#when the wf was still fighting for what was right with the right ways

[missbrunettebarbie]

Omg that’s such a good point about moral passivity=death in asoiaf. I agree that’s what prevented GRRM from ever seeing Ned as the true hero/male lead of ASoiaf. I also think GRRM has a thing for underdogs and outcasts, of which Ned is neither. Dany on the other hand comes from nothing, has only viserys as family, is abused by him her whole life, and is sold into marriage. And yet still she is driven to help people and make the hard choices, at great cost to herself. On the other hand I think dany’s backround (especially compared to the Stark kids who grew up in wealth and comfort) was one of the things that biased them against her, because in their mind might makes right, and the status quo is good, and people on the bottom should stay on the bottom and shouldn’t rise up. That’s also why they demonized Dany, and made her the ultimate villain of the show, because they believe in the neoliberal notion that fighting back against evil makes you just as bad as the thing your fighting, and it’s better to do nothing in the face of deep societal injustice.

Agree with pretty much everything. I would go beyond this and say that passivity of any kind is an unforgivable flaw for GRRM. We see this with Doran Martell, who GRRM clearly likes ... but he can't get a win because he wasted too much time doing nothing .

And, like, Ned is very passive in general. We don't realize it because he is the main character of the first book, so we want to root for him. But the guy would gladly bury his head in the sand/run away to Winterfell if he could, the rest of Westeros be damned. I wondered for a long time how tf Ned and Robert managed to be such good friends, because they seem so different, but they really aren't. They both dislike facing reality, they both neglect their children* in some way or other and neither of them sees everything wrong with the status quo. (Like, Ned is pretty much making the same mistakes with Arya his father did with Lyanna! Yes, he hires a sword teacher for her, but it's Jon who gave Arya the sword that started everything, not Ned. And he clearly expects Arya to more or less grow out of her tomboy phase and 'do her duty'. He doesn't see anything wrong with the fact that she is barred from the Kingsguard, the Citadel or the position of High Septon for simply being a girl. Not to mention the way he seems to more or less regard Bran's life as being over once he can't walk anymore. Again, it's Jon who asks Tyrion to make a saddle for Bran to ride, it doesn't even occur to Ned that Bran might still be able to do normal activities if he has help.)

*There is no question that Robert neglected both his legal and his biological children. But Ned also kinda neglected his, especially the girls. Sansa and Arya are stuck in a very very toxic dynamic of golden child-black sheep, probably created by Septa Mordane and reinforced by Catelyn, but Ned only seems to realize this when he gets sole custody of the girls. Also, the fact that Ned didn't seem to have any plan for Robb and Jon beyond 'future Lord of WF and his right hand' is kinda another black mark against him. One could argue that if Ned had tried to look for a wife for Robb, there would have been no Frey engagement to break and no Red Wedding.

Anyway, yeah, passivity=death IMO.

As for D&D and Dany, I honestly don't think it's that deep. I think they more or less so the Targaryens as bad because Ned was part of a rebellion to despose them, and well, Ned=Good in their eyes. So Dany can't be good. It's also why I think Jon gets sent in exile bc well, Jon is also a Targaryen by birth. We only need the 'pure' Starks at the end of the day, for good to triumph over evil. D&D seem to have a veeeery simplistic worldview, I think even Disney's Descendants would seem too morally grey for them LOL.

So I think the show's downfall was the fact that it was made by two people who seem to want to do straightforward epic fantasy and could not, for the life of them, deal with nuance of any kind.

[ladystoneboobs]

[Jaime, to Brynden Tully:]"I will permit you to take the black. Ned Stark's bastard is the Lord Commander on the Wall." The Blackfish narrowed his eyes. "Did your father arrange for that as well? Catelyn never trusted the boy, as I recall, no more than she ever trusted Theon Greyjoy. It would seem she was right about them both. No, ser, I think not. I'll die warm, if you please, with a sword in hand running red with lion blood." -Jaime VI, aFfC

there's always been some debate about how seriously to take the blackfish's words about jon here, and whether he's actually trying to keep the lannisters in the dark about jon being a possible new kitn according to robb's will. for me, after due consideration, what seals it (but seems to be overlooked whenever this subject comes up) is the reference to theon as equally mistrusted by catelyn. except she never did distrust theon in that way! cat may have found his constant smiling suspicious, but if anything, she trusted theon too much and took the loyalty and obedience of ned's hostage completely for granted.

[Catelyn, to Brienne:]"Bran and Rickon tried to escape, but were taken at a mill on the Acorn Water. Theon Greyjoy has mounted their heads on the walls of Winterfell. Theon Greyjoy, who ate at my table since he was a boy of ten." -Catelyn VII, aCoK

there's no sense of being proved right when she learned all that theon supposedly did at wf, only that he was a member of their household for 10 years, without any mention of his being a hostage from an enemy family as the only reason he lived with them.

and if that's not conclusive enough, let's look back to when cat reunited with robb after ned's arrest while theon was still a member of robb's entourage.

[Catelyn, to Robb, about his leading the northern army:]"No one?" she said. "Pray, who were those men I saw here a moment ago? Roose Bolton, Rickard Karstark, Galbart and Robett Glover, the Greatjon, Helman Tallhart … you might have given the command to any of them. Gods be good, you might even have sent Theon, though he would not be my choice." -Catelyn VIII, aGoT

yeah, she said he wouldn't be her first choice, but still the fact that she presented theon as a viable option at all, not her best suggestion as an advisor imo. can you even imagine foreign hostage theon leading an army of veteran northmen--a number of whom must have fought against balon's first rebellion alongside ned--to save ned? (not to mention that theon was 5yrs older than robb but in no way more experienced as a commander or warrior in any sense, and not any better trained as a leader in his perpetually subordinate captive squire position.) before that, she accepted theon's bs embellishments about ned being a second father to him and knowing his family owed hers a great debt without even a thought of doubt. and when she did argue with robb about sending theon back to the islands it was framed as distrust about balon only, not disputing robb's assertion that theon proved his loyalty by fighting in battle for them and saving bran's life in the wolfswood before that.

in conclusion, any idea that catelyn distrusted theon all along and was only proven right about him without any shock would have to a rewriting of history on her part, of which there's no evidence in her own pov in asos. it's possible she could have presented this false narrative to the blackfish sometime offpage in asos, just like it's possible she wrote letters to him in the vale airing her family's dirty laundry and complaining endlessly about jon's existence without ever mentioning that communication in her own pov, but the simpler and more likely explanation imo is that this discrepancy is bc the blackfish was lying to jaime. esp considering the blackfish was also in robb's inner circle and as both were non-povs all of their convos without catelyn would have to take place offpage moreso than brynden's with catelyn, and that edmure, another tully and the one in riverrun least close to robb, witnessed robb's will, and that sers desmond grell and robin ryger, two long-serving, high-ranking, and trusted riverrun retainers, did take up jaime's offer to go to the wall, which seems an odd choice if the blackfish was indeed wholly against that institution under jon snow's command and presumably would have tried to dissaude his men from joining. and i'd say there's no evidence catelyn ever suspected jon of willingness to work with ned's killers and robb's enemies or even hated him as much as the people who killed ned and twice tried to kill bran. which makes brynden's absolutely wild accusation of jon owing his rise to tywin lannister well beyond anything cat said or thought about jon in her own pov, which only further makes me thinks his words were insincere. (she may, at times, have wanted to believe jon untrustworthy to justify her own feelings about him, but such suspicion was not the source of those feelings. idt she actually needed to see him as a true enemy to dislike him when being ned's (alleged) bastard was enough without any sins of jon's own.)

[valkyrieandstrangeridingaragorn]

I really dislike Disney's new trend of "the girl saves the villain" that's been done with both kylo and loki

I don't even think that's the case with loki but the more i read about how the fandom interprets sylki the more i get this vibe, and while i don't exactly like rey and kylo/ben as a couple i can see how rey may have impacted his choice for redemption, she showed him compassion and had faith in him that he decided to twist to his own good

But in case of sylvie and loki i can't really see how sylvie treats loki any different than the people in his life that made him like that in the first place

I've also seen metas discussing that loki was so attracted to sylvie because she is a braver version of him one that he lacks the strength to be like her and while I don't want to bash sylvie but she is not brave she is vengeful try hard as i can i still can't see a single thing about her that makes her more powerful than other lokis, her backstory is almost the same as every varient in the tva only she is the one that managed to escape in the dumbest way possible? I still don't understand why she wasn't eliminated by the TVA for so long

Ones she escaped she must have had some time to try to figure out how this technology works cause as shown by the show she only spent a couple of hours in the TVA before her escape, and even if she did figure it out and the tva had been hunting her for so long why couldn't they just prune the timeline she hides in and get rid out her?

Thinking about this show hurts my brain tbh, and seeing the two couple compared to each other just made sth break loose in me

The biggest difference for me is Rey is good... but Sylvie is not. I know a lot of people tend to see someone with a "troubled past" and they're super quick to defend and justify the character no matter what they do (WF handles the story beautifully but the amount of fans I've seen justifying Namor really makes my skin crawl), but that's just not the way to go.

In Sylvie's case it's the same as Namor's, what part of her story means she's good? She's seen torching people alive, enchanting both agents and innocents at will, she's completely selfish and everything she does is for her own petty revenge. The only character in the series who never hurts an innocent is Loki. He's the only one.

So to claim that the girl saves the boy it's laughable. That implies the boy is bad but the girl is good, except we know she's not and the same attributes that are condemned in him are praised in her on the basis that it is her doing them.

But to claim that Sylvie is a braver version of him... oh my. How funny. So Classic Loki escaping means he's a coward but when it's her escaping that means she's brave? So brave that her method of violence is enchantment? Don't they see the irony in that? 😂😂

If her actions had been done by Loki they would be against them, they just don't want to admit that because the framing supports that.

PS. I agree with you about Reylo by the way. I'm not a fan, especially when Finn was right there! I loved those 3 characters but the story was so bland... oh well. We'll always have the throne room fight + Finn and Poe flying the tie fighter

[i-love-u-loser]

Something something I know why the movie (at least the animated Netflix one) didn't show the way Grey Beaver originally gave up White Fang but it's still heartbreaking and terrible either way.

In the book he (Beauty Smith) gets Great Beaver addicted to alcohol and turns what was already a harsh and mean man to one that would willingly turn over his wolf dog for more booze when money was gone.

The part that kills me so much in the book is even when turned away the hang of the 'God' who raised him, WF still comes back. Several times until it's beaten into him to leave Grey Beaver alone. And then WF is turned to be trapped in the dog fighting scene. (He later is taken in by a sheriff and gets a happy ending eventually).

In the movie (the animated one on Netflix) Grey Beaver is showed kinder but still tough when he needs to be. He still raises him to be tough and stand his ground.

Grey Beaver sells mittens and gets his money stolen at the end. Which sends him into a panic because how is he supposed to pay to keep his land (which is being sold due to the gold rush and GB just wants to buy the rights to the land so his tribe is not left without a place.)

Obviously I would assume the animated movie didn't want to show the stereotype that comes with what the book originally portrayed which is valid. At the very least the alternate way still makes it heartbreaking to watch.

Also unrelated-- In the movie I have to wonder how the woman picked up on the stick bothering WF. Like it either could have been men or the stick but like it makes me wonder how on earth was she so fast to pick up on it?

[whereareroo]

A STITCH IN TIME

WF THOUGHTS (12/14/23).

Yesterday, we discussed Ukraine and we gave an ethics lesson to the Republicans in the House of Representatives.

While I’m still on my soapbox about Ukraine, let me make one additional suggestion to the Republicans: LISTEN TO YOUR GRANDMOTHERS.

Sooner or later, when giving advice about how to deal with a problem, every grandmother suggests compliance with the old proverb “a stitch in time saves nine.” That proverb must be in the Grandmother Handbook.

From life experience, grandmothers know that it’s best to address problems immediately. If problems aren’t addressed at the earliest possible time, they tend to become bigger problems. A problem that could have been fixed with a single stitch might require nine stitches at a later date.

What does this have to do with Ukraine? I’ll tell you.

As a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (“NATO”)- -the greatest international security organization in history- -America is required to defend any other member that is attacked. If another NATO member is attacked, we would supply that member with huge sums of money and vast quantities of military equipment. We would also send troops to fight in the conflict. Because Ukraine is not a member of NATO, our approach there has been different.

Fourteen NATO countries (Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belarus, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Slovakia) share a border with Russia and/or Ukraine. Under the NATO treaty, we are obligated to defend all 14 of those countries.

All of the experts agree that Ukraine will lose the war if the Republicans in the House block future funding from America. Russia will win, and it will take 100% of Ukraine.

What would happen next? World War III. Putin has repeatedly stated that his goal is to rebuild the old Russian Empire. If he wins in Ukraine, he will try to conquer other countries. He’ll have a bunch of NATO countries to choose from. The likely targets are Georgia, Estonia, and Latvia. Lithuania and Finland are also possible targets.

If Putin attacks any of those NATO countries, all of the other NATO countries (there are 31 of them) will enter the war to fight Russia. Iran and China would probably join with Russia to battle the “evil” West. It would be WWIII.

Right now there is a limited war between Russia and Ukraine. If the Republicans in the House stop funding and thereby allow Russia to win, we’ll soon have WWIII.

When is the best time to deal with this problem? Ask any grandmother. It’s best to focus on the relatively small current war, and to make sure that Ukraine wins that war. If we walk away from the current problem, we’ll soon be spending exponentially more on WWIII- -and in that war we will have boots on the ground and many of our military members won’t come home.

Let me say it a different way. Fully funding Ukraine, and providing whatever military equipment that she needs, is the best path for America. It’s not charity. If we don’t give Ukraine what she needs to win, we’ll be paying exponentially more in the future. Our grandmothers were correct. A stitch in time saves nine.

If they won’t listen to common sense, maybe the Republicans in the House will listen to their grandmothers. Despite all of the pressing issues that must be addressed by Congress, including the Ukraine war and the fact that we’re facing another government shutdown on January 14th, today the Republican leadership in the House decided to begin a long holiday recess and go home until January 9, 2024. Isn’t that unbelievable? When they’re home, I hope they get an earful from their grandmothers.

[goldsrc-hl1]

Don't care the the stuff that isn't RWBY, but the RWBY stuff... so fucking awful...

Literally the entire, and I mean ENTIRE fucking message of the White Fang arc is that Adam doesn't represent the Faunus. He's a false representative. Bad Faunus exist, but they aren't the entire Faunus. Just like every single minority and majority group.

"“As a Jewish person, I stopped watching RWBY around the beginning of s5 when Adam (the main White Fang antagonist) said that the goal of the White Fang was to replace humans in society. It came SO shortly after those riots where people where chanting "Jews will not replace us" and it made me so sick to my stomach to watch a conspiracy theory like that actually play out on screen that I hard stopped watching a show I'd been highkey obsessed with for years.”"

Well first thing is first, Adam isn't related to Judaism in any way. He's connected to the WF plot which is inspired by the American civil rights movement. That is also only Adam's goal, and the entire message of the arc is about how Adam doesn't represent the Faunus.

"“The evilest moment the writers wrote for their literal “minorities are secretly just wanting power over the whites” scapegoat character involves said character revealing he was not only enslaved but also was branded with a cattle prod over his eye.”"

That's, once again, not at all the message. The message is that Adam does not represent all Faunus, just as Wayne Williams doesn't represent all POC.

I don't see what's evil at all about that, he has to have a reason for why he wants revenge.

"“The White Fang is the only organization fighting for the rights of the Faunus, the in-universe minority group meant to be an allegory for poc, and they’re portrayed as ruthless terrorists who are conveniently less white than the privileged minorities who “redeem” them. A majority of the actual poc who are also Faunus have “allusions” to the Jungle Book, and if you know the Jungle Book’s author and the certain other thing he wrote, you’d Barf at how racist that really is. The white comfort is strong in this Texan show. Also, said terrorists in this show are based off the real-world Black Panther Party, which just makes this whole thing feel like a special on Fox News!”"

Once again, wrong. Adam is not fighting for the rights of the Faunus. Adam is fighting for revenge on humanity. He is fighting so he can massacre and enslave an entire race, in retaliation for how they have treated the Faunus.

Sienna, who actually is fighting for Faunus rights, is not portrayed as a ruthless terrorist. She's not portrayed as evil or being in the wrong. She's not portrayed as being good or in the right, either. She's portrayed very neutrally. RWBY lets you decide what you think about her. I wish it didn't do that and made her out to be good, but neutral isn't racist.

The author of the Jungle Book is racist, not RWBY for using allusions to the Jungle Book.

Sienna is sure as hell based on the Black Panthers but she isn't evil. Adam on the other hand is.

"“You know that trope? That one trope *Everyone* hates? The trope in which a well meaning antagonist to our heroes, one looking out for the good of a certain community, suddenly does something horrible and drastic to make not only them, but the ideology they stand for the most villainous of all?”"

White Fang doesn't even fit this trope at all cause Adam isn't well meaning or looking out for the good of the Faunus. He wants revenge on humans, he wants enslavement and genocide. I understand why he wants that, but it's still evil. He's an anti-villain in that sense, he's evil but it's very understandable why.

Adam is not looking out for the good of the Faunus either. He sends Faunus to die by the hundreds in the Mountain Glenn tunnels and instead of confronting Cinder about how a ton of his men, all Faunus, died fighting a human cause, he straight up says:

Mercury: Yeah. A lot of Faunus didn't make it out the tunnels. You still think the White Fang's gonna listen to us?

Adam: No, but they'll listen to me.

He doesn't care how many Faunus have to die, he wants revenge. This shows that his quest for vengeance is motivated because of how he personally was treated, and reasonably so. He literally got branded and enslaved.

Sienna, who is the one actually looking out for the Faunus, doesn't do anything evil.

WELCOME

TO THE FIRST ROUND OF THE COPAGANDA CLOBBERFEST!

“You know that trope? That one trope *Everyone* hates? The trope in which a well meaning antagonist to our heroes, one looking out for the good of a certain community, suddenly does something horrible and drastic to make not only them, but the ideology they stand for the most villainous of all?”

NOW IS THE TIME TO BATTLE THEM OUT! Like Ken dolls, fighting for survival! Like your Polly pockets discarded in the closet, we’ll see which of these bitches jumped that slippery slope harder! Whose character did numbers on y’all, and blew up a bunch of grandmas and babies and hospitals with it!

ROUND ONE

SQUEALER from SHIN SEKAI YORI vs THE WHITE FANG from RWBY

Squealer propaganda (TW for disturbing themes, as well as spoilers for the anime)

“he is a human man who has descended from a long line of humans who were genetically engineered, tortured, studied like literal rodents, selectively bred, and worse by a population of other humans with psychic powers. to show that he is in the wrong, he slaughters the elderly, infirm, children, murders two 14 year olds in particular and uses their child as a living weapon, and lobotomizes his mother in an effort to be recognized as human and treated better than literal garbage.”

White Fang propaganda (TW for Racism, Branding, Slavery, Antisemitism):

“As a Jewish person, I stopped watching RWBY around the beginning of s5 when Adam (the main White Fang antagonist) said that the goal of the White Fang was to replace humans in society. It came SO shortly after those riots where people where chanting "Jews will not replace us" and it made me so sick to my stomach to watch a conspiracy theory like that actually play out on screen that I hard stopped watching a show I'd been highkey obsessed with for years.”

“The evilest moment the writers wrote for their literal “minorities are secretly just wanting power over the whites” scapegoat character involves said character revealing he was not only enslaved but also was branded with a cattle prod over his eye.”

“The White Fang is the only organization fighting for the rights of the Faunus, the in-universe minority group meant to be an allegory for poc, and they’re portrayed as ruthless terrorists who are conveniently less white than the privileged minorities who “redeem” them. A majority of the actual poc who are also Faunus have “allusions” to the Jungle Book, and if you know the Jungle Book’s author and the certain other thing he wrote, you’d Barf at how racist that really is. The white comfort is strong in this Texan show. Also, said terrorists in this show are based off the real-world Black Panther Party, which just makes this whole thing feel like a special on Fox News!”

“The first indigenous-coded character and she’s a terrorist. Like what real life native Americans are to this day dubbed as for simply wanting their rights.”

Always feel free to rb with more propaganda :)

[kob131]

https://www.reddit.com/r/RWBYcritics/comments/yx3pj2/what_if_the_white_fang_had_been_written_as_the/

What if the White Fang had been written as the good guys?

It’d be far more generic and worse for the show?

I’ve been sort of entertaining this idea for a while now. Knowing all the unfortunate baggage and mishandling involved with the White Fang, why not just. Make them the good guys?

Because the actions that drove the White Fang to villainy, the abuse and violence of others, is what also drove Cinder and Salem to violence? And that making the WF good guys but condemning Cinder and Salem is a glaring example of that Protagonist Centered Morality that you ‘critics’ say you hate oh so much?

Say an official rewrite or reboot of RWBY exists in the future - if those two words rub you the wrong way then whatever, basically a clean slate or re-adaptation of RWBY - the fact stands that the White Fang need a heavy revision.

Why? Because a bunch of people who are either being contrarian or want to feel validated keep making catty remarks while making themself look ignorant?

Because that’s about 90% of White Fang criticism. ‘You didn’t do exactly what I wanted so I will misrepresent everything you say out of spite’ and ‘I want to feel like my bloodlust is morally justified.’

People are smart enough at this point to know that you shouldn’t be villainising the oppressed group trying to fight back against a world that is actively pushing them out - if anything the SDC should be more of a antagonistic faction, kind of like the Shinra corporation from Final Fantasy 7 which RWBY is clearly heavily based on, what with Dust and Materia and all that. But that still leaves you with the White Fang and Blake’s arc to write.

Isn’t it a huge compliant that RWBY ‘rips off’ other media? So making it more like something everyone says RWBY rips off just going to make things worse? Also, just because the trope was done a certain way you like doesn’t mean every single execution of the trope needs to be that way.

At any point- You kind of run into a small problem here. And that’s that the WF were committing acts of terror, even in your rewrite. Like, this is not up for debate. It doesn’t matter how terrible of a life you lead or how abused your people are- you do not get to use fear and violence to control people. That causes far bigger issues in 

This has been a large headache point for anyone trying to figure out how to revise RWBY’s more fundamental writing flaws, because the WF are such a prominent antagonist faction throughout the Beacon arc and they were such a problem that CRWBY had no choice but to sweep them under the rug entirely after Adam’s death. But hear me out here. Do we really need to latch onto that idea so hard? That the White Fang need to be villains?

Hear that, future writers? If you resolve an arc or plot point, you have to constantly bring it up again and again and again and again and again and again or else it’s ‘sweeping it under the rug!’

And again, you can’t really excuse the White Fang without excusing Cinder and Salem. They were also abused and treated poorly, almost like objects with their human rights violated. But the thing about RWBY is that it’s a story with themes of heroism and sticking to your principles. With each time a character rejecting said principles being punished (yes, even Team RWBY).

Like, imagine a RWBY where the White Fang are shown as terrorists on TV and in newspapers throughout Vale, but when you actually meet them, they’re a ragtag band of freedom fighters. They’re like Avalanche from FF7; the freedom fighters from Sonic SatAM; you start to realise that they’re the good guys. They’re the embodiment of Chaotic Good or at worst, Chaotic Neutral.

You know, good guys who blow up train cars full of innocent employees without remorse or regret!

You can’t really escape this- From all the way back to the Black Trailer, the WF were bad guys. It is built into RWBY’s foundation and you cannot remove that without rewriting the basics of RWBY. And that point, what makes you any different than The Last Airbender movie?

Putting aside Adam, Ilia and others simply because they’re all supplemental to Blake’s arc, where does Miss Belladonna herself fit into this?

If we want to keep her backstory as a person atoning for a dark past, then the WF would be more grey in response, but still not outright evil. Revolution is not without sacrifice, and when you’re fighting for drastic societal change, conflict is inevitable. While they may fight for a good cause, not everyone has the will or strength to fight, to endure the monumental societal backlash and opposition. Perhaps Blake was one of those people - jaded and burnt out by the never-ending struggle to be heard, losing hope that change would ever be possible - so she runs away in hopes of finding herself, only to be scooped up into Beacon instead.

Because as we all know- Revolution has never caused any problems or made anything worse.

... Hey, Sytokun. Ever heard of the French Revolution? Even if you haven’t, you’ve felt it’s effects. It promoted things like the abolishment of slavery, equal rights and human rights. It was the foundation for many civil rights movements because of the ideals and philosophies the french philosophers at the time preached. And it can be considered the sister revolution of the American Revolution.

It can also be seen as the failed version of the American Revolution. Because as it turned out, the rebels at the time weren’t squeaky clean. The famous saying ‘let them eat cake’ was attributed to Marie Anttonete who was a royal at the time. However, as it turns out, it was actually closer to propaganda against the royal family to stir the people into acting. And no, that’s not the only indication of its failure.

See, the peroid after the Revolution was called the ‘Reign of Terror’ for good reason. Former rebels became leaders and, upon attaining power, started purging anyone and everyone who disagreed with them. One of the most famous being Maximillien Robespierre, a leader of the Revolution who was obviously far too radical to be trusted but was elected anyway in part due to his intense fanaticism, A fanaticism that morphed him into a narcissistic tyrant who tried to make a cult around himself, progressing from killing innocent nobles to other rebels who opposed him to the people he claimed to have cared about.

Luckily, the Reign only lasted about 10 years. Unforunately, what came after was the tyrannical rule of Napoleon. And by Napoleon’s end, the French royalty came back into power and was seated on the throne once again, only to have its power undercut by a more peaceful group of politicians limiting its power as time went on. So basically- the French Revolution was about unseating the royal family. It ended up setting the stage for two consecutive tyrants and ended with the royal family coming back. With its goals accomplished far more peacefully in the future, with nothing to show for the French but a pile of dead bodies.

And honestly, nothing embodies the failure of this revolution than its symbol- the guillotine. You know, the guillotine. The symbol of bloody, frenzied and righteous vengence against anyone the person deems is corrupt and above them. An object used as shorthand for gleeful bloodlust. What you might not know is that this object was made to be an equal and merciful method of execution. Its inventors made it specifically so that human error and bias could be excluded from the act of execution and was promoted as a way to embody the French Revolution’s ideals of equality, that both the poor and rich die equally and mercifully. Then it was used as symbol of fear and oppression, corrupting its intended purpose due to the flaws of the rebels who became tyrants.

So why did I bring you through this long tangent? Because if you were observant, you would notice similarities between the violent White Fang and the French Revolution. How they devolved into bloodlust and violence before ultimately accomplishing nothing. Because this is what happens when people compromise their principles- they keep doing so until there’s nothing left.

And because revolutions and drastic societal change are not inherently POSITIVE like your post implies. While they can be like the American Revolution- that was led by a group of people who stuck to their principles and knew when to end. 

That’s why I love RWBY- it has the balls to admit that sticking to your principles is the way to go. Something your rewrite lacks.

What would she feel, fighting for the side that, while may not have oppressed the Faunus directly, have remained ambivalent and blind to their struggles? Hunters who claim to fight for human and Faunus alike, but who clearly have more humans in their ranks and would choose to rather save a prosperous human city over a struggling Faunus slum? Would living among humans change her outlook on the fight, where she’s torn between reclaiming the hard fight to preserve her own heritage, vs. a relatively comfortable new identity, but one that forces her to assimilate with humankind and live on their terms? Is there a way for her to reconcile these two sides of herself, these two families she’s now a part of?

I would like to point out that no Huntsman in the show aside from the widely hated Cardin has ever shown a bias against the Fanaus. Hell, if Ruby and Yang’s reaction to Cardin bullying Velve, Tuskon owning a bookstore and Qrow’s comment about the discrimination of Fanaus in WOR is any indication- Fanaus equality is probably a virtue in Vale society. Unlike in Mistral or Atlas, So you’d need to fundamentally rewrite huge chunks of RWBY OUTSIDE of just the WF just to get this to work.

Almost like you don’t know what you’re doing...

But let’s not exclude other possibilities too. Assuming we have a Chaotic Good WF, what if Blake was actually proud to be part of the Fang, and enrolls into Beacon as an unashamed member? Her conflicts would then come from the people around her struggling to accept that - how would Weiss work with someone whose group keeps sabotaging their trains? How would Beacon deal with a public member of the Faunus liberation movement? Would some staunchly oppose her enrolment, while others see it as a possible bridge to better relations with the Faunus? How many Faunus would be inspired by Blake and look up to her as a Faunus-born Hunter, while others would decry and dismiss her as just a hollow figurehead and Remnant’s equivalent of a diversity hire?

We could also have the White Fang be nothing but a group of sadistic monsters, going around and murdering innocent people for the sake of making the show feel darker and more dramatic.

None of this is inherently better or even good.

When seeing other rewrites or revisions of RWBY, I still mainly see people trying to work with the WF as given in canon. They still keep the activism turned to violence and extremism. The WF and thus a majority of Faunus are still portrayed as terrorists and cannon fodder for fights. But what if there’s a better way of going about all this?

Why is it better? I’ve already demonstrated that portraying revolution as inherently good isn’t better because it’s a neutral thing in real life. And that the WF as it stands reinforces the theme of principles and heroism. I’d say your version makes it stand out and feel less cohesive.

Again, this usually happens because the person wants Adam to be a good guy or a (not really anti-)hero, Or that they believe that violence for their cause is good and want the show to validate them. Neither of which I accept.

In the end, this is just an interesting thought exercise,-

It’s not really a thought exercise if it’s portrayed as definitively better.

As Blake has said in the manga: “Fangs of pure white need not shed blood.” Those words and the imagery they evoke have always stuck with me when I think about the White Fang and how Blake could have been written, and gives such a valuable insight to why the group was named the way it was.

What if they had never strayed from that name? What if they had not been treated by the story as just faceless enemies to mow down by the dozens… but as people from the very beginning?

You know, I find this awfully funny. Because uh-

Them fangs looking pretty white.

You try citing a non-canon manga but completely miss the symbolism behind the Grimm masks they use. That in their bloodlust and self righteousness, the White Fang has become no different than the creatures of Grimm. Their pain and suffering don’t matter because their actions (terrorism and mass murder) just can’t be excused. It doesn’t matter if the faceless WF member the team is facing was ostracized by society for something they couldn’t control-

They’re still trying to kill them and everyone they care about. All because they fell to their flaws. Just like Cinder. Just like Salem. And just like so many revolutionaries.

[jackoshadows]

Can Robb disinherit Sansa? Does he have the power to do that? I think not. I think Robb just legitimized Jon and left it at that and this could be why the will is not going to end up being a big deal after all. Bran, Arya, Rickon, Sansa are all alive and will still be ahead of Jon.

We really don't know exactly what Robb has put down in his will until the next book comes out because there are so many variables and unknowns that GRRM has kept deliberately vague to throw in those twists and turns and keep things surprising. It's hard to guess here.

Can Robb disinherit Sansa? Can people be disinherited in Westeros? I think so.

We do have the case of Rohanne Webber who was threatened with disinheritance by her father:

Before his death, Lord Wyman attempted to marry Rohanne to his castellan, Ser Lucas Inchfield, but she refused him. As such, Wyman stated in his will that Rohanne had two years to marry after his death. If she would remain unwed, Coldmoat would be granted to her cousin, Ser Wendell Webber.

The Targaryens did this as well:

According to Archmaester Gyldayn, Princess Rhaenyra herself objected to the match as well, but agreed when King Viserys I threatened to appoint her half-brother Aegon as his heir over her if she would not wed Laenor.

It’s also been said that Aerys II was threatening to pass over Rhaegar and his line and disinherited Aegon and Rhaenys after Rhaegar’s death and named Viserys his heir instead. That’s why Daenerys would have more of a claim to the Iron Throne than Jon Snow even if he was trueborn - because Rhaegar and his line were disinherited.

Randyll Tarly threatened to disown Samwell Tarly.

I think Robb disinherited Sansa in his will precisely because of all the uncertainties surrounding the situation and the desire to keep WF out of Lannister hands. Robb and Catelyn were adamant that the Lannisters should never get the North.

By law Sansa is next in line of succession, so Winterfell and the north would pass to her." His mouth tightened. "To her, and her lord husband. Tyrion Lannister. I cannot allow that. I will not allow that. That dwarf must never have the north."  - Catelyn, ASoS

Considering this, I doubt Robb is going to leave it open to the risk of Jon refusing his offer or being unable to accept it. It’s not just enough to legitimize Jon Snow - can Jon actually leave the Night’s watch, even if a King asks him to? That’s a question that’s never been answered before and another variable. Disinheriting Sansa and leaving the North without a Stark heir would put pressure on the other houses/clans to make Jon King.

Now, a resurrected Jon may get out of his NW oaths because he was dead - but Robb does not know about any of this when he drafted his will. And if Jon could leave the NW, would he? We see him refuse Stannis’ offer because of his NW oaths and allegiance to the Old Gods. Would Robb leave that to chance?

Do bastards have any rights? What about bastards who have been  legitimized, do they go in at the end after the trueborn kids, or  according to birth order? What about widows? And what about the will of  the deceased? Can a lord disinherit one son, and name a younger son as  heir? Or even a bastard? There are no clear cut answers - GRRM

In the one case we know of where a bastard was legitimized while his trueborn siblings were still alive, a legitimized Addam Velaryon became the heir to Driftmark ahead of his younger trueborn brother Joffrey.

But again, GRRM says these cases are uncertain. What if the Lannisters argued that legitimized Jon Stark should go in at the end after the trueborn kids and therefore comes after Sansa Lannister? Why would Robb take that risk?

It’s easier for Robb to simply disinherit Sansa, rather than take the chance that the Lannisters/Tyrion wiggle their way in somehow.

So Sansa has two choices here. If she gains control of the Vale and it’s army, she can attack the current KITN/QITN/Lord/Lady of Winterfell and win the North that way. Or she can go to King’s Landing, petition the high septon to have her marriage annulled and then make a case to the current ruler of the North - whomever that maybe - to negate her disinheritance.

Or Tyion will have to die. This is not happening - he is 100% surviving the books and dying of old age in his bed.

If Sansa is still married to Tyrion, it will be hard for her to find support among the Northern houses. The North really loathes the Lannisters. Unlike in the show, in the books The North remembers. And even Stannis Baratheon has vowed that while he is alive, Sansa will never get Winterfell and Jon Snow is actively supporting him and aiding his campaign to win the North.

“Lady Lannister, you mean? I promise you, that will not happen whilst I live, Lord Snow.”  - Jon, ADwD

Apart from Jon, the North have other Starks they can rally behind - Arya and Rickon. We already see some Northern houses rising up against the Boltons in Arya’s name. I doubt Ramsay Bolton will survive the next book. Meanwhile, Manderly has thrown his support behind Rickon Stark because he has a better claim to WF than Arya and therefore undermines the Bolton claim to Winterfell via marriage to Arya Stark.

Now, Bran, Arya and Rickon have no problems with Robb’s will because Robb assumed they were dead when he drafted the decree. They become default heirs by simply turning up alive.

Of course, then the question becomes does Jon Stark - as the eldest Stark - come ahead of Bran Stark or behind Arya Stark? Can the will be discounted because Bran, Rickon and Arya are alive? Maybe, but according to Catelyn, once Jon is legitimized, it can’t be taken back. So what happens then?

Robb’s will and the spanner it throws into the works is why it's possible that there will be some discord among the Starks in the last two books. I don’t see Jon and Arya fighting. But as for the rest? All of GRRM's main houses/families have conflicts among members and I don't see why the Starks have to be the exception.

If the decree is relevant at all, it will come into play in the next book with Howland Reed/Maege Mormont and Northern plotting, fake Arya and Rickon, resurrected Jon and possibly Bran making it back south of the wall by the end of TWoW.

[crimsonxe]

I didn't bring it back, disphit McGee over there was the one that dragged it back up. Like you'll note that what I said was aimed at the one that reblogged. Nah, profanity isn't going anywhere and never will; that's just part of me & where I grew up. Maybe grow up a bit to not take issue with just words.

Oh I've seen the far right incel sexist chud bigots; I've seen women that disgustingly parrot the exact same sexist & queerphobic bullshit that they do as well as double standards nonstop; I've seen far left types that bitch that the show isn't some leftist propaganda story as well as entitled/spoiled ass types that'd rather have a rushed fucking LGBT+ pair than a properly cared for slowburn; I've seen the ones that simp for Ironwood, Adam, or even Sun; I've seen the ones salty over Clover/Qrow; etc. All that either comes down to it not fitting their headcanons or fanon; or going w/ a ship that isn't their preference. Ones that fail at knowing the story, characters, relationships, or themes of the show.

No, they actually didn't. Pyrrha had to go in order to have a threat to the main crew, because of how strong she was; which would become even more had she gained half-maiden powers. On top of that her death and Penny's both hit Ruby JUST AS FUCKING HARD as Jaune. Pyrrha died being a badass self-sacrificing (cause I'm 99% sure she went into the fight with Cinder thinking she had no damn chance) fucking heroic warrior trying to stop the big bad. That wasn't for Jaune, it was her doing it for her school and everyone. The way your ass frames it she died while mentoring him, when that's completely not the case. Oh and just to cover the bases, she's also fucking allowed to fall for the guy too and that isn't bad writing because its not to your preference. If that's where that tone was tapping into.

Adam served exactly the amount he should and was tied more into Blake's story than the WF, the only ones bitching about that side of things are incels and simps that had come up with headcanons for him. Your ass doing a "I can understand where they're coming from" is just more showing how you don't have a clue on character & story.

Yeah, I'll laugh my fucking ass off at the notion that Weiss and Ruby have more goddamn chemistry; because WHAT? No, they fucking don't at all. But that does show a bias.

Once again blame dipshit McGee who drug this back up with a reblog. The PoC characters are just fine, could've been earlier but still just damn fine as they are given the inspiration for the show.

Dumbass I'm not in the camp of trying to get your dipshit asses onboard with the show, that's for other people to do. I'm more in FAFO camp, where people that talk shit fuck around and find out via having their shit torn apart. Your shit actually holds weight? It'll hold and not be touched, if its biased or just flatout bullshit it'll be shredded apart. Not a fucking soul is obligated to roll over and let your asses spread misinformation.

YOUR BITCH FUCKING ASS LITTLE BUDDY REBLOGGED ME SHITHEAD. I said my goddamn piece and let it lie for however long, then someone decided to drag it back up where I tore into THEM as the reblogging person. But do keep trying to play your broken ass pity violin and once again go fuck your damn self. I'll go back to my Fallout 4 game

Say you never watched RWBY without actually saying you never watched RWBY.

Aromancy: "Wasted potential"

And thus you speak the same as Hbomb...meaningless lies with misinformation. Poor soul, who spreads lies happily to hate.

I watched up to about halfway through Season 4. Season 3 ended on a high point that had me excited for more, but basically nothing happened afterwards and I got bored and dropped it. I say the same thing as Hbomberguy because I agree with him; the show is an attempt at anime made by people who enjoy the superficial aspects of anime but fail to look beneath the surface to examine the themes.

Monty's fight scenes were excellent (and even after he died -rest in peace -the fights continued to be excellent; Pyrrha vs. Mercury is probably my favorite of the whole series), but his unwillingness to work hand-in-hand with the writers in charge of providing context let the whole show down.

I haven't seen past season 4 personally, but I've heard many RWBY fans disparaging the series since, especially Season 8, and I have no reason to doubt their testimony.

[oddlyhale]

Why Twiins' Video Doesn't Work (For Me.)

While I've never been thoroughly invested in Adam, as I am with James, I do see that there are major problems with the video itself. Even for someone like me who got into the FNDM pretty late and had to rewatch all the volumes to catch up, something about Adam's character never sat right with me.

What I wanted to talk about is how Adam's character feels trapped in a limbo of what was V1-V3, as well as the Black Trailer. We have no idea what to think about him, and so we have to grasp for clues and straws to make sense of him. It's the same thing Twiins does in her video - grasp for clues and straws that make something coherent.

In fact, I'd wager that all the characters had no identity throughout V1-V3. We hardly know anything about them, because they were constantly side-lined to give other Team McGees spotlight. Team RWBY didn't do anything remarkable either. Especially not Blake.

Remember, the writers said that V4 was where the real story began. So, does this mean everybody before V4 is irrelevant? I certainly hope not, and I don't think the writers wanted it that way. But then again, these are people who never watch what they say, so how can I trust them when they changed Adam's characterization into crazy ex? I can't.

When we arrived at V4, there was a drastic change in the air. Now, this was where Monty had passed, so of course, the writing would be immensely different without him around.

Ruby, Weiss, and Yang became different. Ruby became an ignorant little angel, Weiss became even more blank, and Yang just became a huge bitch.

Adam's character completely changed after V3. I am sorry to say it, but it's the truth. There was set up for something about Adam and the WF in the very beginning, only for it to suddenly do a switcheroo once V3 was done. He went from being adamant about Faunus rights to being anal about his stupid ex.

And Blake became even more irrelevant than before.

That's the thing. Blake became so irrelevant that her story only seemed to matter when it had anything to do with Adam or the White Fang, or both. If Adam revolved around Blake to be relevant, then Blake's character also suffered by having her existence revolve around him.

When Adam died, Blake became a nothing character. A filler character that should belong in the background. She just became unimportant, and the funny thing is, the only time Blake is deemed important enough is when it has to do with Yang. Blake's character growth didn't change at all. She just put her burden on somebody else after Adam died.

If it weren't for Yang, Blake would be incredibly useless and scrutinized to no end.

Twiins claims that it was Monty's vision to make Adam a certain way, but the thing is - she also doesn't know that. Nobody truly knows, and Shane's letter is still being scrutinized to this day. Nobody will ever have solid proof that things were meant to be this way for Adam.

And anyway, how does the Yang v Adam fight have anything to do with his relationship with Blake? What if she was prompted to attack him because he was hurting, idk, Ruby or Weiss, or just a random victim? Is she in love with them, or is she saving them to save them? Or, did Adam corner Yang and she was prompted to defend herself? WE DON'T KNOW.

Not to mention, the video just focuses strongly on Blake's relationship with Adam. Twiins stated that Adam started with this, "I hate all humans," characterization, and I do believe that's what made people drawn in. He's a freedom fighter using violence to get equality. Blake was just an accessory to him and his story. I wouldn't be surprised if Adam never cared about Blake and it was all one-sided.

Everybody loves a villain that fights for the right things. I mean look at me - I love Ironwood. It's more than likely that fans found interest in Adam for taking on such a task that Blake didn't want to take on. Blake certainly stopped giving a shit about the WF and Faunus Rights after a while, as did the writing. Blake just handed the problem over to her parents and Ilia and skipped away with her girlfriend to do this stupid world-saving mission.

It's what's so frustrating, too. Adam seemed to be the only one speaking for the Faunus and WF. Blake certainly didn't. Adam was the only one doing remotely anything for his rights. Blake seemed to of accepted this passively racist society, hence why she let Cordovin slide with that racist remark. Had to give Weiss Savior a chance to glow and not the Faunus girl? The Faunus girl who's been "preaching" for her rights, but lets somebody else do the talking for her?

BTW let's not forget that Robyn is also being a racist shit towards Marrow. She called him "Wags." That's a big no-no to the Faunus people, that's a slur in their world. But, we don't talk about that...

The writers admitted that they had no idea what to do with the Faunus arc anymore, so they shelved it. This is why Adam suffers as a character because the writers had no idea what to do with this incredibly sensitive topic anymore. They created this arc and they - once again - dug themselves into a hole they had made and wondered why they can't get out.

And that's the big problem with the video. It's all cherry-picking. I would know - I am the cherry harvester of nitpicking.

[crazywolf828]

Someone argued with me that Yang isn't the type to put others before herself like? Have we been watching the same show??

There's a lot of examples, but I'm going to give four of the biggest (in my opinion)

When Yang lost her arm. Y'all knew it would be on here, but she straight up fired in without a single thought as to what could happen to her. It was obvious by the way Adam's dressed he's not just a normal WF member, he has some status which means his more powerful than those she's faced in the past. Up to that point the only real enemies that Yang alone had faced was Neo, and she would have died if Raven hadn't stepped in. Even still she fucking fires in and goes for it, despite what could happen to her.

When Yang literally jumped in a fucking Ursa's mouth. So this was in this character short where her and Ruby were training (before they went to Beacon) but an Ursa crashes the party. Yang manages to hold it off pretty well for a while but gets hit hard and is out for a bit, that's when the Ursa notices Ruby who doesn't have her weapon. Yang sees the Ursa charge towards Ruby and literally jumps into its jaw and it breaks her aura, then throwing her into a tree. She uses her semblance and vaporizes it and all's well that ends well, but like. She didn't give it a second thought before protecting her sister by doing something that could have killed her if it decided to hold on longer after it broke her aura.

This one might get a bit of debate but I don't care tbh. When Yang was about to fight a whole fucking bandit camp because they captured Weiss. I say debate because technically Weiss was helping her out, it wasn't just her, but this one is a different type of sacrifice than just jumping in front of an enemy. She needs Raven's semblance to get to Ruby, but she knows the likelihood of getting help after beating up her entire tribe is pretty low. But she chooses Weiss anyway, she chooses to help Weiss. Yang knows she can still find Ruby, it'll just be a hell of a lot harder. But they imprisoned her teammate, her family, how could she not stand up for them?

And as you probably expected, the last one is Yang taking the hit from Neo. This one is pretty similar to number two, she doesn't think, she acts. Yang notices Neo before anyone else and her first instinct is to protect Ruby before she could get hit, so once again she fires in and it destroys her aura. Even if she didn't fall, she managed to stay on the platform, she would still have to fight Cinder and Neo with no aura, which means minimal use of her semblance. You could also argue if she took a second to think, she could have blocked the hit with her right arm, like she did with Adam at the waterfall, but she doesn't.

Listen, there's a lot more smaller examples I didn't include, such as sticking up for the faunus in the crater who were accepting people from Mantle despite them being extremely ungrateful.

My point is, while every character wants to stick up for their friends, it's Yang's first instinct. She is a protector, it's just her nature. She doesn't think, she acts on instinct as opposed to someone like Weiss who would find the logical option, or Blake who would look around her surroundings to try and find the best route to escape an enemy (minus when Yang fell lol).

Yang doesn't think about herself when she goes into battle, whether she realizes it or not, it's self sacrificing.

[bonesandthebees]

Vigilante time. You are right, crimeboys as vigilantes are underrated while it is the best dynamic for them. And it’s properly set up because Wilbur has been mentioned to always try and find the way to get the least amount of casualties. Meanwhile, Tommy has his new moral compass where suddenly everyone is a person and people shouldn't be hurt. It works out well.

Second detail I noticed. Wilbur doesn’t make any decisions. I’m assuming because he’s so used to not being listened to that he just stopped bothering and he has yet to relearn to make decisions or put his foot down. But he always lets Tommy make the decisions. Which might be genuine care and not wanting to make decisions for him because that’s what he always experienced. Also Tommy was clearly very mad about not getting to make decisions or not being asked his opinion. Maybe it’s all of them.

But Wilbur doesn’t decide to move out, even though he might want to too. Wilbur doesn’t bring up doing more, even though he might want to. Wilbur doesn’t decide to go to dinner with Techno and Phil, even though he might want to. It’s just interesting.

Lastly, Sapnap has some sort of deal with the syndicate, right? Like either the syndicate is holding something over his head so they can end fights. Or it’s a mutual thing where both sides can decide a fight is over. Probably the first. Maybe the threat is actually starting to kill heroes. He also seems to be the only one who knows about it. So maybe they fixed it via quackity.

-🌲

YEAHHHH VIGILANTE CRIMEBOYS it just made the most sense to me with the way their characters both panned out throughout this entire fic. I love me some villain wilbur but wf!wilbur... no he doesn't want to do that anymore. and now he doesn't have to!

yeah wilbur not making any decisions was very intentional on my end. it's a combination of the fact that he wants to let tommy make decisions because tommy was denied his ability to make decisions for such a long time, so it really means a lot to him to be able to make his own choices, but also wilbur just being familiar with not making decisions for himself. one of his biggest flaws in wf is that he doesn't really make a lot of choices for himself, and simply accepts his situation the way it is. tommy is his catalyst for realizing he doesn't have to accept things as they are, but he still has a tendency to follow tommy's lead (although he'll eventually get better about it).

and tommy is trying to leave space open for wilbur to make choices. specifically when talking to techno and phil, at one point he says "I don't speak for Wilbur, but-" he wants to leave his brother the option to make his own decisions. and actually, wilbur does make a decision in this chapter! he says he's going to give phil and techno his new phone number before tommy does. that's a decision he makes for himself. it's a really tiny moment, but it was very intentional that he said that first before tommy decided to do the same. baby steps, y'know?

while the syndicate and sapnap don't have a flat out deal, they do have a mutual understanding. the syndicate doesn't want to hurt hellion specifically because of how he's kept the secret about tommy's involvement in dream's death. so when fights seem to be lasting too long, usually it needs to be cut short. the understanding is essentially "we won't hurt you if you don't hurt us." it was never explicitly said, but it's very much just an unsaid understanding they have with one another

[rwby-sk]

If RWBY were to get a Reboot, what are some changes you'd want for Jaune and Neo and what are some changes you wouldn't want? (I'm speaking figuratively, not saying I want an actual reboot to happen rn)

Like if I did an AU fic but made all of my dream changes? Oh this is a lot of pressure... Of course I know RWBY's story has grown as it has been going, so obviously the gift of hindsight helps in general here

-

Looking back, this is mainly plot points. very few about Jaune or Neo. they’re doing alright right now 

I guess I'll break it down by arc?

- Opening / worldbuilding / meeting characters Vol.1 and Vol.2 I probably wouldn't change too much. Everything was set up pretty well. Nice and slow, we get hints and clues when we need them. Maybe a few more episodes to get a real sense for the "Beacon days" as they all become friends. Maybe a bit more of Jaune, Ruby, and Yang's home lives? Addressing that the White fang we see is 100% Adam's splinter group, and not the organization as a whole. I know that was Salem/Cinder's point, to divide humanity, but like, let's not ruin this group fighting for civil rights right away, huh? Blake can be a part of the original WF still, looking into Adam's group for Sienna. That'd be cool

- Tournament Arc Vol.3 Again, this was done really really well. Everything was set up as we needed it. Introducing the maidens was cool. Maybe a few more hints that Ozpin is older than he seems would be nice. Or that he isn't the one with all of the answers. He seems infallible and just until vol.6, I think foreshadowing that he knows he can't beat Salem would have been cool. I also wish Pyrrha didn't have to die here. Like, maybe take her out of the story, take away all of her powers/aura or scare her into never traveling to Anima. But I'd love it so much more if she didn't die. Penny's death would have at least been made right in Vol.7 so that could stay if it has too. But like. Can we keep Pyrrha alive please?

- The world is bigger than you realize Vol.4 and Vol.5 More time in general. I wish Vol.4 was twice as long. I want to see everything. RNJR in Anima, Weiss in Atlas, Blake at home, Yang healing. I want to see May and Winter around Atlas. i want to see Yang getting used to her new arm and how it impacts her, and how everyone that stayed behind in Vale reacted/moved on afterwards. I want to see that year long trek across a continent! Of course I want Neo back in Vol.4 too. If she wanted revenge on Little Red this much, now's the time! Cinder only popped up in Anima (she was staying in Grimm-hell castle with Salem) until the battle at Haven, so that's why Neo only pops up after. She was tracking Cinder, not Ruby. But I digress. I need Neo to sort out her issues with RNJR, then move on so she can help Jaune fight cinder at Haven. we have a schedule to keep! Also, more secret Qrow helping them while they don't even realize. Make him scare off bandits while the kids sleep. Pay their way at an Inn when they run out of money. Give us more bird dad

- Gaining Knowledge Vol.6 More backstories now. We're just going through Argus to Atlas. Give us filler. Cinder's backstory, Neo's backstory, Emerald's, Oscar's, everyone! If you didn't attend Beacon, you get an episode of show-n-tell so we know who you are! Maybe make the Brothers have better motives? Like, their lesson to Salem is so mussed up. This whole world is just her eternal hell. She learns nothing from this. And for a God so upset about 'balance' he sure did kill everyone super fast (Is it too late to be selfish and say that Roman and Neo should have Peter Pan and Tinkerbell allusions? Because I need to drop that in here. So that Neo can fly to Atlas instead of Maria. I love the old crazy lady though) Speaking of which, give us a young Qrow flashback of him looking up to the grimm reaper!!!

- Isnt America Atlas super fascist great? Vol.7 and Vol.8 Yes hello. Winter is actually an undercover Happy Huntress who is dating May. Maybe a cool flashback to that. Clover and Qrow can still flirt, but like, make it gayer but also make Clover less blind to how bad Atlas is. Maybe let him be stabbed, but again, don't kill him. We can hurt Qrow just as badly by putting his boyfriend in the hospital. More downtime in Atlas. Let these kids be CHILDREN for ten minutes!! Let them run around, go on dates, get into trouble, whatever Gotta fix the Vol.7 ending if Neo is pro-RWBY now. No one to help Cinder. She's all alone. Maybe Neo needed to help Cinder to show Cinder she isn't strong enough to do things on her own and needs allies. Which then becomes a fatal flaw when cinder betrays Neo in Vol.8 that she can't ever trust anyone enough to have those allies that make her stronger, the way Ruby has all of these friends..... oh wait maybe I understand the original plot better now Also, let penny keep her original body, and dont kill her!!! She was always a real girl, dont let her die again!! just have cinder kick her through the vacuo portal, same thing, easy

[itsclydebitches]

What has Ironwood done that's objectively wrong? Bringing the fleet to Beacon makes sense with 1) Qrow's warning, 2) the presence of Grimm in general, 3) we have security forces for major events on Earth. Blake's trailer shows her & WF stealing dust for terrorist acts used at Beacon and Haven. His embargo makes sense. Penny & co. were fighting grimm in Mantle in vol. 7. Amity was used in vol. 8. I keep seeing people call him a Greek tragic hero and characters keep calling him misguided but why??

Personally, the only thing I think Ironwood has done objectively wrong is shooting Oscar and the Councilman, which is why those actions feels so far removed from the rest of his character — an attempt on the writers’ part to make him really evil when the story started insisting he’s an antagonist. RWBY isn’t interested in portraying Ironwood and Ruby as two heroes who go about saving people in different ways, like it was for Yang and Ruby: “You go save individuals and I’ll tell the world about Salem. We might disagree about how to help, but the narrative presents both actions as helping” (stupidity of the Amity plan aside). We could have easily gotten that with, “You go make a suicidal stand against Salem in an effort to save more people and I’ll take the risk of trying to escape with the people we have” but the show just... didn’t. Nor is the story interested in saying that Ruby was wrong, so the moment she took a firm stance against Ironwood he had to become the objective bad guy. If your story refuses to acknowledge that the hero is in any way flawed, then their opponents can’t have redeeming features that reflect badly on the hero. Which is what we had with Ironwood prior to the Oscar shooting, standing in contrast to Ruby with his practical approach that actually had a chance of saving some vs. her idealism that was going to get everyone killed (and still might). Everything Ironwood did was ABSOLUTELY iffy... but never objectively wrong. He had justified reasons for everything he did and only the best of intentions. Does that mean he was right every time? Wrong? It’s debatable and straddling that line was always the point. But once the story pit Ironwood against Ruby, a Ruby the story refuses to acknowledge as anything other than Pure and Good, that line could not longer exist. He HAD to be villainous in order to exist as her contrast, yet hadn’t acted in a villainous manner. So what do you do? Have him randomly shoot people to establish how evil he is.

As for the tragic hero aspect, I’d say it’s an easy claim to make if you don’t dive too deep into the story. Meaning, we can see a lot of similarities on the surface of Ironwood’s character, yet the actual meat of the story doesn’t support this reading very well. Ironwood is indeed a moral person of good standing whose misfortune stems from some bad luck/mistakes (army getting hacked is the best example), but that’s it. A great deal more of his misfortune stems from deliberate acts against him, both by Salem and (to a lesser extent) by Ruby. Ironwood’s supposed fatal flaw — the hamartia, usually hubris/pride — is not seen throughout the story, despite how much the fandom insists that he seizes power because he believes he’s Remnant’s savior. Throughout the whole series Ironwood continually eschews pride in favor of leaning on others: Let’s listen to Ozpin, let’s welcome new allies, let’s align ourselves with old enemies. It’s just that every time he reaches out, his allies fail him: Ozpin was keeping secrets (I love the guy and support most of his decisions, but I get why Ironwood's trust faltered, far more-so than I understand the group’s), Ruby lies and betrayed him, Robyn likewise betrayed him and helped get Clover killed. Pride is not his downfall, bad allies and an evil witch are! 

Perhaps most importantly, the tragic hero is meant to elicit pity. Sometimes fear too, but mostly pity. The story should be cathartic for the viewer because they’re watching a good person meet a bad end, largely due to what we recognize as inevitable, human error. That’s not who the story now insists Ironwood is. The story wants us to hate him, hence the above paragraph about “He’s evil now and shoots people for no reason.” This isn’t to say that the tragic hero never does things/has characteristics that the audience dislikes — they are still meant to be very flawed — but those aspects should not outweigh our ability to connect with the character and understand them. The emotional foundation here is regret that things turned out this way when they didn’t have to and the character (or at least who the character started out as) didn’t deserve this fate. Is that what RWBY is aiming for with Ironwood? I wouldn’t say so. We, as individual fans, might feel sympathy for him —  largely due to what we recognize as bad writing choices changing our perspective  — but that doesn’t mean the story is actively angling for that response. I’d say RWBY wants us to despise Ironwood and root for his downfall, which flies in the face of the tragic hero. He’s moved into the category of a much more clear-cut villain: a killer, a contrast to the heroes, our protagonist tells the whole world not to trust him. It’s possible that Ironwood may circle back to a tragic hero, but again, I doubt RWBY will succeed in making that move in a persuasive manner. I think they’ll just kill Ironwood off and people will go, “See, that’s what happens to tragic heroes!” ignoring both what the story wanted us to feel for Ironwood this last volume (he’s villainous) and how it failed to get us there in a believable manner (he was a good guy who just inexplicably started shooting when the story needed him to). 

These archetypes are complex and require that they be written with intent and, to be frank, skill. Compare Ironwood to someone like Walter White. Breaking Bad ensure we see from Episode One how Walter’s pride continually leads him down a dark path. His inability to lean on/trust others means that he goes to extreme lengths to do everything on his own, like making drugs to pay for his own cancer treatments. In time this leads to a more overt desire for power and his eventual downfall, wherein the audience recognizes the need for his punishment, yet still aches for the good man besieged by bad luck (cancer) that he once was. Ironwood’s fatal flaw is that he... wants to use military force against an endless army of literal monsters? That he doesn’t want to do everything on his own? Ironwood’s flaw is only a flaw in our world, not the world where magical monsters are eating people, and 99% of his misfortune stems not from his own actions coming about due to a different flaw, but because others are actively working against him. We can’t make broad-sweeping claims about Ironwood’s actions without first considering the actions of the characters around him. Oedipus is a tragic hero because he kills a man (action), ignorant that this is his father and thus fulfilling part of his prophecy. All of Ironwood’s recent, intended actions  — tell the world about Salem, leaving with Amity, etc. — have not come about and his ignorance only existed because others deliberately kept that information from him. It’s like if a friend of Oedipus’ knew all along that Laius was his father but refused to tell him, then stopped him from killing Laius because that’s bad... but then blamed him when someone else killed him instead? I think the fandom forgets that things are #bad right now because Salem is attacking the kingdom with, like, five different evil weapons. The kingdom is falling mostly because Salem is an asshole and a little because Ruby has made awful choices lately. Ironwood’s supposed pride didn’t bring Salem here, didn’t keep people from surviving, is not stopping the group from winning their battle. The tragedies we see in the story right now are not on him. 

[janiedean]

Amazing how you can erase and twist everything someone says and not even bother to check things before launching in your 1000 words answer where you repeat the same things over and over again. When I say “Theon’s story is about destroying death”, I AM talking about his trauma and abuse. I’m not saying that Theon is a superhero, I’m saying that Theon’s story is literally about surviving and saying no to the dying of light, he’s always been trapped between life and death. How is that less meaningful than Jon being AA just because he’s special. Jon is stereotypical, not matter how much you deny it. He is the bastard son of the “good” Ned Stark that everyone seems to venerate, he becomes important, he’s actually a prince, and heir to the kingdom, he’s going to come back from the dead and apparently it’s not enough because he’s also AA. Also “I search for AA and see only Snow”, how is that not a red flag? Didn’t you think that it could be about Ramsay hiding Theon? I didn’t say that everything is about mythology and ancient literature, I said Theon has a lot of connections to it, connections that are hard not to notice, that actually make sense and are not taken out of nowhere like everyone in this fandom does. Theon’s story is about himself, not about Bran or any Stark, you’re just obsessed with throbb. Theon is connected to magic and to the gods, Theon is the rightful king of the Iron Islands, so why it’s so amusing to people when someone suggests that Theon has something to do. I’m not saying that Theon has to be important for his story to count, but why it’s so amusing to people the idea that Theon is an abuse and rape victim and at the same time he has something to do. When it comes to female victims, they want them to do great things, when it comes to Theon they constantly reduce him to poor say boy, but Theon is not like that, Theon is in pain and he wants everything to end, but he’s also angry and he wants to be free. I didn’t say that he has to explore the sea because he’s an Ironborn, you said that, not me. I think that that’s something Book!Theon would want to do if he survives everything. Because he would be free and he would go into the unknown. That’s not true Theon has no connection to the sea, the Drowned God himself wants him as king and he likes ships, there’s also the fact that he never learned how to use a ship because he was kidnapped at 10. Also what’s so wrong about him connecting with his culture? He could change things, he wouldn’t be a viking, he would be an explorer. The way you talk about it, it’s like dealing with trauma means closing himself in an house. And about the prophecy, what’s so amusing about saying that Theon has a lot that fits? I know that the prophecy is vague, but Davos and Stannis don’t come close to it as Theon does. Theon died in almost every possible way and managed to come back on his own. He keeps saying that he died in Winterfell. Read the last chapters in ACOK, it’s all there and it all happens at the same time, and still there’s so much more, so many things. And it’s like this HAS to be true, but you say no to everything, you don’t even think that he has something to do with the Iron Islands, you just think he has to “atone” to Bran, so how are you different from D&D? Theon doesn’t have to atone to Bran, Robb or anyone else called Stark, his story is about identity. And Bran is talking to Theon and yes, Theon took Winterfell, but it’s not the only reason their stories are connected, Theon taking Winterfell from Bran was a foreshadowing to them interacting in the future for different more important reasons, that was always clear to me

... anon never mind that I hadn't talked about this in ages so like you came into my inbox with some 500 words of replying at 8 am on a sunday morning and idk how *I* am supposedly twisting things when

you brought this out of nowhere

I hadn't talked about the AA thing nor anything wrt theon's ending in like... a year

you are basically making up half of what I said or didn't because like 'oh I didn't say he had a tying to the sea because he's an ironborn' but two lines later you say 'what's the issue if he reconnects with his ancestry' which.... means that he'd have a tie to the sea because he's an ironborn so what's the truth here

'you're obsessed with throbb' I didn't mention robb once in my entire answer nor throbb nor I have written throbb meta recently like... I ship throbb but I don't see how that has any relevance to an answer where I literally didn't mention it and I said theon's sl can't be just about the starks

idk why you seem to think I have great stakes re jon snow and 'he's stereotypical no matter how much you say he's not', I'm saying that for a chosen one archetype he's a deconstruction so he's not stereotypical in the way h*rry p*tter is or aragorn is or whatever and it's like objective text and honestly I have fic to write and stuff to do and I could have like completely ignored your ask and said 'I think you're wrong' instead yesterday I spent half an hour answering you like... you don't need to sound that aggressive or come at me with this entire block of text when I wasn't even the one starting this conversation

what’s so amusing about saying that Theon has a lot that fits?

anon I explained in those 1k reply or whatever all the reasons why everything theon has that fits is something every single other character has at that point dany has the exact same reasons for fitting it and I told you all the reasons why jon has extra things that fit that no one else has, like.... it's my opinion, I haven't changed my mind since 2012 on it, you aren't going to change it and no one is until grrm writes different, you don't need to convince me or look for me to validate your reading because you can have whichever reading you want and no one stops you, I just don't think it's correct, the end

The way you talk about it, it’s like dealing with trauma means closing himself in an house.

anon you keep on saying I say that but you are aware that if I say I want char X to get their little house in the village/woods/city of their choice and grow strawberries with their loved ones and be happy I'm not saying what you said and I'm talking abt endgame? jaime and brienne both also deal with trauma and when I say that I hope they get married on tarth have fifteen kids and never set foot in a court again I'm not saying having children is the only way to deal with trauma like.... one thing is the endgame one thing is how you get there, where did I say theon is gonna lock himself in a cottage in wow and stay there until ados? nowhere, like.... please a bit of chill here? you read a thing and arbitrarily decided it meant stuff it doesn't mean but I am the one twisting and erasing? like sorry but it sounds like you want a fight about it or smth and believe me fighting about who is AA is not on my list of to-do things for today, also 'I died in winterfell' is like... yeah, theon greyjoy died in wf then he became reek then he became theon again, it's metaphorical, jon literally died, also like if AA wasn't a main fiver then it'd probably be someone completely out of left field that no one gaf about and for that matter there's a character who has been dying and coming back to life who has a flaming sword since like acok, but do I see you telling me it's textual proof beric is AA? no, but that would make more textual sense than theon imvho so *shrug*

in short: anon sorry but it sounds like being that theon is your fave - which... I mean he's in my top three so I agree that he's a great fave choice - you want him desperately to have the main role in the main storyline which is imvho not the case and again... even if jon was stereotypical (which we can argue on but like... from your wording I think you hate jon ngl which fair enough everyone has their dislikes) it wouldn't make the textual evidence less evidence and like... idk how to say it nicely but not liking the protagonist is more common than not and if you don't whatever but that doesn't mean he's not and that the textual stuff indicating he has the mystical hero storyline doesn't exist, I'd suggest you make peace with that concept and with the concept that your fave doesn't need to have any specialness in their sl to be a legitimate fave, also like... in asoiaf everyone who is special™ has a shit life and when grrm says he wants a bittersweet ending like in lotr, do I have to remind anyone what was lotr's ending? samwise gamgee goes back to his little house and children and wife in the shire and says he's home and we're all happy that the dude who deserved it most got it great, if that's what he's aiming for I really don't think presuming everyone gets the magical great™ storyline is in the cards X°D but most of all: again, everyone who's had a sl being full of magic prophecies and shit in these books has had a crap life and hated every second of it that was related to those prophecies and I want theon to be happy at the end so in lack of any imvho text proof that says it's anyone but jon I'll stick with that because it means none of my faves is in line to hate their life, which is exactly what happens to jon if he's AA and exactly what I think is gonna happen and I don't particularly like that for him either bc I do want jon to have nice things but idt he'll get them, doesn't mean I'm trying to find any textual reason to decide on my own that AA is dany (a char I care a lot less about) so that she gets the brunt of it because that's now how it works, I made peace with it too X°D

[deadbeatbirdmom]

@alullinchaos there's an official answer to your question from @incredibly-unprofessional in the tags where I'm reblogging from! I'll copy paste here with a bit of editing so it's easier to read, for the benefit of @starlightsaphron who might be interested too:

#I DIDNT SEE MY TAGS GETTING POSTED AW GEEZ GUYS 🥺🥺

#but yeah ok i have an answer for this! when she follows blake on the boat she doesnt specifically KNOW shes going to menagerie #all she knows is that blakes going on a boat far away and hey if tagging along with blake on a boat gets her far away from her dad so be it #and ik what you guys will think 'wouldnt she likely know where shes going by like whatever the boat says or boat ticket is??'

#and for that i always got the notion that the boat is like one that stops at multiple places #like it stops at menagerie those that are leaving get off/then it goes to mistral those leaving get off/goes back to vale ect... #like maybe weiss just gets like a one way ticket that gets her anywhere

#and then she finds out when her blake and sun (after he reveals himself in thay sea beast fight) are talking and ask her where shes going #who knows if weiss would know exactly about menagerie like maybe the name but not much else about it maybe its not studied a lot

#but yes my idea was that in order to disguise herself she cuts her hair short in so shes like barely recognizeable #like if you guys remember the short hair weiss edits people did? thats the vision!

#she wouldnt have time to cut it on the boat so when they set foot off the boat sun would give her his cloak thing he had on the boat #BECAUSE HES A LIL GENTLEMAN (she is sweating like HELL under it they are on an island but yknow its the thought that counts)

#another reason for cutting her hair is like also the risk of like 'what if people recognise me and send me nack to my dad for reward money' #but for thr most part i dont think the citizens would do much to her like siem side eyes and maybe some comments at first

#in this weiss is actively helping the belladonnas and menagerie against the white fang like shes forging her own path away from her father #standing up for what she feels is right shes earning menagerie citizens respect so those stares and side eyes lessen with time

#i like to think maybe older citizens who emigrated to menageire who maybe worked in the mines with her grandfather would trust her quickly

#and by the time the belladonna house fight is done menagerie is basically like 'fuck the schnees EXCEPT THIS ONE RIGHT HERE SHES COOL'

#but yeah she would be a target for the wf like its fuel to the fire for their reaosning to take down the belladonnas it doesnt phase them #'ofc we are protecting this girl HER DADS TERRIBLE if our daughter trusts her so do we' theyre not gonna hold her dads actions against her

#abd in regards to like jaques i imagine ok first off he takes his time getting to vale cause he doesnt really care that much hes that bitch #like 'oh in all the chaos it was hard to enter vale airspace because of the grimm' (and probably some jab at ironwood he cant help himself)

#like that's why shes able to leave before he arrives cause he takes that long in getting there #and even then jaques would likely put in like the teeniest bit of effort trying to find her for images sake

#But I do imagine he could just be like 'she's missing but presumed to maybe be dead' and milk that for what it's worth for publicity #Plus with Ironwood calling back his people from mistral so nobody gets in and out there would be no way for Jaques to know where she is

#i have so many more thoughts about this but i ranted about it all in the bees discord like MULTIPLE DAYS WORTH but still thank u guys 🥺🥺 #credit isnt just on me since i was bouncing idea around with with meena and riley on discord so THANK U OOMFIES 😚😚

Thanks for sharing what you and your friends came up with, incredibly-unprofessional! I've gotta encourage you to write it as a fic, it's a great AU.

Question of the Week: What's your favorite AU that you've created? (shout yourself out XD)