#we’ve gone full circle except they’re not doing it intentionally they just don’t care
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Note
what really sucks too is that if the writers cared about his character in the way they care about anyone else's, we could've gotten such a cool exploration of how miguel ended up as the head of an organization in the first place, we could've explored how it's impacting him, how the mechanisms of his character are grinding against this spot he's placed himself in. but i don't think we're gonna get that if they really just chose him as the antagonist because he's scary. especially with the director's comment that this film is a commentary on people who hate miles. like.... maybe i'm wrong but it really looks like they just needed a character to pit miles against. like they shaped the story first and then put miguel in rather than having him shape the story alongside other characters
nah, you’re right on how they added him without thinking how he shapes the story alongside everyone else. his origins are so interesting and really paint the picture to explain who he is.
and i want to believe they read his source material (his white suit being in the background and confirmed recently by the artists), but it’s not looking too great. his whole thing is being half spider and they couldn’t even get that right.
#interesting that miguel’s choice of being a spider person was taken away from him#and it’s being taken away AGAIN from the writers#we’ve gone full circle except they’re not doing it intentionally they just don’t care#404-505#cn!ask#miguel o'hara
4 notes
·
View notes
Note
How are you feeling about Nathan and Nathan and Elizabeth right now? Do you feel like the show has destroyed him? Just, how are you feeling about all this—what are your thoughts?
Oh anon, I’m so glad you asked. Buckle up! We’re going for a ride.
I would marry Nathan Grant this instant if 1) I wasn’t already married, and 2) he wasn’t a fictional character.
Nathan is not even remotely close to being destroyed for me. I love and adore him as much right now as I ever have. I absolutely, wholeheartedly disagree with anyone who says that Nathan was in any way responsible for what happened to Jack, to any degree. That’s just ridiculous. By that same line of thinking, then Jack was responsible for Doug’s death in season 3 or 4 (I can’t remember). I don’t remember anyone pointing fingers at Jack for that series of events. And you know what? By the line of thinking that I’ve seen in regards to Nathan and the secret, then Jack would actually have been more responsible for Doug’s death than Nathan was for Jack’s. Jack declined his orders to go to the Northern Territories. He straight up said “sorry, but no” because Elizabeth wanted him to stay, and he wanted to stay with her. Nathan did no such thing. He made a decision to chase bad guys - which was in line with his job, if not his direct orders - and was disciplined for disobeying orders. That led to Jack being asked to lead the training mission. Not Nathan’s refusal of orders. So ... nope. Jack wasn’t responsible for Doug’s death, and Nathan wasn’t responsible for Jack’s death. Also, depending on who you are and what you believe, it could almost be said that Jack should have died in Doug’s place, and because he didn’t that meant he was going to die in Nathan’s place. There is a macabre sort of symmetry to it: Doug dies in Jack’s place, Jack dies in Nathan’s place. That’s full circle.
Now, I’m not saying that I believe that. Just pointing it out. I believe that Jack died because of an accident. No one is at fault. It just happened, because sometimes bad things happen. And I understand how difficult it would have been for Nathan to tell Elizabeth that, especially as they got to know one another and he started to fall in love with her. Not telling her doesn’t make him evil or a bad person or whatever - it just makes him human. He knew that it would hurt Elizabeth, and you never want to hurt the people you love.
I’ve seen various other criticisms of Nathan, of course. I’ve seen some comments saying that he’s too aggressive in his pursuit of Elizabeth, and to that I say that I don’t think I’m watching the same show. Nathan has never been aggressive with Elizabeth in any way. I could literally write a book about that argument, but I won’t, because I still have a lot of other points to cover.
So, no. I don’t think the show ruined Nathan. I think some people are just ready to hate him for any reason, and if that’s how they feel then ... well, I don’t care, actually. The great thing about fandom is that you get to choose how you engage with it, and I’m not interested in those points of view. Other people’s dislike or outright hatred of Nathan does not dim my love of him one whit.
As far as Nathan and Elizabeth are concerned, I am tired, but I have absolute faith that they will be together by the end of the season. Nathan is Elizabeth’s “next great love” (words used by Erin Krakow); we’ve always been moving toward their end game, and despite how rocky and painful and awkward the journey has become, that end game hasn’t changed. Here’s a (non-exhaustive) list of reasons why I know that:
Quality of storytelling: Nathan and Elizabeth have the highest quality of storylines both separately and together. Their storylines focus on real and important values such as family, forgiveness, growth, loss, etc. I’ve mentioned this before, but pretty much from their first interaction we are shown that Nathan and Elizabeth are a team. They are united. Elizabeth is the first person to welcome Nathan to HV, and she shares a personal story of her first days in the town and how challenging they were. It’s the first thread that connects them. Also, I should point out that the first time Nathan meets Elizabeth he delivers a measure of relief for her in the form of Jack’s pension. We know that Elizabeth makes money from her teaching, and that her family in Hamilton would probably never let her want for money, but still. Receiving Jack’s pension undoubtedly relieved a financial burden for her (as evidenced by her reaction to seeing the amount). Anyway, the themes of team and unity keep going from there. Elizabeth helps Nathan search for Allie; they have to work together to correct Allie’s behavior and reassure her; Elizabeth distracts Amos Dixon while Nathan is infiltrating the saloon to catch him; etc. These themes are not present in Elizabeth’s relationship with Lucas. All of Lucas’s storylines are impersonal, with the exception of the one with his parents in season 8 and the little bit of backstory we got with the Amos Dixon incident. The work and effort that has gone into telling Nathan’s story, and Nathan and Elizabeth’s story, is absent from Lucas’s plotlines both with and without Elizabeth. Another point: whereas Elizabeth’s first interaction with Nathan ties that first thread of connection between them, her first interaction with Lucas starts them off on the wrong foot: Lucas asks her where her husband is and if he’ll be joining her. Elizabeth immediately walks away from him and Rosie and Lee have to tell Lucas about Jack.
Depth of interactions: At this point, the lack of any real depth between Lucas and Elizabeth is absolutely intentional. I think it always has been, but now there’s just no question. Almost every interaction between Nathan and Elizabeth has depth. They can’t help it - they’re not really surface level people. Helen Bouchard tells Elizabeth this season that she knows that Elizabeth is a person who feels things deeply, and I think we know by now that Nathan is as well. They bring that level of feeling to their interactions. They argue, they flirt, they talk about the hard things. Pain, loss, distrust, obstacles ... we never see that depth between Lucas and Elizabeth. The one hard thing they talk about is the reveal of Helen’s secret, and it’s important to note that in that interaction Elizabeth calls out Lucas’s comment for what it is: cruel. “What would you know about it?” Uncalled for. This is the only time we really see Elizabeth and Lucas argue, and Lucas doesn’t meet Elizabeth’s depth here. She tells him something meaningful - that maybe Helen had to be the first one to reach out, and that love should be fought for - and Lucas responds with a cruel comment and walks off. That was intentional on the writers’ part. When Nathan and Elizabeth argue they get heated, but they do not attack each other. That’s an important distinction. They’re not trying to hurt each other. Now, I’m sure someone will point out that in Nathan and Elizabeth’s most recent argument about Allie, Elizabeth says “now you’re just being hurtful” when Nathan tells Elizabeth she originally wasn’t invited. Guess what? Cruel and hurtful don’t mean the same thing. Cruel means: willfully causing pain or suffering to others, or feeling no concern about it.” Whereas the definition of hurtful is: “causing distress to someone’s feelings.” I would say there’s a huge difference in those two words. Plus, even though it may have hurt Elizabeth to hear it, what Nathan said was true. It was not an insult, or a petulant remark said in anger. In fact, while Nathan is irritated and kinda snarky, I’d say he’s not really even that angry in the scene where Elizabeth confronts him. They bicker, but he doesn’t lose his temper like he did in the cabin scene in season 7. In fact, in all of the times that Nathan and Elizabeth have argued their disagreements have never been mean spirited or intentionally hurtful.
But it’s not just that. When Nathan loses his temper in the cabin scene, he says “you both could have died!” When Elizabeth confronts him in the Mountie office the next day, she says “please stop shutting me out!” These are not surface level arguments - they’re not arguing about Elizabeth’s inability to decide what she wants for dinner. (Sorry, had to throw in a joke). They’re arguing over deep concerns: bodily harm, and emotional withdrawal. I find it interesting that Nathan displayed concern about Elizabeth’s physical safety and Elizabeth over his emotional withdrawal, considering that at the end of season 7 and now in season 8 we’re seeing an Elizabeth who is terrified of losing Nathan (physical safety) and a Nathan who has had to weather Elizabeth’s emotional withdrawal. Who’s shutting who out now, Elizabeth? I digress.
Another thing of note: we’ve never actually heard Nathan tell Elizabeth that she’s beautiful, and we’ve never actually heard Lucas tell her anything but she’s beautiful. Interesting contrast. Nathan says, “You matter to me,” “you’re quite the teacher,” “I’m glad the publisher realized how special you are. He’s not the only one,” and of course, “I love/am in love with you.” Even Nathan’s compliments go beyond surface level. Whereas Lucas tells her she’s beautiful, and that he’s so glad to have her in his life. Again, depth vs. surface level. I do remember that in the first episode of season 7, I believe, when Nathan says that he was never engaged with school Lucas butts in and says “that’s probably because you never had a teacher like Elizabeth.” I tend to disregard this compliment though, because it didn’t feel genuine. Lucas butts in to a conversation that Nathan and Elizabeth are having and then compliments her - it feels like a showboat move. In contrast, all of Nathan’s compliments have been sincere and given in private, without anyone else around.
I was going to make a separate point for this, but I actually think it belongs here: the depth of Nathan’s gift giving/wooing vs. Lucas’s is also very apparent. Nathan gives her personal, humble gifts: an apple, a hand carved wooden sign with a quote from her favorite poet (which she mentioned once, to someone else), a moment of relief when he offers to hold baby Jack at the christening party. Lucas’s gifts are more grandiose, but impersonal: flowers, fancy dates, etc. The two sweetest things Lucas has done for her, in my opinion, were when he gave her the binoculars to take for the kids on their trip to the woods, and the Virginia Wolff trip. Note, I don’t mean the dinner out of town or the picnic on the way there: I mean the fact that Lucas bought tickets to go see a reading of an author that he didn’t particularly like because he thought Elizabeth would like them. Granted, I didn’t like the way he sprung them on her, but it was still a very thoughtful gesture.
Wardrobe: Costume and set designers will tell you all the time that they make conscious decisions about who wears what, and when. Nathan and Elizabeth are always dressed in complementary colors. They match, or at least blend well; Lucas and Elizabeth are often mismatched or outright clashing. Elizabeth and Nathan generally dress in lighter colors, whereas Lucas dresses in darker colors. Also worth noting is that we have seen several instances of Nathan and baby Jack being dressed alike, and Allie and Elizabeth being dressed in similar/complementary colors.
Family Imagery: the amount of family imagery that we are presented with in regards to Nathan, Elizabeth, Allie, and baby Jack is impossible to miss. They pick out and decorate a Christmas tree together in a warmly lit home with a combination of Elizabeth’s decorations and Nathan and Allie’s; even though it doesn’t happen, the first time Nathan asks Elizabeth to dinner they go as a family unit; Elizabeth brings over cupcakes for the sleepover and helps Nathan loosen up by flirting with him in the middle of his kitchen, with an apron on; these are all intimate, family oriented scenes.
Shows of fear/worry/concern: look at Elizabeth’s face any time Nathan is heading into danger, might be in danger, or just generally might be unsafe in any way. She is visibly distressed every time. She’s also distressed every time Nathan gives her the cold shoulder/tries to back off/resorts to any kind of formality. We’re always shown this moment of fear for her, and usually some kind of scene after that shows us the aftermath. For example: after the fight in the cabin, when they’re back in town it looks like Nathan might be about to apologize and Florence interrupts him and he leaves to find Lee; we get the scene of Elizabeth confronting him the following day. After that confrontation, we get Nathan showing up at night and telling her “you matter to me.” Elizabeth asks Lucas to dance and then sees a crestfallen Nathan leaving the saloon; in the next episode (even though it’s the first episode of the following season) we see Elizabeth purposely approach Nathan in the street with a sweet but awkward comment about Allie’s book report on Queen Victoria. We’ve only seen two real moments of danger for Lucas: the Amos Dixon situation, and the oil derrick explosion. In the Amos Dixon incident, Elizabeth is angry with Lucas for endangering her; in the oil derrick explosion, we actually don’t get a scene addressing that other than the one where Elizabeth stops Helen and tells her that she’s sure Lucas is fine. Interesting differences, I’d say. This also ties into the previous point about the emotional depth that exists between Nathan and Elizabeth, but not Elizabeth and Lucas. Other than the hug, of course, which was a huge display of fear and emotion from Elizabeth, I'd also point you to the scene at the end of 8x01 when Elizabeth is waiting on her porch for Nathan to come home. She can hardly breathe when she sees him ride up. Watch the way she breathes - she inhales so deeply that it makes her collarbones stick out sharply, and her expression is intense. The way she says "you made it home" is so tense and shaky!
The pursuer vs the pursued: This is a huge point, and difference. In the Elizabeth and Lucas relationship, Lucas is the pursuer; in the Nathan and Elizabeth relationship, Elizabeth is the pursuer. Lucas inserts himself in conversations that Elizabeth and Nathan are having, he repeatedly asks her to dinner and surprises her with things (like the Virginia Wolff tickets, and sending her manuscript to his mother, etc). At first, Elizabeth seems hesitant about these things: she turns him down once for dinner, hesitates over the tickets, then finally sits down to dinner with him but won't call it a date. To me, the relationship between Lucas and Elizabeth seems to come about mostly because he wears her down. Elizabeth only really goes to Lucas and opens the door for a relationship after Nathan's profession of love. That certainly makes it seem like she's not so much running to Lucas as she is running away from Nathan. In comparison, we have a whole bunch of examples of Elizabeth being the one to pursue some sort of relationship with Nathan. Not necessarily a romantic one (at least purposely) but every time Nathan tries to leave Elizabeth alone and put distance between them, she closes that gap by figuratively running straight at him. Calling him out for shutting her out, finding excuses to talk to him (like Allie's book report), basically telling him that she went to Union City with Lucas because Nathan wouldn't ask her out. Now, in season 8 I would say that we've taken a fairly hard turn and Nathan has now taken the lead as the pursuer and Elizabeth is the pursued ... which is mostly true. I think one of the key takeaways on this point, and up to this point in the show, is that Elizabeth and Nathan can't help but pursue each other. It's a frustrating game of cat and mouse. But, it's true: even though they're on shaky ground and things are complicated, we still see Elizabeth and Nathan running to each other as much as they run away. Nathan does so in obvious ways, but Elizabeth is more subtle. She sends him that note about missing the parent teacher conference and then they have that conversation in her living room; Elizabeth follows Allie as she barges in on the inquiry and then waits outside with her, and they're together when Nathan emerges; Nathan invites her to the adoption ceremony, they share the moment outside the infirmary, Elizabeth stops him to ask about the stolen car outside the mercantile; Elizabeth and Allie upset each other and Elizabeth runs straight to Nathan. No matter how they have tried not to, it's clear at this point that they will always gravitate to one another. In support, in argument, in misunderstanding, in triumph ... they just keep going for one another.
This, I think, has been the point of having Lucas witness all of these interactions between Nathan and Elizabeth. No matter what they might say or the perception they might try to give off, the truth always comes out - and the truth is that they can't stay away from each other. Even when she tries to hide it, Elizabeth's heart is a compass, and we all know that compasses always point one way (and in her case, the N doesn't mean north).
To that point, I think that there has been a lot of double meaning to the things Elizabeth has said this season. The most recent example: in the last episode when Elizabeth says, "I tried to tell you at Allie's parent teacher conference. You are her rock. You are her foundation. If you let her down, her whole world crumbles." Also, to this point, in the scene where they're in Elizabeth's house, she says, "You will always be the measure of the quality she'll look for in a man as she chooses who to marry." I find the wording of both of these statements both interesting and telling. At this point, I think that Nathan isn't just Allie's rock - he's also Elizabeth's. She trusts him, and depends on him, and holds him in high regard. Nathan has unexpectedly filled a hole in Elizabeth's life: he is her main male support now. She has Bill and Lee, of course, but they don't fill the same spot. Bill is like a father figure, and Lee is her best friend's husband. But Nathan - Nathan is only Elizabeth's. It's a very specific spot he fills, and it's as the leading man in her life. They solve problems together, mentor and parent Allie, address the town's needs, etc. Again - they're a unit, and we're meant to see them as such. Elizabeth's behavior didn't change until after she almost lost Nathan (and then he told her he loved her); she doesn't seem shaken or upset until Nathan does something to make her feel that way. Nathan has become her rock, and she's laid a new foundation with him. Her emotional state is directly tied to Nathan (and Allie, as I think we've now seen). No matter how painful or difficult it is, Nathan and Elizabeth are already bonded (and deeply). A fact that will be highlighted in 8x09 when Elizabeth will choose Nathan's hands in that wedding game, despite the fact that she has never held his hands (but has held Lucas's several times now).
So. This turned into a freaking novel, and I could honestly keep going, but I won't. I will just say, once again, that I love Nathan with my whole heart. I may not agree with his every decision, but I don't expect to. I don't agree with a lot of Elizabeth's decisions, but I still love her too. The writers do have some work to do, however, because they took this further than I expected them to and now they need to work their way out of it. But, even in my most frustrated and tired moments - of which there have been several, and will probably be a few more - I have always known all roads lead to Nathan and Elizabeth. We'll be exhausted by the time we cross the finish line, but we'll get there. Don't lose hope.
#Anonymous#Nathan Grant#nathan x elizabeth#elizabeth x nathan#Jess' thoughts#gosh this one really got away from me#but I have so many thoughts
22 notes
·
View notes
Text
book review: Meg Rosoff, How I Live Now (2004)
Genre: Young Adult
Is it the main pairing: yes
Is it canon: yes
Is it explicit: no
Is it endgame: yes
Is it shippable: yes
Bottom line: It finally happened, I broke my own “no cousincest—in this house we turn the TABOO dial up to eleven” rule. In my defense this book is gobsmackingly good.
Lately I’ve been mulling on the difference between books about teenagers and books for teenagers. This one is the former, and a joy to reread as an adult. Our American heroine Daisy is sent across the pond to live with her British cousins; a war breaks out; details are scant but who cares about the war, she starts fucking one of the cousins. She describes it as “falling into sexual and emotional thrall” she said THRALL I am living for it. On a scale from “pure” to “problematic” this ship is almost all light and no darkness—what darkness menaces our protagonists emanates from outside the charmed circle of their big ol’ farmhouse and their sheepdogs and their goat:
The real truth is that the war didn’t have much to do with it except that it provided a perfect limbo in which two people who were too young and too related could start kissing without anything or anyone making us stop. There were no parents, no teachers, no schedules. There was no where to go and nothing to do that would remind us that this sort of thing didn’t happen in the Real World. There no longer was any Real World.
The notion of carving out an idyll where you & the object of your desire spend all day doing nothing but drink each other up? It’s attractive even for those of us conducting mundane relationships in the “real” world. Maybe especially for those of us in the real world, where we compartmentalize our relationships and no one person can fill every filament in our universe. Daisy’s cousins live a cloistered life in the countryside and within a week she’s saying stuff like “I felt like I’d belonged to this house for centuries.” Which is an awfully dramatic way of saying she never felt like she belonged in New York. She doesn’t just fall for Cousin Edmond; she falls for the whole telepathic dog-whispering cousinly clan and their big anarchist energy. When Daisy, an only child, says “I had about as much experience with sex and boyfriends as I did with brothers and sisters,” she is intentionally conflating romantic and familial relationships and I am 1000% here for it. Sure it’s technically cousincest but it feels claustrophobic and codependent and everything I want out of an incest ship.
Every step of Daisy’s obsessive infatuation is chronicled with agonizing tenderness:
I wondered if that’s the feeling you’re supposed to have when your cousin touches a totally innocent part of your anatomy that’s fully clothed.
that’s right it’s the thought and the intention and the pining behind the touch, not the bare fact of physical contact.
Things were so intense I was sure that other people could hear the hum coming off of us.
Imagine desire rising like mist from the surface of one’s skin. And the “other people” part of the equation is important, because it’s the sneaking around behind the other kids’ backs that gives urgency to their coupling:
we started sleeping most of the daylight hours so we could be awake at night when everyone else was in bed … Then we would sleep for a little while and eventually reappear and try to act normal
But what is “normal”? There are no adults and no rules; nothing is forbidden save that they themselves deem it so. What then explains Daisy’s conviction that this is “not a good idea”? Why shroud their affair in secrecy if the most powerful reaction they provoke from smol!cousin who learns about Daisy/Edmond is “Well I’m glad you love him because I do too”? That’s pretty anticlimactic given the lengths Daisy & Edmond have gone to be stealthy. It also emphasizes (in case we’ve forgotten that Daisy has both no siblings and no boyfriends) how romantic & familial attachments spring from a common source. I think what the text is getting at here is that it’s dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket the way Daisy puts all hers in Edmond. It’s dangerous and unhealthy to make one person your whole world, as we see later when Daisy comes to much grief. At no point, however, does she regret her decision.
we could try and try to get enough of each other but it was llike some witch’s curse where the more we tried to stop being hungry the more starving we got.
That’s a hard-hitting simile right there. The thing about curses in fairy tales is they don’t always do what they’re designed to do; frequently they accomplish different ends entirely. If we look at what Daisy’s insatiable hunger for Edmond is displacing we note that Daisy is no stranger to the feeling of constant, gnawing, unsatiated hunger because Daisy has an eating disorder. In her own words:
at first not wanting to get poisoned by my stepmother and how much it annoyed her and how after a while I discovered I liked the feeling of being hungry and the fact that it drove everyone stark raving mad and cost my father a fortune in shrinks and also it was something I was good at.
…which is just about the world’s most cogent account of eating disorders as quests for control & autonomy. By the end of the novel she no longer experiences hunger as “a punishment or a crime or a weapon or a mode of self-destruction” and that's something, anyway.
Y’all know I’m a big skimmer right? I mention this because I want you to take my full meaning when I say I read every single word of this (very short) novel. The syntax helped—most sentences are structured like so: “… and …. and … and then …” but it was engrossing af and I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone use Ironic Capitalization to such devastating effect. The stylistic choice to use zero dialogue brackets means Daisy’s thoughts and Edmond’s thoughts (Edmond’s a telepath) and external action and internal commentary all run together. I didn’t find this confusing btw I just found it extremely effective.
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
Daisy and Edmond are separated at about the one-third mark and she spends the remainder of the book trying to get back to him, traversing a war-torn countryside with Edmond’s smol!sister and his dog in tow (since Daisy is a city girl who can’t even read a compass, maybe it’s more accurate to say smol!cousin + dog have Daisy in tow):
I guess the difference between Gin and me is that when Gin got shut in the barn she thought Edmond didn’t love her anymore but because I could feel Edmond out there somewhere always loving me I didn’t have to howl all night.
The parallel between Edmond’s girl and Edmond’s dog is not an idle one. There’s consistent strain of anticapitalist sentiment that runs through this book, that comes out most strongly in the relationships between Daisy’s cousins and their animals. Some military junta appropriates the farmhouse and displaces Daisy, her cousins, and the menagerie of animals that depend on them—that’s how Edmond and Daisy become separated, they’re “relocated.” The army is hierarchal and in wartime, the army is in charge. By contrast, Daisy’s cousins model a nonhierarchical kind of relationship with their animals, a relationship based on reciprocal obligations rather than dominating other people. “At times,” professes Daisy, “I thought I was more animal than human.” In other words, human beings live under an absolutely barbaric system, and it’s often more “humane” to behave like animals. It’s Edmond’s sheepdog who proves key to Daisy’s successful escape. City girl Daisy still can’t wrap her head around it:
one of the things I most dislike about nature, namely that the rules are not at all precise. Like when Piper says I’m pretty sure that mushrooms aren’t poisonous.
But nature’s strength lies precisely in the fuzziness of its rules! It encourages interdependence & reliance on others, rather than trying to go it alone as an atomized individual. So surviving on the run actually forces one to prioritize community (however you define it) over individual, which has salutary effects on Daisy, who reports “Somewhere along the way I’d lost the will not to eat.” She’s defeated her eating disorder, that’s good news. Unfortunately, Edmond and Daisy are not even reunited before she’s expelled from England and shipped back to America for Reasons. Dw she comes back! As soon as the borders reopen she comes back:
The soldier had stamped my passport FAMILY in heavy black capital letters and I checked it now for reassurance because I liked how fierce the word looked.
Very powerful passage but now for the ending. Let’s not talk about that ending. I don’t know why I called this a good book I am still incredulous we got THAT ending after everything we went through brb I’m suing Meg Rosoff for emotional damages
24 notes
·
View notes