearance in the comics.

... to which Garfield immediately hates him. But hey, it's a great way to immediately establish their dynamic, and show the main reason Garfield dislikes Nermal is his jealously (and annoyance at how he interuppts his naps.) The fact Nermal looks so happy to meet him though <3

The next few strips feature Garfield telling Nermal how he hates cute, his general disappointment in Nermal, and all the little ways Nermal annoys him. Here, Nermal is just the naive baby of the group and doesn't seem to mean to annoy Garfield. It's honestly reminisent to how Garfield and Odie were when Odie was introduced early on as well as a reflection on how cats tend to treat new cats, which is usually not very well until they get used to each other. (I have three cats trust me.)

Nonetheless, it doesn't take long until we get strips showcasing the ways they actually enjoy their time together, finding ways to play that shows their friendly side with each other without completely altering their established dynamic.

These are some of my overall favorite Garfield comics. Jim Davis honestly deserves kudos for being able to draw and write his characters in ways that feel like a natural sibling rivalry with both good and bad moments. But when the moments are good, they're so damn good. Here's more examples:

God this is my favorte Nermal and Garf stirip. I can hear them giggling as they confuse Jon.

I don't blame you for thinking that Nermal.

He's just his little baby brother and I will accept no other answer.

However there's this one:

If nothing proves Garfield's hatred is fueld mainly by jealously, this will. So much for Nermal being the "evil" one. (They both have their evil moments I suppose.)

In this one, Garfield fully admits it.

To move forward because I can analyze each and every comic, truly I can, but I also have so much more I want to talk about, I'll just say there's a few basic formulas for a Garfield and Nermal strip in this era I've observed, and that's one of these few:

-Nermal being snobbish towards Garfield to which Garfield is reasonably annoyed.

-Garfield just being a jerk to Nermal unprovoked or scolding him harshly usually ending with Nermal being tossed out the door.

-Garfield yearning for Jon's attention upon Nermal getting attention.

-Garfield trying to copy Nermal and/or have Nermal teach him to be cute (you are cute though Garfield, you're a cat, of course you're cute, Jon or Nermal just won't admit it.)

-Nermal and Garfield asking each other what seems like genuine questions out of a true interest about each other's lives.

-Something a bit more on the wholesome or brotherly side.

Or something kinda random.

Now, before both our attention spans die out, lets quickly look at modern Nermal comics and how Nermal's character has developed over the years. As we can see, early on, he had his snobbish moments but could also be sweet enough to break through Garfield's walls he puts up. Does that sweetness remain or get replaced?

To be honest, their dynamic hasn't actually changed too awfully much. There's so many modern ones with Nermal that feature Garfield's age and birthday more often than the past one's. Nermal is usually insulting Garfield's age but there's one where he does try to comfort him, proving he's still a cute sweet kitty despite his smart-aleck attitude. But I'll have to continue in part 2 because there's already 29 pictures in this post and I can only add one more which isthis one, which I coudn't leave out:

"Garfield! You're blocking my sunlight!"

Tee-hee, yep, one more cute one for the road. Can't get enough of it? Tune in for my next post because we'll have to do a Part 1 part 2!