#when you've been copying those same analyses for years

[getvalentined]

Ah. I think the issue is that people see criticism as hate? This isn't the case at all; I hold things I like to a higher standard, I'm more critical of things like I like than things that I don't. I get how this can come off as abrasive to a lot of people, but I believe that it's impossible to appreciate the true depth of anything if you only engage with the positive aspects and reject any impression of negativity.

If I don't like something, I generally don't really bother unless it's something that is impacting my quality of life. (ie: if someone is being a piece of shit to me I'm gonna talk about it, this is not fiction, this is different.) It takes a lot of energy to dig into a character or a work of fiction this deeply, and it's not worth it to do for something I don't like.

I've said repeatedly that I don't like this character as a person, but that I love him as a character. I talk a lot about how I think he's got one of the best-written stories in the entire series.

That story shows a wonderfully flawed human being whose flaws build up until the facade he's been hiding behind for his whole life breaks under the weight. That's part of the beauty of it, that's part of the tragedy of it, that's what makes his story so good.

The problem is that he's a liar, and some of his fans would rather believe the lies than actually get to know the character for who he is. But he's genuinely a wonderful character. I don't just admit this, I will die on this hill—he's such a good character. He's so well-written. He's so consistent, and this newer presentation is spot-on.