#where a parallel is present. Showing how their relationship has evolved.

[ariays]

The Significance of Kitty & Minho Bookending Both Season 1 and Season 2 in XO Kitty

Yes, I'm here again with another analysis because why not?

So previously, I mentioned the term bookending. & I just thought that it would be nice to elaborate on that.

So firstly, what is bookending?

It is a storytelling technique where a narrative begins and ends with the same event, character interaction, setting, or theme. It is a method that is often used to create symmetry, reinforce themes, highlight character growth, or foreshadow key relationships.

Storytelling is rarely accidental—especially in romance-driven narratives like XO Kitty. One of the most deliberate yet overlooked narrative choices in both Season 1 and Season 2 is how Kitty and Minho’s relationship is bookended—they are the first and last people she interacts with in both seasons. This framing technique is often used to subtly highlight a relationship’s significance, and in this case, it strongly suggests that Kitty and Minho’s story was always meant to be a slow-burn romance.

When two characters are both the first and last interaction in a season, it’s rarely coincidental. It is to:

Signify that the relationship is central to the protagonist’s journey.

Showcase how much their dynamic has evolved over time.

Foreshadow their long-term importance to each other.

For Kitty and Minho, the fact that this happens in both seasons is a strong indication that their connection is not just a subplot—it’s one of the core emotional arc of the story.

So let us break it down:

Season 1: The Beginning & End with Minho

First Interaction: The first person Kitty physically bumps into at the airport on her way to Korea (signifying the beginning of her journey) is Minho. This is their very first meeting, setting the tone for their playful, sometimes antagonistic, but always high-energy dynamic.

Last Interaction: The season ends with Minho’s confession—a moment that completely shifts their relationship. And instead of rejecting him outright, Kitty smiles. It’s a small but telling reaction—if she truly felt nothing, there would be no hesitation.

& before people come up to say that the smile was only shown in Season 2 when they re-shot the scene...

This is a screenshot from Season 1 where you can see her slight contemplating smile (with About Love by MARINA playing in the background, mind you).

Why It Matters: The fact that Kitty’s first and last interactions in Season 1 are with Minho shows that he was always meant to be a significant part of her story. The show could have ended the season with anyone—Dae, Yuri, or even a solo moment of self-reflection. But instead, they chose to end with Minho’s confession. That’s not an accident—it’s intentional storytelling, subtly planting the seeds for future development.

Season 2: The Pattern Repeats���Minho Comes First & Last Again

First Love Interest She Sees: In Season 2, the first love interest Kitty locks eyes with is Minho. While Dae is technically present (standing right beside Minho), the camera deliberately focuses on Kitty looking at Minho. This is a classic storytelling technique used to subtly emphasize a character’s importance to the protagonist.

Last Interaction: Once again, the season ends with Minho and Kitty. But this time, things are even more emotionally complicated.

Kitty realizes her feelings for Minho, but she’s too scared to confess. She convinces herself that he has moved on, and the fear of rejection holds her back. Meanwhile, Minho is actively repressing his feelings. After his failed relationship with Stella and seeing Kitty’s complicated emotions regarding Yuri, he convinces himself that moving on is the only option. He even goes so far as to swear off relationships entirely.

Why It Matters: The fact that, once again, the season ends with Minho and Kitty means their story is still unfinished. No matter what happens in the middle, the narrative keeps circling back to them.

The Parallel to K-Drama Romance Structure

In K-dramas, the first person the protagonist meets in a new place often represents fate or destiny—and Kitty’s first physical interaction in Korea was with Minho at the airport.

The “first and last” interaction trope is often used to signal who the true endgame is—the person the protagonist starts and ends their journey with is usually their true match.

By structuring both seasons the same way, the show is subtly preparing the audience for their eventual romance.

The Parallels Between Season 1 & Season 2 (Between Minho & Kitty)

While XO Kitty explores multiple love interests, Minho and Kitty have scenes that directly parallel each other from Season 1 to Season 2. These mirroring moments serve as a way to track their emotional development and reinforce their importance to the story.

Season 1: Minho watches Kitty and Dae at the party → Season 2: Kitty watches Minho and Stella dancing at the ball.

In Season 1, Minho was unknowingly affected by seeing Kitty with Dae. In Season 2, Kitty experiences the exact same thing—showing that now she’s the one realizing her feelings.

Season 1: Minho sees Kitty in slow motion, feels attracted to her, then panics when he realizes it's Kitty and screams "NO!" in denial. → Season 2: Kitty sees Minho in slow motion—not once, but twice.

Minho’s slow-motion moment in Season 1 was a comedic way to show his growing attraction, but in Season 2, Kitty has two slow-mo moments of her own—this time, with much more emotional weight, showing her realization.

Season 1: Minho saves Kitty from the fire on her skirt. → Season 2: Kitty saves Minho from his family's reputation being tarnished by Stella's plans.

In Season 1, Minho literally puts out a fire for Kitty, protecting her. In Season 2, Kitty does the same thing metaphorically—protecting Minho from a social firestorm that could have hurt his family. Can I also add that both scenarios happened in similar settings? One is on stage while the other is back stage.

Season 1: Minho confesses, "I think I fell in love with you… a little bit… or a lot." → Season 2: Kitty has an inner monologue, "I have fallen for Minho… a little bit… or a lot."

This is the most important parallel. Minho was the first to confess his feelings in Season 1, but by Season 2, Kitty finally acknowledges her own feelings—mirroring his words exactly. The fact that her confession was internal rather than spoken aloud adds tension for the upcoming Season 3, setting up a major moment where she will have to verbalize it.

The Emotional Progression Between Bookends

Season 1 starts with Minho being dismissive of Kitty → Ends with him realizing his feelings and confessing.

Season 2 starts with Kitty locking eyes with Minho first → Ends with her realizing her own feelings, but being too scared to confess.

Each season follows a clear pattern, showing that their relationship is evolving step by step. The reason it hasn’t happened yet is because both of them have been in denial, not because the connection isn’t there.

Foreshadowing for Season 3

If Season 1 was about Minho realizing his feelings, and Season 2 was about Kitty realizing hers, then Season 3 will likely be about them finally acknowledging their love for each other and acting on it. Their bookended interactions and season-long parallels have been leading toward something bigger, and Season 3 will be the moment they finally break past their fears and come together. I think we can expect a major confession scene from Kitty—one where she has to face her feelings out loud, just like Minho did in Season 1.

In Conclusion

The bookending of their interactions in both seasons, paired with their direct scene parallels, is not a coincidence—it’s a deliberate narrative choice that:

Establishes Minho as a consistent presence in Kitty’s life.

Marks their relationship as a key focus of the series.

Shows their emotional and relational growth.

Foreshadows their eventual romance.

By structuring both seasons the same way—starting and ending with Kitty and Minho—and including multiple mirrored moments between them, the show is subtly telling us that their story isn’t just important, it’s inevitable.

This isn’t a random ship gaining popularity—it was always part of the plan.

[jesuis-assez]

Tim & Lucy ↳ Their story\ milestones in their relationship [Pt. 2]

Pt . 1 -> [ x ]

[mightdeletelater]

A speech made at the Academy Awards by Jonathan Glazer, along with the subsequent reactions, sheds light on how people tend to distort others' words to portray themselves as victims and, more concerning, their willingness to reside in a dystopian bubble as long as it doesn't affect them directly.

Rather than idolising Hollywood, I've previously posted about the complexities of my evolving parasocial relationships. But to disregard the influence wielded by these elites would be naive. It's frustrating to witness those in power facing backlash when they attempt to bring attention to pertinent issues.

While the Oscars' prominence in Western pop culture is waning, the ceremony and the fervour surrounding the nominees and winners, especially in the major acting categories, still hold significant sway in film culture and the broader world.

So when such a speech is delivered at the Oscars, it's bound to garner attention:

All our choices were made to reflect and confront us in the present — not to say, “Look what they did then,” rather, “Look what we do now.” Our film shows where dehumanization leads, at its worst. It shaped all of our past and present. Right now we stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation, which has led to conflict for so many innocent people. Whether the victims of October the — [Applause.] Whether the victims of October the 7th in Israel or the ongoing attack on Gaza, all the victims of this dehumanization, how do we resist? [Applause.] Aleksandra Bystroń-Kołodziejczyk, the girl who glows in the film, as she did in life, chose to. I dedicate this to her memory and her resistance. Thank you.

Glazer highlighted in his speech that victims of the ongoing situation and the last 75 years, whether Palestinian and Israeli, all stem from the occupation and are casualties of entrenched ideologies like Zionism. But when he said this on stage and was immediately misquoted online on social media and by reputable news sources, alleging that he simply renounced his Jewish identity.

He also faced considerable backlash from those indicating a persistent conflation of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. It really parallels previous speeches of resistance at the Oscars. Boos rang loud and clear during Michael Moore's opposition to the Iraq war (which we know was a colossal failure by Geroge Bush and the US Government who perpetuated and pardoned multiple war crimes in the region after lying to their own people about evidence of weapons of mass destruction).

There was also Sacheen Littlefeather's advocacy for Native American representation and the direct of attention to the Wounded Knee Occupation, a speech that had bodyguards having to restrain people from getting on the stage and attacking her.

And, of course, Vanessa Redgrave's aim at “a small bunch of Zionist hoodlums whose behaviour is an insult to the stature of Jews all over the world and to their great and heroic record of struggle against fascism and oppression”, which still feels relevant today.

Turning to Glazer's film, I am baffled at those who vehemently objected to it: Did they actually watch it? Because if they had any negative feelings towards Glazer's speech, especially after watching his film, it suggests, to me, a deficiency in critical thinking.

Glazer's film portrays a chilling atmosphere where genocide becomes normalised, echoing real-world situations like the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The film serves as a stark reminder of humanity's ability to coexist with atrocities, often turning a blind eye for the sake of comfort.

The horrors adjacent to the characters' lives evoke contemporary parallels, particularly in regions like Gaza. With over five months of relentless violence, Israel's defiance of international court orders, and Western governments passively reprimanding while fueling the conflict with arms shipments, the spectre of genocide looms ominously. It risks becoming a mundane backdrop to daily existence. It is a stark portrayal of how affluent lifestyles can be linked to neighbouring atrocities, challenging the notion of denial and complicity.

The film doesn't centre around the Holocaust (Glazer's own words), with its specific historical context. Instead, it delves into a more universal theme: humanity's ability to coexist with atrocities and even derive some form of reconciliation or gain from them. The discomforting reflections are on purpose. It prompts us to acknowledge that the threat of annihilation of any people is always closer than we might imagine.

One of the most poignant moments in the film occurs when a package filled with clothing and lingerie pilfered from the prisoners of the camp arrives at the Höss household. The commandant's wife decides that everyone, including the servants, can select one item. She claims a coat for herself and trys on makeup discovered in one of its pockets.

How can the people who are so staunch against Glazer not draw parallels with Israeli soldiers who have recorded themselves rummaging through the lingerie of Palestinian women and slut shaming them? (Why are Israeli soldiers obsessed with Gaza women's underwear?) Or proudly displaying stolen shoes and jewellery for their partners back home (Israeli soldier loots Palestinian homes for his engagement party). Or celebrating International Women's Day with a photo of women soldiers posing for selfies against the backdrop of destruction (How an AP photographer made this image of Israeli soldiers taking a selfie at the Gaza border).

The film is rife with these parallels that it feels like a documentary. It is a grim reality: the potential emergence of the first live-streamed genocide, captured by its very architects.

Gaza doesn't mirror the systematic mass murder machinery of Auschwitz, nor does it approach the scale of Nazi atrocities. However, the entire purpose behind establishing the postwar framework of international humanitarian law was to equip us with the means to collectively recognise practices before history repeats itself on a large scale. And disturbingly, some of these practices – such as the construction of walls, creation of ghettos, mass killings, openly stated intentions of elimination, widespread starvation, plundering, gleeful dehumanisation, and deliberate humiliation – are recurring. And have been long before October 7th.

How do we disrupt the cycle of trivialisation and normalisation? What actions can we take? There are persistent protests and acts of civil disobedience to "uncommitted" votes, disrupting events, organising aid convoys, fundraising for refugees, and creating radical works of art.

And as genocide fades further into the background of our culture, some people grow too desperate for any of these efforts. I am certainly one of them.

Yet, these efforts seem insufficient, particularly when those in positions of power remain indifferent. It's insufficient when I watch a video of a little girl saying that the violence has made her feel less beautiful before she talks about her father being kidnapped by Israeli soldiers or of the orphans visiting their mother's burial spot in the street. It is insufficient when the death toll rises to exceed the daily death toll of any other major conflict of the 21st century.

Perhaps it's unfair of me to prioritise one tragedy over another, given the multitude of suffering in the world – the ones that are in the news cycle and the ones that are not. Yet, my connection to Palestine and its plight feels as personal as it can be without me actually being Palestinian, fostered from childhood teachings and further enriched through my own research. I have loved ones directly impacted by this conflict: friends in the diaspora grappling with survivor's guilt, friends in the West Bank enduring the daily hardships of occupation. And my friends in Gaza are all either dead, dying or being pushed straight into the arms of death.

The realisation that my efforts to help them are insufficient fills me with frustration. I'm angered by the indifference of those in power and by the hostility encountered by those attempting to bring the truth to the forefront.

[my-coven-is-claudia]

Louis and performance

something that always stuck out to me about louis’s behaviour in the first episode is how almost thrilled he seems to be doing this interview? he full on laughs at daniel’s “so mr du lac, how long have you been dead?” line and overall seems very put together and calculating.

it appears as if he’s fully prepared for this, only interested in giving an informative and educational account of his life. this interview is a heroic pursuit, acting as a warning to others about the harsh reality of vampire life.

but this is all a facade. this cool calm and collected louis slowly falls apart and is paralleled with 1910 louis’s overly violent and macho persona that also falls to the wayside as the series goes along. in both new orleans and present day dubai, louis is putting up a mask. although this time round he’s exchanged stereotypical masculinity for clinical rationality.

and news flash!! he has neither.

he’s trying to conceal the fact that this interview has come about from a distrust of his own memories and recollection of events. that there’s this much more distressing motivation for the interview of louis not even trusting himself to tell the truth and needing someone else to help him parse out what really happened. furthermore, there is also a personal undercurrent to louis’s intentions due to the second interview picking up from his and daniel’s first encounter. unsurprisingly, all of these reasons he neatly skirts around (until push comes to shove). louis meticulously illustrates this picture of his life in new orleans via vivid narration and metaphor, asking daniel (and the viewer) to “let the tale seduce [him].” as he does this he teeters along a tightrope, swinging between expressing his crazed and immense love for lestat and portraying himself as a reserved intellectual detached from his vampiric instincts.

from the very start it is a performance. no argument about it.

the louis of present day dubai is in such stark contrast to the louis of even the 70s. he’s lost so much joy and confidence. this is not the same man who spent hours chatting with lestat under the moon in new orleans, who cheekily danced with emilia in romania, who torched a whole theatre. and with how quickly louis admits to killing lestat in season two it’s interesting how carefully crafted and persistent his ruse of serenity in dubai is. as he’s grown more adept at concealing his secrets, he’s also evolved into this hollow husk of himself. for the past 70 odd years he’s been stuck in a tumultuous relationship, has not properly killed anyone since the year 2000 and tries to paint himself as a passive figure in the tragedy of his own life.

this goes to show that louis is very particular about how others view him and how he’s presented. consistently, louis is tugging back and forth with daniel over who he truly is, his true motivations, his true desires. this is most apparent in 2x04 when louis is horribly embarrassed by the work of other photographers somehow ending up in a pile of his old photos. although it’s currently unclear how they ended up there, i think it’s safe to assume that louis genuinely didn’t intend to pass off other’s work as his own. he immediately scrambled to explain himself and apologise, even going as far as to demean himself as a mediocre artist. he’s so enraged by this incident because he fears how it reflect on him and how it will cause readers to perceive him. in order to be able to tolerate himself, louis has to maintain this very specific image of himself where he is this vulnerable but restrained vampire who is totally fine. louis is always barely holding this facade together and his ability to swallow his more intense emotions has obviously been something that he’s struggled throughout his life, from lashing out and killing the alderman in new orleans to triggering daniel’s tremors out of spite in dubai.

and circling back to dubai, this is all wonderfully conveyed via his change in accent in the present day. he no longer retains his new orleans accent, now speaking with an accent closer to a general north american one. his tone is also much more subdued and soft-spoken, rarely even raising his voice. this really hits home how weary louis has become and how he’s become so detached from his true self. he’s not energised, he’s not passionate, he’s not happy. the closest we get to pulling back the curtain on louis’s mask is when he lashes out and acts most like a stereotypical vampire. if there is a “true” louis then it’s likely the one who triggers daniel’s tremors, who digs through daniel’s memories about alice, who argues with armand over the misplaced photographs. i’m not trying to say that louis is inherently an violent or angry person but the most emotion we get from him in the present day is when he’s wrathful, bickering with armand, laughing in daniel’s face. it’s far from the whole picture of who louis de pointe du lac is but it’s the most honest portrayal he’s allowed of himself over the course of the interview. he does have much more emotional and somber moments but his repressed anger is poignantly tied to his repressed vampirism. we don’t know who louis truly is in dubai and and i suspect he isn’t sure himself

[shipposttt]

The Ship of the Day: Swan Queen

Name: Emma x Regina

Ship name: Swan Queen

Original content: Once Upon a Time (OUAT)

Ship info: Once Upon a Time is a TV show where all of the fairy-tale characters that we know and have been told about all our lives have been cursed by the Evil Queen into our land – the land without magic – and have been frozen in time for 28 years in a small town called Storybrooke. The legend goes that the daughter on Snow White and Prince Charming (the saviour) will come to town and wake everyone up from the curse. Thus, the show starts with Henry, the adopted son of Regina (the evil queen) going to find his birth mother Emma (the saviour/Snow White and Charming’s daughter) and bringing her back to Storybrooke.

Henry (their son) who has found out about the curse through a gifted storybook, spends a long time trying to convince Emma that the curse is real not just a story and that she’s the one that needs to break it. However, Emma has a hard time believing that everyone living in town is a cursed storybook character and only participates in these discussions with Henry to keep him happy.

Emma and Regina’s relationship gets off to a rocky start as Regina immediately begins to feel threatened by Emma, her sons birth mother, and due to the fact that her relationship with Henry is a little fractured during that point in time. It looks like she has nothing to worry about however as Emma vows to leave town that night although on her way out of town she gets run off the road by a wolf ultimately leading to a chain of events that have Emma staying in town. 

During her stay in town Emma spends a lot of time at odds with Regina, they are constantly arguing over Henry (at first), and there is a lot of tension between them when they are making threats to each other and arguing. This arguing however comes to a stop after the fight they have over their son eating a poisoned apple turnover that Regina made for Emma. Emma wakes Henry up with true loves kiss and both mothers are happy their son is not dead. This is arguably the point where their relationship is worst, after this their relationship only gets better. 

After Emma breaks the curse by waking Henry up and true loves kiss magic comes back to Storybrooke. This leads to a lot of instances in which Emma and Regina have to fight together to save the town and their son a lot and even in some instances save each other. There are also many points in the show where people don’t believe that Regina is redeemed and still see her as a villain however Emma has always believed in Regina’s redemption, even going as far as protecting and defending her when Regina is accused of murder. We see moments later on in this show of Emma bringing Regina lunch and the both of them teasing each other which shows how much their relationship has evolved from what it used to be.

There is a lot of tension that can be felt in this teasing and in their ever-present need to save each other and even in simple moment such as Emma declaring that she always knows when Regina is lying and that she wants to help Regina find her happy ending. The move of their relationship from enemies to people who trust one another with their lives – as they have on many occasions – is very important in understanding why these characters are so beloved together. This is because they are both passionate fighters about/for the things that they love and once they get over their differences and realise who similar they actually are, they spend a lot of time fighting to save each other. Even going as far as Emma absorbing the darkness/curse of the dark one in order to save Regina and her goodness.

Additionally, there are also multiple parallels throughout the show both visually and audibly wherein Swan Queen are compared to Snowing (Snow White and Prince Charming) who are a canon heterosexual couple who share two children. Why are moments between Emma and Regina being parallel to a couple in a canon romantic relationship, a couple who are professed to be (canon) romantic True Loves in this show, if Emma and Regina themselves aren’t meant to be in a romantic relationship and/or true loves.

Type of Ship: Queer Bait

Putting aside all of the fairy tale elements and all of the magic in this show, seeing the trope of two people sharing a child implies that by the end of the series these two people will be in a romantic relationship. Instances in which this trope occurs, and the parents have been a man and woman result in a romantic relationship, some examples include: About a Boy (2002), The Switch (2010), Life as We Know It (2010), Love Comes Softly (2003).

In all of these examples the male and female characters who are seen parenting a child together end up in romantic relationships. Why then did the creators of OUAT choose to apply this trope to their show only to have these two parental characters not end up together just because they are both women. They have spent the majority of the show making parenting decisions for their son together, fighting together to save their son and even becoming something resembling a family only for them to not end up together even though if they were a man and a woman instead of both women, they would have ended in a romantic relationship together.

Additionally, there are also instances in the show of prolonged eye contact and wide screen shots of these characters looking at each other. In this same show there are heterosexual characters with examples of the same moment happening that are in or do end up in a romantic relationship. If this is so then why isn’t it the same for Swan Queen, the only difference being that they are both women. The shots of these two characters together are conscious choices made by writers, producers and directors and have been put into the show making people think that what is going to happen is that these characters are going to end up in a romantic relationship, yet they never do! There is no need for creators to tease something that is not going to happen, the only thing that this does is creates outrage from audiences who were invested in this relationship and led to believe that it was a possibility. There have also been instances in which creators have spoken on social media about this ship speculation and actively participating in keeping this audience tuned into the show. They have reeled this audience in only for them to be disappointed by the results. 

Thank you for coming to my ted talk!

Admin 🦈

[basedkikuenjoyer]

The mood feels right, it's that time without light. Who's up for a lil late-night Togashiposting? Because there's one that has me thinking about a few concepts we've been on about. Which means we get to talk baby's first foxboy blorbo again. This was always one of my better posts that still generates interest today, but for the basic idea we talk a lot about the Akazaya as throwbacks and particularly Okiku's ties to Eiichiro Oda's own history on Rurouni Kenshin. There was another two-faced redhead in popular manga at the time, and we get Oda referencing the iconic clash with Game Master in interviews as a big moment he liked. But also just in One Piece canon it's interesting how Ryokugyu with a similar power intersects with Kiku's tale to bolster the connection. Likewise with the parallel story of the thieving fox spirit and how it intersects with Kiku's past.

For this part of our examination though, we're going to look through the lens of another meta concept we've been on about. Poking at the nature of "filler" and how much strict canon really matters? This is the finale of Kurama's last fight in the anime, something really glossed over in the manga as YuYu Hakusho tragically came to a close in the hurried Three Kings Saga. To me though, the anime at least salvages this arc into a worthy conclusion. I don't actually mind the idea of our quartet squaring off their personal arcs underneath the bigger show of the Makai Tournament. Kurama's fight with Shigure is so well done for that. One thing you have to give me, being filler or noncanonical is not an impediment to being an inspiration or an influence on someone else later.

The whole fight is a great finale for Kurama & his demonic past. We meet him distanced from it, they're reconnected in the Dark Tournament, he embraces it to answer the call in Chapter Black...then here after reconciling it he rejects the old self. Importantly though, he only wins through taking advantage of seeds planted by his old self. I love the final line to Yomi about it "I never leave anything behind." That reconciliation of past and present for a brighter future is where I really see Kiku picking up this torch. Himura Kenshin has a lot of similarities in his arc, but Kurama's with themes of reincarnation and parent/child bonds feel like the ways this gentle redhead seeped in. Of course, Kiku is still her own take on the idea. The trans aspect and cloaking it in a lady caring about her reputation is an excellent evolution.

Can't ignore the antagonist here either, this is why I was thinking this part in particular after all. A surgeon with a samurai vibe, choosing an honorable death after defeat. The way Shigure shaped the tone of this climax for foxboy's saga was giving me some big feelings. I honestly haven't rewatched the Three Kings Arc in years. The montage of core scenes though, showing us how Kurama grew into someone so willing to choose this new life, it had a big one I didn't really think about in this context:

How it all starts between he & Yusuke the MC. The story of the Forlorn Hope. That dub name is way cooler because the Funimation dub of the YuYu anime is a national treasure. But yeah...that's where this entire relationship started. It's an artifact that demands the user's life to grant a wish. An empty, unfulfilled Kurama was so casually willing to throw his life away to return a mother's love...without getting the point. Too busy turning over every possibility he hasn't realized how much he's grown. There's no way his mother would be happy with that trade because she doesn't see some legendary thieving fox demon...and if you told her she'd probably just say that explains a lot.

How does Yusuke solve it? Stepping in and sharing the burden. Very similar tone we'd see later with Usopp and the samurai. Even with the little dash of levity and that fine line between nobility and senseless self-sacrifice. Not to mention the big moment of Kiku's fall being Kin's final push to evolve and strike down Kanjuro. That's not unique to YYH but it's one of the biggest pillars of that series. But Bakura Town ends up being a lot like this in tone. The sumo match. Luffy jumps in because Kiku's putting her body on the line to amp up the crowd's panic. The two working together, Luffy stepping up and playing the hero for a moment, opens a new path. Just like the Forlorn Hope here and it letting them slide for being such good boys.

Then from there Kurama's story arc has the same structure we'll see out of Kiku later and Himura Kenshin around the same time. You've come so far by the time we meet you that we can do an arc about confronting that past. But that story can't end with going back to it, can it? No matter what it may mean, it's still so wild for me to see this connection over time. Kurama really was one of my first major anime characters I could latch onto and I've been a One Piece fan for so long. Just can't believe the cutesy waitress we met early Wano had all this in store.

[uths-ethnol-spam]

mad max: fury road and journey

hi. as a french student, i attend to english class as a foreign language and i submitted an oral presentation on a piece of media in relation to our theme: Journey, Travel, Exile. despite the compelling topic, the class had been incredibly dull this semester. i figured i might as well post the text somewhere, if it interests some people in the fandom.

anyway! there are mistakes here and there, sorry about that. :))

MAD MAX: FURY ROAD. GEORGE MILLER. 2015

Journeys depicted in cinema are about going from one place to another; they often mirror the protagonist’s own inner and emotional journey — hence the satisfaction of finally witnessing the protagonist’s arrival: it symbolises the completion of the character’s story after three or five acts.

So what about a movie revealing about two thirds into the story that actually, the journey doesn't end here, because the characters are meant to go back from where they came? How does this depiction of journey match the inner journey of the protagonist?

This question is quite central in MAD MAX: FURY ROAD, and some even expressed criticism about the fact that what was announced as a journey is, basically, a round-trip. 

MAD MAX: FURY ROAD, directed by George Miller and released in 2015, is the fourth opus of the MAD MAX series started back in the eighties. The multi awards-winning action movie features Charlize Theron as Imperator Furiosa and Tom Hardy as Max, in the post-punk dystopian “Wasteland” : after a nuclear war, a handful of men have taken possession of means of production and of vital resources, keeping survivors as slaves and fanatic soldiers. But the specificity of this post-apocalyptic feudal society lies in the key importance of motorised vehicles: in the deadly desert, a car is a symbol of freedom and independence. 

Max has been captured by the main antagonist and war lord Immortan Joe, and his iconic car now belongs to the lord’s mechanical cavalry; as for Imperator Furiosa, she drives the War Rig and intends to recklessly flee to the Green Place, bringing with her Immortan Joe’s “Wives”. Starts consequently the epic high-speed car chase, which is the beating heart of this action movie.

Of course, the chase is both a setting for the characters to evolve, and a metaphor of this journey. It is exemplified by the quote at the end: "Where must we go... we who wander this Wasteland in search of our better selves?" But the whole movie also focuses on two other noteworthy elements: what is it like to have no home to return to, hence being perpetually exiled? And what are the mechanics of travel in this collapsed society? Indeed, Miller and the creative team focused on the materialistic dimension of journey — the cars, how they function, and to what extent they inform the public about their driver.

Keeping all of that in mind, we’ll study how the audience’s expectations about this tumultuous journey — relying on a materialistic and spectacular depiction — are subverted into the very heart of the narrative structure, in order to unfold Furiosa’s and Max’s inner journey.

We’ll proceed that way: 

First, we’ll focus on the global approach of journey, exile and migration in the movie, from a thematic and a structural point of view, and how it impacts the narrative.

But the means of the journey are as important as the ends: that’s why we’ll see how filming and showing the journey enable Miller to draw parallels with our own relationship to movement, vehicles and consequently, modern society.

Finally, the means of one’s journey is intrinsically linked to their inner journey, so to speak. We will thus explore how Furiosa and Max evolve as characters throughout the chase, but also to what extent they actually can escape their condition as drivers in the Wasteland.

Out here, everything hurts.  Journey from a thematic and structural perspective

Migration and exile: overarching themes

In this devastated land, migrations — individuals and groups moving from a place to settle in another — are an important dimension of one’s life. The population relying on Immortan Joe for water migrated to the Citadel but depend on the tyrant’s whims and wishes. The nuclear and ecological disasters forced the remaining population to move and eventually, submit in order to barely survive — we’ll come back to that.

The theme of exile is also tackled at the very beginning of the movie. Max is presented as a man with no home anymore — a stateless man. As the audience discovers, it is also sort of Furiosa’s case: she has been taken from her home as a child, and now fully intends to go back. The two lead characters are uprooted, in a desert maybe too dry to let anyone grow anymore. 

Finally, Furiosa and Immortan Joe’s Wives rely on the Rock Riders, who are sort of people smugglers, to cross a canyon: movement and travel in this world is controlled not by a state, but by lords, tribes… informal groups holding power on limited territory thanks to violence. The people smugglers too are an obstacle for Furiosa to overcome.

Subversion of the traditional journey narrative

But the most obvious type of journey or travel one thinks of when watching MAD MAX: FURY ROAD, is the chase. The chase seems at first to structure the narrative as Imperator Furiosa announces she wants to go to “The Green Place”, home. But the third and supposedly last of the three acts turns out to be short-lived: a plot-twist forces the story to go through two more acts, hence a subversion of the narrative.

The first act is Furiosa’s breakout: she leaves Immortan Joe’s Citadel, but the tyrant, his war boys, and other lords are chasing her. The second act focuses on how Furiosa, Max, the Wives and a War Boy succeed in escaping the antagonists: they are now heading to the Green Place, Furiosa’s birthplace. 

As the third act begins, we are expecting the difficult end and final arrival to this utopian world, a space for everyone to grow and settle for good. But the third act is very short and ends on Furiosa’s despair as she discovers that going home is no longer possible. 

Hence the unexpected need for a fourth and fifth act: the dramatic and epic journey back to the Citadel, and the arrival as the characters themselves have opened up and fought for what they thought they would never fight.

Travel, exile and migration are thus important elements in the overall narrative: they are themes directly addressed in the story, and they even bend the traditional hero journey. 

It’s a detour. Filming the means and symbols of journey

The means of the journey — and not just the ends — are themselves a theme explored in MAD MAX: FURY ROAD: they contribute to the depiction of the Wasteland, centred around movement, and a parallel must be drawn with a modern perspective on our own use of means of transportation.

Creative means of transportation and creative process to model the Wasteland

One the strength of the movie is doubtlessly its depiction of travel. Great effort has been put into the choreography of the chase by the creative team and Miller himself, but also in the conception of the motorised vehicles — and even other means of roaming.

The cars all have their specificity and identity. Furiosa’s War Rig probably is the best example: every detail inside and outside of the car is meaningful for the character, but also adapted to the Wasteland — for instance, Furiosa can extinguish fire thanks to the hinged front of the truck, using sand to smother it.

But two other striking elements caught my eye: the Crow Fishers and the Pole Cats.

The former, the Crow Fishers, are men wayfaring thanks to stilts. Their disquieting way of wandering stands in sharp contrast with every other characters’: this detail (just one shot!) shows how every surviving human adapted their means of travelling depending on their environment. 

The latter, the Pole Cats, are the men using swinging poles fixed to vehicles to swiftly attack the protagonists: their agility is remarkable and clearly exemplifies Miller’s will to show great spectacle. 

The chase itself, finally, is filmed in order to be simply remarkable, breathtaking and constantly frenzied. All of the vehicles are real, which is today extremely rare in the industry, hence the amazing effects and materialistic, raw dimension of the film. The use of fast motion (when the action filmed is sped up — a very eighties style of filming and editing), close ups, panoramas, travelings, steadicam… are all means to offer to the spectator an incredible experience of journeying in the Wasteland. 

Fanaticism, symbolism: depiction of movement and travel to question our own 

But there’s also a symbolic dimension of journey in-universe, hence a depiction of movement to question our own. Indeed, there’s a religious belief in the Citadel, focused around speed and driving cars, which of course evokes futurism and facism. Immortan Joe’s fascist reign is fueled by the War Boys fanaticism, praying before taking from the altar a wheel that seems sacred to them. 

To this religious symbolism is superimposed a political one: the means of migration belong to Immortan Joe who keeps them at the top of his fortress. A motorised vehicle for him is not just a means to go somewhere: it testifies of his domination and control of the resources (human and otherwise). The Doof Wagon and its iconic Coma-Doof Warrior demonstrates how Immortan Joe is the man who controls the gas, and that using it with such extravagance is his right. As Colin Gibson (production designer) says, “car have always been about power”.

Obvious parallels are meant to be drawn here. This movie seems to critique severely the disastrous and inequitable use of resources — think of the immigrants needing water we talked about earlier. “Then who killed the world?” Angharad ironically asks at some point, one of Joe’s Wives, clearly thinking of the tyrant and his kind. The glorious spectacle of the chase is also the symbol of a decaying world, destroyed — as it is reminded — by a nuclear and ecological calamity.

Well, you keep moving. Two drivers’ inner journey

All of that being said, this spectacular depiction of the journey mirrors the characters’ inner journey and evolution: but it appears that the periple itself changes deeply both Furiosa and Max, because these individuals, even though they want to escape their condition, can’t help but be submitted by the Wasteland — and hence, be drivers.

Furiosa’s and Max’s progression displayed through the chase 

Both Furiosa and Max are based on archetypes they escape from throughout the pursuit. Max is the lone wolf, wandering on his own, and his initial refusal to help Furiosa and the Wives hammers home that he does not belong to any community anymore. Furiosa seems to be the idealist: the prospect of freedom promised by her native country, the Green Place, keeps her moving.

But both evolve and learn to trust each other. Max eventually proposes himself to “slow down” the chasers, putting himself on the frontline and ready to sacrifice himself in order to save the small community he grew attached to. The stateless man found a shelter to their side.

As for Furiosa, she brutally learns that the Green Place is no more and that her only way of survival is taking back the Citadel. The pragmatic choice of transforming the place that once was her prison, Joe’s former base, is also an adieu to her hopes of travelling away.

The pursuit is a perfect context of this evolution, as the characters have no choice but to adapt or to die. 

Humans unable to escape their path: one’s road is never independant from the world

Nevertheless, the end may seem bitter, especially on Max’s side. Indeed, even though he defeated the bad guy, the protagonist is shown again and again in the movie as a driver, unable to evolve past that — and consequently, is destined to be submitted to the Wasteland. 

The heavy symbolism of the driver clings as firmly to the War Boys as it does to Max: the shot after Max’s “retaliation” makes him appear as a ghost-like figure, almost otherworldly, holding the wheel — and it underlines how that dimension is part and parcel of him. When Furiosa and Max part, the protagonist walks against the current of the crowd — once again a symbol of his eventual loneliness, despite the temporary respite alongside Furiosa: he is ready to drive again, far from here, an eternal nomad.

Finally, the disparition of the Green Place is loaded with symbolic, even religious meaning. This edenic utopia does not exist: in this sublunary space, the overwhelming feeling of dereliction is a weight on Furiosa's shoulders. There is no alternative: Furiosa has no choice but to be part of the Wasteland she had tried to escape all along.

Conclusion

"Where must we go... we who wander this Wasteland in search of our better selves?" asks the end of the movie. I think that the characters’ better selves (especially Furiosa’s and Max’s) emerge when they are together, because they find the human remains buried under all the sand. The spectacular MAD MAX: FURY ROAD seems to be, eventually, asking the audience to go on their own path as wanderers, showing how things may become if we stop moving, and thus, acting for a better future. Thank you.

so here it is... it would be waste just to share it in class. besides, this is the extended version, as i take about 15 minutes to read all of this out loud. god

i may have been caricatural here and there — and i KNOW that some of it is factually incorrect, specifically about Joe's control of gas. but you know, sometimes one HAS to lie during an oral presentation

[nakimkcapstone]

An example on how I am using ChatGPT for my script

I would like to present an update on how I choose to implement ChatGPT within my presentable. While it would be easy to just tell ChatGPT to "write me a script based on ___" I feel that there are a number of factors that would not only present a surface-level project, but also one that lacks creativity as well. As I stated in other updates, I want to treat ChatGPT as an assistant. In this case, I stumbled across a cultural question when writing my script. For context, one of my characters referred to another as "Lord", and I wondered if the use-case was appropriate as a title, since Lord carries multiple meanings in different cultures.

Instead of just describing the workflow, I thought I'd present the conversation I had with Chat GPT in full. ----------------------- CHAT GPT CONVERSATION ---------------------

MATT: In Japanese culture, is it common to have Lords?

CHATGPT: In traditional Japanese culture, particularly during the feudal period from the 12th to the 19th century, lords played a significant role in society. These lords, known as "daimyo," were powerful landowners who controlled territories throughout Japan. They were essentially feudal lords who held significant political, military, and economic power within their domains.

Under the daimyo were the samurai, who served as warriors and administrators, sworn to loyalty to their lords. The relationship between a lord and their samurai was a central aspect of the feudal system in Japan.

While the feudal system and the role of daimyo have largely faded away with the modernization of Japan, aspects of this historical system and the cultural reverence for hierarchy and authority still influence Japanese society to some extent today. However, in contemporary Japan, the term "lord" is not commonly used to refer to individuals holding such positions of power. Instead, Japan has a modern democratic government with elected officials and a constitutional monarchy.

MATT: Did japanese workers, often warriors, consider their bosses as lords?

CHATGPT: In feudal Japan, warriors, such as samurai, were typically bound by loyalty to their lords, known as daimyo. This loyalty was a fundamental aspect of the feudal system, where samurai served their lords in exchange for protection, land, and status. The relationship between a samurai and their lord was characterized by a sense of duty, honor, and obedience.

While the concept of a "boss" in the modern workplace context is different from the relationship between a samurai and their lord, there are some parallels. In contemporary Japanese culture, there is a strong emphasis on respect for authority and hierarchy in the workplace. Employees often show deference and loyalty to their superiors, and the relationship between workers and their bosses can sometimes resemble the dynamics of feudal allegiance.

However, it's essential to note that the modern workplace in Japan operates within a different social and legal framework compared to the feudal system of the past. While there may be elements of respect and loyalty reminiscent of the relationship between samurai and their lords, the dynamics are not identical, and the terminology and expectations have evolved to suit the modern context.

MATT: could anyone be a daimyo, or did daimyo need to have political power?

CHATGPT: In feudal Japan, the title of daimyo was typically conferred upon individuals who held significant political, military, and economic power within their respective domains. While there was a degree of hereditary succession in some cases, particularly among powerful families, the ability to become a daimyo was not solely determined by birthright. Factors such as military prowess, wealth, connections to the ruling shogunate or imperial court, and alliances with other influential families could all contribute to someone attaining the status of daimyo.

Furthermore, during periods of civil strife or instability, individuals with the military strength and political acumen could rise to power and establish themselves as daimyo through conquest or alliance-building.

In essence, while there were certain societal structures and expectations that influenced who could become a daimyo, the position was not strictly limited to individuals with inherited political power. Successful daimyo often demonstrated their ability to govern effectively, maintain order within their domains, and navigate the complex political landscape of feudal Japan.

MATT: could someone who just had a lot of money be considered a daimyo?

CHATGPT: In feudal Japan, while wealth certainly played a significant role in one's ability to exert power and influence, simply having a lot of money would not typically be sufficient to be considered a daimyo. The title of daimyo was not solely based on wealth but rather on a combination of factors, including political power, military strength, land ownership, connections to the ruling authorities, and social status.

Many daimyo came from noble families with long-standing histories of power and influence. Others rose to prominence through military prowess, alliances, or strategic marriages. While wealth could facilitate these endeavors by allowing individuals to raise armies, fund construction projects, or bribe officials, it was not the sole determinant of daimyo status.

However, it's important to note that during periods of upheaval or transition, such as civil wars or when central authority was weakened, individuals with significant wealth could sometimes leverage their resources to acquire political power and establish themselves as daimyo. Yet, even in these cases, they would typically need to demonstrate the ability to govern effectively and maintain control over a territory to be widely recognized as daimyo.

MATT: I am creating a short film set in Japan and would like your advice using this information. In the story, someone is trying to meet with a character, who is of high wealth due to his past as a bounty hunter or samurai.  However, he has put his past behind him and is trying to live peacefully.  The person who is trying to see him is stopped by a hired guard. Would this guard refer to the character as "lord"?

CHATGPT: In your short film scenario, the guard's manner of addressing the character could depend on various factors, including the guard's own background, the cultural context of the setting, and the specific relationship between the character and the guard.

Given that the character is portrayed as having a high status due to their past as a bounty hunter or samurai, it's possible that the guard might show a certain level of deference or respect when addressing them. In the feudal context of Japan, individuals of high status were often addressed with honorific titles such as "lord" or "master."

However, since your character is depicted as having retired from their past life and is attempting to live peacefully, they may prefer not to be addressed with such titles, as it could remind them of a time they are trying to leave behind. The guard may also be aware of this and choose to address the character in a more neutral or respectful manner, using their name or a respectful term like "sir" or "mister."

Ultimately, the way the guard addresses the character could serve to highlight their respect for the character's past accomplishments while also acknowledging their desire for a peaceful life. This can add depth to the characters and help convey the themes of the story effectively.

MATT: So would it be more accurate to call him "Lord" or "Master"?

CHATGPT: In the context of feudal Japan, "Lord" or "Master" could be appropriate titles for addressing someone of high status like a former samurai or bounty hunter who has retired. These titles convey a sense of respect and deference to the individual's past accomplishments and status.

However, it's essential to consider the character's personal preferences and the dynamics of the specific situation. If the character has put their past behind them and prefers not to be reminded of their former title or status, the guard might opt for a more neutral or respectful term like "Sir" or simply their name.

Ultimately, the choice of title should reflect the relationship between the character and the guard, as well as the tone and themes of your short film. You might consider exploring how the use of different titles impacts the interactions between the characters and contributes to the overall atmosphere and narrative of the story.

MATT: In this story, the guard would have respect for the character. Based on this character's personality, I don't think anything that reminds him of his past would phase him, as he already lives with the guilt of what he has done.

However I do believe "Master" being more neutral would be more structurally correct.

CHATGPT: Given the character's personality and the guard's respect for him, using "Master" as a title for the character would indeed be a suitable choice. "Master" carries a sense of respect and formality without necessarily evoking specific connotations of past roles or titles. It's a neutral term that acknowledges the character's status and authority without necessarily highlighting their past.

Using "Master" in this context would align with the guard's respect for the character and their acknowledgment of his position without overly emphasizing his past as a samurai or bounty hunter. It allows the guard to show deference and respect while also maintaining a level of neutrality and discretion that might be appropriate given the character's desire for a peaceful life.

Ultimately, the choice of title should serve the story and characters in a way that feels authentic and meaningful to the narrative you're creating. If "Master" feels structurally correct and aligns with the themes and dynamics of your story, then it's a suitable choice for the guard's manner of addressing the character.

MATT: Thank you

CHATGPT: You're welcome! If you have any more questions or need further assistance as you develop your short film, feel free to ask. Good luck with your project!

--------------------------------------END----------------------------------- Make sure to double-check your responses, as ChatGPT isn't always 100% correct. And don't forget to thank your AI in case of a robot uprising 😜

Until Next Update!

[sidharthojhasns]

Blog post 2.

Evolving nature of the Image

It's a common fact that an abundance of something can sometimes, counterintuitively create scarcity of said thing. example. being alone in a big city full of lots of people can feel more lonely than being alone on a hike away from civilization. this can also be said of our films, books, and other media. and since the quantity has increased our bandwidth has gone down shrinking it to a smaller point in time (Hillenbrand, M. 2017).

"The world is experienced through photographs… the photograph is the most powerful way of shaping how the world is perceived." (Sontag, 1977, p. 80) By reading Sontag's writing one is reminded of the many iconic photos of the 20th century. one is the photograph of the napalm girl. this image shocked the world and showed the horrors of war made itself a part of the public consciousness and shaped our visual culture.

Image has become a dominant aspect of visual culture for decades now (Sontag, S. 1977). But this process may be put into overdrive with the existence of the internet where millions of gigabytes of data is uploaded every second constantly. this has changed our relationship to the image vastly in the contemporary world. making it very different from what the pre-internet generations experience. with the amount images that exist now. and the rapid pace at which they arrive. our relationship with the image seems to have changed. This has happened through many different processes and has had many different results.

One of the results has been the repetition and the existence of remakes. images when they acquire a certain virality or importance are subjected to remakes and iterations leading to memeification. (Hillenbrand, M. 2017).

This memification also happens in a few different ways, where a meme can just be media that is being shared in an im traditional sense, in an altered form, or in a form where the original has lost meaning and the alteration process takes a life of its own. this has been described as a structural meme, emergent meme, and the quintessential meme, respectively (Wiggins, B.E. and Bowers, G.B. 2014).

A small sample of how images get transformed and turned into various memes online, going on a long journey.

One image that draws a parallel to the image of the napalm girl is the image of the drowned Syrian boy from 2015. the effects of this image were very different from the former. (Hillenbrand, M. 2017). the impact was a lot smaller and the image also spawned many imitations remixes and parodies. and if this is compared to our relationship with image today 10 years later, this effect has only grown stronger.

there have been many victims of memification. the power of the internet to over-saturate and overexpose seems to have taken power away from the image. there is a tendency of the internet to trivialize almost anything. Is this a result of the general collective consciousness of humanity and its tendency to do that and the internet only provides a platform for it?. or is it only done by certain people and the flat nature of the internet where any voice from any place can be heard at any time, creates an environment where the voice of a few can seem like the voice of the collective? it can also be the cynical commercial and political forces that have the incentive to dial-up or suppress the power of a said image. reasons can be a combination of all these points.

Also, the fundamentally global and universal aspect of the internet does not seem to care about cultural differences. a taboo topic from one culture might not treated in the same way in another culture. which are now occupying the same space on the internet. this also dilutes images and other signs that are present on the internet. The phenomenon of virality is also capricious and very few other things can be considered lightning in a bottle the way a viral internet meme can be. and trying to recreate its effect, or induce it artificially almost always fails. but still, the act of repetition continues to happen on the internet. and the image keeps transforming in unexpected ways.

Sources-

⦁ Hillenbrand, M. (2017). Remaking Tank Man, in China. Journal of Visual Culture, 16(2), pp. 127–132. DOI: 10.1177/1470412917703154.

⦁ Sontag, S. (1977) On photography. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. pp. 98–127

⦁ Wiggins, B.E. and Bowers, G.B. (2014) ‘Memes as genre: A structurational analysis of the memescape’, New Media & Society, 17(11), pp. 1886-1906. doi: 10.1177/1461444814535194.

[music-dmt]

Evolving Sounds and Shifting Audiences

As technology continues to advance, the way we discover, share, and appreciate music has shifted dramatically. In the past, physical media like vinyl, cassettes, and CDs played a central role in how audiences accessed their favorite artists. Now, a few taps on a smartphone can open up seemingly infinite playlists and channels, changing the dynamic between musicians and listeners forever. The advent of streaming has not only flattened traditional genre boundaries but also expanded the global marketplace, giving listeners unprecedented access to sounds and styles from every corner of the world. In this environment, singer-songwriters like Ryan Cabrera find new audiences who discover their acoustic-pop melodies through curated playlists, social media recommendations, and algorithmically generated suggestions. This constant digital presence allows artists to connect with fans more directly than ever before, fostering a more personal, immediate relationship between creators and consumers.

Broadening the Musical Conversation The internet and social media have given rise to platforms that empower individuals to bring their own voices into the industry’s ongoing dialogue. Artists who once struggled to gain recognition now have direct access to listeners, enabling them to carve out their own spaces. For instance, the rise of black female rappers exemplifies the cultural shift that places control back into the hands of artists who challenge longstanding norms in hip-hop. These women’s voices are increasingly present, not only in music charts but also in social commentary and cultural discourse. Their lyrics, fashion, and creative visuals transcend geographic and cultural boundaries, pushing hip-hop forward while helping to redefine who gets to be seen and heard in an ever-changing musical landscape.

Enduring Influence of Musical Pioneers While the digital age encourages innovation, it also rekindles interest in foundational acts. The resurgence of vinyl and nostalgic throwback playlists highlights that listeners still crave the authenticity and raw energy of earlier eras. The White Stripes serve as a prime example of how foundational rock acts continue to influence modern sound. Though they emerged in a pre-streaming world, their minimalist approach to instrumentation and striking stage presence resonates with today’s audiences who may encounter their music for the first time online. Through social media tributes, remixes, and covers, the White Stripes’ legacy endures, revealing how timeless artistry can thrive in a climate defined by rapid technological change.

The Curious Case of Celebrity Fascination As musicians gain global followings, their private lives often become a source of curiosity. This is especially true in the digital era, where fans can scrutinize a star’s personal narrative in parallel with their discography. Whether listeners are drawn to romantic ballads, confessional lyrics, or upbeat pop tracks, many find themselves intrigued by the stories behind these songs. For instance, the question how many exes does Taylor Swift have frequently arises in fan communities, illustrating how deeply personal stories can become woven into an artist’s public persona. This fusion of personal and professional life can influence how music is interpreted, adding layers of meaning to lyrics and performances. Today’s environment allows fans to interact with each other, share interpretations, and debate the real-life inspirations fueling the art that moves them.

Pioneering Performance and Global Choreography It’s not only recorded tracks and personal narratives that shape the musical experience. The rise of music videos, televised award shows, and online concert streams emphasize the vital role of visual storytelling. Choreographers like Son Sung Deuk have become influential figures in defining how global audiences perceive music performances. Crafting intricate routines that merge cultural elements, these choreographers help bring songs to life. Their work ensures that fans, regardless of language or location, are united by a shared appreciation for compelling visuals and synchronized movement. Artists and choreographers collaborate closely to produce shows that exceed expectations—grand spectacles that merge sound, vision, and performance into a cohesive experience. This holistic approach to artistry ensures that as sounds evolve and audiences shift, the global music scene continues to expand, reaching further into hearts and minds across generations and continents.

[miafoxmanblogs]

Module 5: Participatory Cultures and Online Communities

We (as in the 21st century) are living through an evolving transition from passive consumer culture to the enthralling world of participatory culture in the ever changing landscape of social interaction and digital media. This idea goes against the conventional role of private people by urging them to become active participants in the content creation process as well as content consumption or “prosumers.” One social media platform that perfectly demonstrates this shift is TikTok, a place of innovation and community.

The chapter “Participation” from Christopher Kelty’s Digital Keywords, looks at “participation” in the digital age as a “monument one passes every day” (Kelty, 227). The author highlights the significance of this notion in the digital age, where it finds application in several facets of internet culture, ranging from free software to social media. Kelty draws attention to the idealistic nature of participation, which is commonly criticized. I feel that instead of making a clear argument, this text is presented in a more informational way. In addition to presenting aspects of “participation” in the digital age, it also provides contextual/historical information.

The rise of Haunted TikTok is discussed in the article “Haunted TikTok is the next evolution of internet horror” by Jess Joho. The exposure of “Haunted TikTok” as mentioned by “Haunted TikTok is just the next iteration, evolving from campfire scary stories and Penny Dreadfuls, then also digital urban legends like creepypasta," exemplifies its close relationship to participatory cultures and online communities. This “genre” which emphasizes active engagement on user-generated content, enables people to actively participate in content creation. This has helped build a community of horror fans who all enjoy sharing scary stories. It shows how important online communities are for facilitating mutual interests. A large part of “Haunted TikTok” is that “modern storytellers are often inspired and build on one another's work.” This is similar to how people work together. Additionally, this blurs the lines between reality and fantasy, making it hard for users to know what is real and what is fake. This is parallel to how participatory culture involves people in creating content. I this that this article is convincing and does a good job of showing how “Haunted Tiktok” has become an unusual and growing subculture on the platform. It talks about how it has changed the divide of reality and fantasy, which may have an effect on conspiracy theories, which is something I used to really enjoy watching.

As someone who (guiltily) spends a decent amount of time on TikTok, I have experienced a great deal of participatory culture. I would consider myself a part of “travel TikTok,” meaning users share their travel experiences. There are a lot of different types of travel-related content in this online community, such as travel vlogs, advice, packing tips, etc. Sharing videos that capture my travels is what I contribute to my “creative participation” in this community, which is in line with what the algorithm suggests for similar videos on my feed.

[mitcheldepalo]

What Social Media Means To Me

Social media, as I perceive it, is an incredibly versatile tool that has revolutionized communication, collaboration, and personal expression. I see it as a parallel universe, intricately interlaced with our physical reality, directing our interactions, molding our perceptions, and continuously influencing our worldview.

Born from the foundations of the internet, social media platforms serve as grand stages where global communication knows no bounds. They are hubs of information exchange, experience sharing, digital transactions, and networking. Their evolution has been extraordinary, shifting from simple platforms for sharing amusing cat videos to breeding grounds for multi-million-dollar enterprises.

Reflecting on my personal journey with social media, I recall my early interactions. As a young Instagram user, my posts were sparse and personal, the odd beach snapshot or group photo with friends. I never succumbed to the 'lifestyle' trend of capturing every meal, updating Snapchat stories daily, or curating an image-perfect existence.

Instead, I enjoy the educational value of social media, predominantly via platforms like YouTube. I was drawn to the wealth of knowledge available at my fingertips, sparking my curiosity and quenching my thirst for learning. Today, I can confidently attribute approximately 80% of my knowledge to the power of the internet and social media. However, the journey was, and remains, a cautious one, with a keen awareness of the blurred lines between verified and misleading information.

Fast forward to the present, and my identity on social media has drastically evolved towards content creation. With an arsenal of skills, I design websites on WordPress, host enlightening podcasts, and navigate the maze of Google's algorithms. My ventures span the breadth of the social media spectrum, spreading my content across various platforms to reach wider audiences.

Moreover, I engage my community through a weekly newsletter, keeping them updated and fostering a sense of connection. This role has not only enabled me to share my thoughts but also has enhanced my understanding of audience engagement and content timing.

While writing this, I found myself swept away in a YouTube rabbit hole, engrossed in a video documenting a man's mission to build a lake on his farm. The production quality rivaled that of big-budget TV shows, and this observation struck me - we're transitioning from traditional television to a world dominated by content creators capturing their unique life experiences. The landscape is evolving; our generation, which grew up on YouTube and social media, isn't tethered to television. Instead, we're drawn to these 'one-person shows', filming their intriguing lives with remarkable finesse. The advent of such content creators challenges the longevity of television as we know it, suggesting a shift towards platforms like YouTube and other streaming services. Every ad played contributes to an individual creator, not a faceless corporation, promoting a sense of community. This shift in content creation and consumption suggests an imminent shift away from traditional TV, with a transition towards a new age of independent, user-generated content.

My strengths encompass understanding how platforms recommend content, mastering SEO best practices, and decrypting Google's ranking system. However, challenges persist. The fear of public scrutiny and the mammoth task of creating and managing content across numerous platforms can be overwhelming.

Adding another layer to this complex relationship is the psychological manipulation embedded within these platforms. Crafted by individuals well-versed in psychology, they are meticulously optimized to capitalize on our emotional triggers, often unbeknownst to us. This realization is both fascinating and unsettling.

As I look towards the future, I aspire to delve deeper into the mechanics of social media. My goals include uncovering the secrets behind successful content creation, refining my writing skills to cater to the social media landscape, and fostering a 'people-first' content philosophy.

In conclusion, to me, social media is more than a digital arena—it's an alternate universe teeming with potential and pitfalls alike. It's a powerful learning tool, a canvas for creative expression, and a psychologically tuned matrix. As I continue my journey, I am excited to explore further, grow more, and connect deeper within this intricate web of digital life.

[inapat16]

Love is not in the air. Tchaikovsky's wife by Serebrennikov

For the last article of this series of Serebrennikov movies and how his work can be related to the dissident movement; we are going to take a look through his last movie : Tchaikovsky’s wife. 

This movie came out in December of 2022, during an unstable period in Russia torn between the war in Ukraine, the backlash of a majority of countries because of their decision in the war and with some of the laws against human rights. We could think that a story of one of the most famous musicians of the country would be a great nationalist movie but no, this story is well chosen to show how poorly Russia has evolved. Serebrennikov said it himself : “It is absolutely impossible for my film to be shown in Russia". 

But before talking about this subject, let’s get back to the movie itself. As described in the title, Tchaikovsky’s wife is a story, with some fictional liberties, about the wife of one of the greatest music composers (in my humble opinion) and how she dealt with the fact that she was abandoned by him because of his homosexuality. The main role is played by Alyona Mikhailova and the composer is played by Odin Lund Biron. Tchaikovsky’s wife during her whole life refused to believe that her husband was not interested in women, and it drove her in a state of delirium and craziness. There's something disturbing, because everybody is a victim in this movie. Tchaikovsky is not understood but does nothing to help her wife; and his wife is not letting go of her husband and becomes a conceited character. Because of this situation, she ends up in an asylum where she died in 1917. Serebrennikov tried to understand both the two personalities by reading their letters : almost every sentence in this film is taken from her memoirs. We can applaud the way Serebrennikov decided to shoot the scene of the movie : because the two characters are lost in their relationship, the whole movie is kind of dark, and the angles of the camera are here to remind us that we are looking into somebody's life. During the whole movie, we can see some whispering, some strange looks from the other characters : those scenes are exaggerated with some beautiful plan-sequence shots. The fact that he comes from theater is shown in this movie, and this is what makes the beauty of it. I really enjoyed how he portrayed the insanity of Tchaikovsky’s wife with the use of theatrical methods. This movie reminded me of this famous play from the summer of 2022, The Black Monk that he presented for the first time in Avignon. 

The way Serebrennikov made this movie is interesting to analyze. Because of his problems with the Russian government in the past, and because he wanted to talk about homosexuality in a non-LGBTQ+ friendly country, his movie had to go through a lot of steps to be made. At first and for a few years, he couldn’t even start shooting the movie, because nobody would finance his movie. In today’s Russia, because of the propaganda against homosexuality, there’s no way this movie can be shown. And the worst fact with this movie is the fact that being homosexual in the 19th century seems easier than nowadays. The birth of the movie is also interesting, because the parallel with today's Russia was not at first the goal of the movie. Since his childhood, Serebrennikov was passionate about Tchaikovsky's work and life. He read everything about him, up to his letters with his wife. But, he never could quite identify his mysterious character. With everything going on in Russia, he decided to take the point of view of his wife, to emphasize what’s going on. 

The thing that is interesting with this movie is that the critiques of it are the best. Most of the critics say that the movie is up to the standards of the other movies of Serebrennikov BUT it’s a must see because of how the director manages to criticize today’s Russia politics. 

Milana Tsakaiev

[huapaiqingyuan]

what does it mean when they say “as long as we have karuta, we’ll see each other again”? 

for something that was repeated since the very beginning, and used throughout the story through various’ characters’ growth, and demonstrated through secondary characters, there seems to be some confusion.

we have to realise that karuta, like any sport has an “expiration” age where players’ skills (hearing, sight, movements) decline as a natural consequence of ageing. but unlike most sports, karuta is not what we conventional know as one that is “professional”. this is addressed within the manga itself! there may be classes but these are based on skill. 

age is a factor, but it also isn’t.

and the beauty of this is that it allows such a rich variety of cast. it’s not just your average sports manga where your seniors leave the story the moment they head for college (hello sudo), but we see people from various backgrounds, dealing with various personal, career and familial problems and commitments all competing together.

chihayafuru has always shown us what it means for karuta to bring individuals together, even as other things in their lives have them drift apart.

the trio begin the story proper at the stage where they’ve already drifted apart. (i say proper here, because that is where the meat of the narrative is at. if anything, the elementary school arc serves as a prologue). 

they were never going to maintain their childhood dynamics. they were never going to have that same level of familiarity and closeness. this is part and parcel of growing up. this is something that was acknowledged. and it was this ackowledgement that sparked the fear that they will become strangers.

karuta is like a balm on this hurt, on this aspect of growth, that as long as we have karuta, we will see each other again. we won’t just be a figure immortalised in faded pages of a yearbook, but an encounter to look forward to again. 

chihayafuru is a story that shows how the trio find their way back to each other. and in the background, we are presented with parallels through various characters.

within mizusawa itself, we see an example with nishida; once on the opposite team as the trio played That One 3-on-3 match, he now plays alongside chihaya and taichi. another example, is shinobu and arata, with the former at one point claiming the latter as her only friend. both meeting through karuta, and reconnecting because of it. we also see this play out with sakurazawa and inokuma. both of them have absolutely nothing in common and their only shared hobby, as well as connection, is karuta. it was karuta that introduced them, by bringing both of them to match for the queen title for years on end. and then there’s this lull period. inokuma focused on her family, sakurazawa on her career. even if there was never an established friendship, they nonetheless, they drifted apart. it is karuta that finally brings them together, and they become close enough that inokuma names her daughter after her once rival and now confidant and friend. another example would be harada-sensei, kitano-sensei and makino midori (haha, both examples have a midori, nevermind that the kanji are different). whilst in this case, only harada-sensei is playing competitively, they all still are very much involved in the sport as a whole, with makino reading in the match harada-sensei plays against arata.

i specifically picked out examples of those more in the forefront, and from various distinctive age groups to drive my points, that as long as there is karuta, they will always meet again. this has no expiration date. secondly, all these relationships were always evolving, never staying stagnant. their dynamics naturally shifted as the individuals themselves grew.

[beccanoodles]

Spike and Faye Pairing Analysis

March 2021

Ah the hit or miss pairing of the century! If you don’t love it, you probably hate it lol. I’m a very analytical person so I love analyzing works of art and overall enjoy deep discussions about them too. I have SO much to say when it comes to Cowboy Bebop (and oh I plan to), but I have decided to start with my very own OTP. Here, I am not really going to discuss Spike and Faye’s feelings for each other, but rather why I think people are drawn to this pairing and why I think they're totally valid. Get ready for a long read!😁

⚠️SPOILER WARNING!!! [Major Cowboy Bebop and the movie Out of the Past spoilers]⚠️

First off, let’s clear something up. I am confident most of us can agree that Spike was in love with Julia. Some people assume Spike and Faye fans are deranged and disregard Spike and Julia’s romantic relationship to try and make something of Spike and Faye that never was. While some people may have their various theories and opinions on this, generally, I don’t think anyone denies Spike’s love for Julia. As we will see, this pairing is not really driven by who loves who...let’s first look on the surface.

I don’t know your experiences with the series, but in mine, every time I show this to people it never fails for someone to say something along the lines of,

“Wait, they don’t end up together?”

“Why didn’t he kiss her!?”

“He should have stayed with her...”

and so fourth. 

Naturally, this pairing catches many eyes. 

Think about it, you are given two really cool, really hot and really deep characters that are really fun to see together! There are so many parallels between the two and they are arguably the strongest characters of the bunch. Granted, you can agree with this and still not ship them, but these aspects are part of what opens up the door for many fans of the pairing.

However, there is certainly more to this pairing than them simply looking good together right? As the years pass and I’ve now seen the show multiple times, my understanding of it has evolved in many areas, Spike and Faye included. 

Spike and Faye really couldn’t have ended up together. Sure, it’s a nice thought, but It would have been an entirely different show if they had. I don’t feel that the show should have happened any other way and I don’t think many other fans would either. 

So, what am I saying here?

What’s the point of this paring if I don’t think they should have ended up together? 

It is what's so frustrating about them, yet keeps you coming back and what honestly validates this pairing in my opinion. Spike and Faye are not driven by what is, but rather, what could be.  

I personally feel the themes of classic film Noir are not discussed enough when it comes to Cowboy Bebop! This is one of the show's major influences, especially when it comes to the plot and characters.

One of the common tropes of a film noir is that of a protagonist who is drawn back into his past and ultimate doom, usually by the “seduction” of a femme fatale. In these movies, the women are either a femme fatale [devious, dangerous, mysterious, greedy, troubled, or unreliable] or a woman of virtue [reliable, dutiful, trustworthy, conventional and loving]. 

I am going to use the 1947 classic, Out of the Past to make my comparisons from here on out.

In Out of the Past, Jeff is a former detective who gets caught up in a love triangle between a gangster and his girlfriend Kathie, sound familiar? He attempts to run away with her, but is betrayed and runs off to start a new life in a new town. Here, he meets Ann and falls in love with her, but of course, his past catches up to him and he is drawn back into the world of criminals (largely by Kathie’s involvement). This ultimately results in his and Kathie’s deaths and Ann’s heartbreak. 

Even though Kathie is the femme fatale in this movie, I found myself comparing her more to Julia’s role in the show, than to Faye’s and I found that Faye actually fit best in Ann’s role (this is a bit unusual considering Faye is typically seen as the femme fatale of this show).

Does that mean I think Julia was as ill intentioned as Kathie or that Spike fell in love with Faye? Well, not exactly, let’s look at it a bit further.

“The kind of beautiful, dangerous ordinary that you just can’t leave alone...Like an angel from the underworld or a devil from paradise.”

Most of what we get about Julia is from Spike’s point of view. From this, we learn she is at the center of Vicious and Spike’s conflict, but aside from that she is basically depicted as “The Virtuous Woman” of a noir. The colors around her are warm and she is shown caring for Spike. There is an innocence and modestly about her as well.

Yet, when we finally do meet Julia, we get a different image. We know she is tied up with dangerous men, but is she herself a dangerous woman?

She is certainly capable of betrayal. 

Suddenly she is a bad-ass-gun-toting woman in leather and black, surrounded by hues of grey and dark blue. Intentional or not, Julia is a major part of what lures Spike back into the past and ultimately to his death. In this case, Julia is the femme fatale of Spike’s story and thus, their relationship is doomed from the start.

Faye, on the other hand, is portrayed in somewhat of a contrast. When we first meet her, she is the clear cut femme fatale, appearing cunning, strong willed and seductive. However, we soon find that she has quite a bit of kindness and naivety hidden behind her facade. She uses the former tactics as a way of emotional (and probably physical) protection. Gren points this out in his conversation with her. 

Gren, 

“You’re just afraid they’d abandon you so you abandoned them. You distanced yourself from the whole thing.”

As the show progresses, we start to see less of her “femme fatale nature” and something more genuine. Think about it, between Hard Luck Woman and RFB Part 2 we don’t see much of Faye as her typical conniving or unreliable self, aside from changing the course of the Bebop maybe. Sure she takes off, but it isn’t at all for the same reasons she did in Jupiter Jazz or Speak Like a Child, for example. 

I would argue we actually see her more trustworthy and caring than ever. Since I don’t want to spend too much time talking about Faye’s character development (not here at least) I’ll give one example of this. 

When she returns to the Bebop after her encounter with Julia in RFB Part 1, she gives Spike the message, even though the outcome might hurt her (i.e. he leaves and/or dies). While she does first say “It’s gonna cost you,” she doesn’t really mean it because she tells him without hesitation only moments later.

This isn’t to say Faye good, Julia bad. Both women have their layers and even though we know way more about Faye, I don’t get the impression that Julia is selfish and cunning like Kathie was. But I do get the feeling she was enclosed in a world of crime and betrayal the way Kathie was. We really only know the basics of Spike and Julia’s situation. Who knows the details like motive or how long it lasted etc. etc. We can only speculate...

There is a scene towards the end of Out Of The Past, where Kathie tells Jeff to go away with her. This time it is her asking him, just like Julia asks Spike. During this she mentions,

“I never told you I was anything but what I am, you just wanted to imagine I was. That’s why I left you.”

This got me thinking...did Spike imagine Julia as something she wasn’t? Or something he wanted her to be that she just couldn’t be? 

It could explain why we get such contrasted images of her.

There are themes of this “dreamlike” relationship between Jeff and Kathie, similar to Spike and Julia’s “It was all a dream.”

The two of them were going to “live and be free,” probably something neither of them knew how to do and most likely wouldn’t have been able to get away with.

When Jet asks Spike if he can just forget the past, this is his answer.

Spike,

“There was a woman. For the first time in my life I saw a woman that was truly alive. At least that’s what I thought. She was the part of me I had lost, that part that was missing, that I had been longing for.”

I always wondered about this, because Spike is clearly talking about Julia, but right after is when Faye shows up. To me, that spoke volumes...

Faye is a woman who is terribly human and terribly alive.

Going back to Faye and Ann, I find their similarities shine not so much in the “Virtuous Woman,” concept, but rather in Ann’s dedication to Jeff and her optimism for the future. She is also the last person to talk to Jeff before he leaves for the final time, as if he were being presented with one last alternative. Spike spends his last moments with Faye as well, in which she basically begs him not to go and keep him in the present that she has now discovered for herself. She may be stuck, but she is definitely someone that yearns for human connection, love, and life.

The problem is, Spike and Faye are both set in opposite directions. Her’s leads to a future and Spike knows this because he points it out early on (My Funny Valentine). He also knows, his most likely does not. He has already dug himself too deep into this hole, if you will, that there is really no turning back. 

But let’s say none of that was an issue? What could be?

I sat and watched this movie (Out of the Past) with my mom. She didn’t know anything about it and didn’t know why I was watching it. I wanted her genuine reaction. The whole time she was getting mad at Jeff until the very end. I asked her why and she said that she wanted him to be able to live happily with Ann. I explained to her why he had to do what he did. She understood this, but still couldn’t help but be sad at how things turned out for him, when they could have been good.

Even though Kathie and Jeff are the “lovers,” of this movie, you don’t really want them to end up together. Forget that Kathie has a devious nature, regardless, you know where it has to end and you don’t want to see your hero die.

Like Kathie, Julia symbolizes Spike’s inevitable doom and Like Ann, Faye symbolizes his possible future. 

“I’ll be with you till the end”

                           “You’re the one still tied to the past Spike!”

                                                               “Why do you have to go? Where are you going? What are you gonna do, just throw your life away like it was nothing?!”

It’s two sides of a sad coin...

We want Spike to have a future and because we love the characters of the show, it would be really great if he could have it with them, but that is where the tragedy is. It's only an idea we can think about, a possibility presented to us as it was to Jeff and Spike before their deaths.

The bottom line is, when it comes to Spike and Faye you are really only given a taste. You are not given what you expect to see, which is why I say this ship is driven by what could be. As it is with most of the character relationships in the show, no major breakthroughs are made until the very end, when it's too late. Then it just feels like such wasted potential, but sometimes in life, that's how it is. And thus, we have been given a very classic noir here ladies and gentlemen!

So no, I don’t think people miss the mark when they ship Spike and Faye, nor do I find they invalidate the show by any means. I kind of like that Watanabe switched it up and didn’t do the expected, but left us those subtle hints. He didn’t outright give Spike another lover, but he gave us someone that represents what he could have. Kind of does that with the crew as a whole too!

UGH. I love-hate this show and I love this pairing! Thank you for reading my thoughts and I know this may not be the case or reasoning for everyone, but just based on what I have seen around the community and where this show draws inspiration, this is what I have concluded. I didn’t get into Spike and Faye’s feelings for each other because it gets a little more theoretical there, but I would like to do a post on my thoughts on that as well sometime. I also didn’t touch too much on Spike’s reasoning for choosing to face Vicious in the end, just because I know that will only lead into a whole other analysis lol. But you know I have my thoughts on that and certainly plan to share them 😎 Also, I know I basically spoiled it, but Out of the Past is such a great movie!! I think if you’re a fan of this show it's definitely worth a watch! There are so many more parallels to Cowboy Bebop that I didn’t even mention. Anyways, thanks again and talk to you soon!

[everythingsinred]

Let's Talk About NatsuMikan: The Anime (pt. 1)

I could go on and on about these two and I think I will, just because I don’t often see people talk about the analysis behind them. The meta I have seen about them has included a perspective that equaled the anime and the manga and I don’t think that’s an accurate way of viewing their relationship.

The anime is a different species than the manga, something that frequently happens during the adaptation from page to screen. Since they’re so different, I’ll analyze them separately.

There's going to be many parts to this so I'll keep a table of contents right here so people can more easily navigate (though you can also read through the "let's talk about natsumikan: the anime" tag on my blog):

Anime Analysis

Part 1: Exposition & Episode 7

Part 2: Episodes 8, 9, 10, & 11

Part 3: Episodes 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, & 17

Part 4: Episodes 18 & 19

Part 5: Episodes 20, 21, & 22

Part 6: Episodes 23, 24, 25, & 26 & Conclusion

The anime makes changes, as anime adaptations often do. The most outstanding changes are appearance related, as Natsume now has brown eyes instead of red, in addition to other characters who have hue-shifted eyes and hair. But there are also story changes, and I’ll be focusing on the changes that occur, specifically in regards to Natsume and Mikan and their relationship.

For one, their relationship starts evolving much earlier in the anime. I think it’s pretty undeniable that in the anime, Natsume started liking Mikan at the end of the dodgeball game. That scene never happened in the manga, but in the anime, it’s a crucial step in making sure nothing seems too sudden or forced.

The anime is 26 episodes long. If Natsume only starts liking Mikan after she saves him during the Reo Arc, then we’re already halfway through the show when positive feelings between the two appear. On the other hand, the feelings develop more slowly in the manga because there’s more time to properly develop the relationship in a more drawn out way.

My analysis will start with the anime, because it’s shorter and easier to discuss.

Exposition

It’s impossible to say that the anime was completely loyal to the manga. It very frequently couldn’t be, because it needed to fill in time in episodes or give closure early before the manga even addressed it (Natsume’s backstory in the anime, for instance, is vaguely referred to and implies deviation from the manga).

The most obvious difference between the manga and the anime from the get-go is visual. Not only do they have differing art styles (I don’t dislike the anime style but Higuchi Tachibana’s art style is so distinct and unmistakable while the anime’s isn’t so unique), but the setting is also different.

While the manga started in the depth of winter, the anime starts off in summer/fall. It always struck me as odd that while the first page of the manga has Mikan running after Hotaru in full winter-wear, the anime starts off warm and idyllic. You could almost think of that as a general warning for the difference between the anime and the manga. After all, while the anime has a reputation for being a cutesy and upbeat story about friendship and magical powers, the manga is much darker and discusses many morbid and depressing themes that can and WILL fuck you up. Warm vs. cold seems like an accurate difference, though I don’t think that was intentional.

We see way more of the village life in the anime, including Mikan’s efforts to keep the school from closing. This is a welcome change because Mikan’s passion to keep the school open is nothing compared to her friendship with Hotaru, and even after the school is saved, she runs away to see her friend, even if it means she goes to another school. The manga doesn’t imply that Mikan knew already about the school’s fate, and since she is always so preoccupied with Hotaru anyway, we don’t really get the impression that she cares very much. To Anime!Mikan, Hotaru is more important than saving the school, something she was so passionate about she rallied to get signatures. It’s an extra scene to prove just how much Hotaru matters to Mikan, and to show even more how selfless Hotaru was to go to Alice Academy, since she knew how much the school mattered to Mikan.

“Sign my petition to get a Gakuen Alice anime reboot!!!”

My boy Natsume is only introduced properly in the second episode, when we actually see his face and he speaks. His appearance is different from the manga’s too. I’m not sure if this was to appeal to a younger audience or what, but Natsume’s eyes are changed to brown instead of their iconic red, something that was always my biggest peeve about the anime adaptation. His hair is also somewhat purplish instead of entirely grey/black and, although this does bother me a lot less than the eyes, I wonder why they made this change when other characters have black hair. It might have been to differentiate him from Hotaru, another main character with black hair, though I’ve never had issue in the manga telling them apart.

His first interaction with Mikan is a lot more pleasant in the anime than in the manga, although that’s not really saying anything. Mikan’s skirt simply falls off and Natsume draws attention to it, rather than the unpleasant events that took place in the manga. This different event makes it a lot easier to support a relationship between the two of them right off the bat. They are still antagonistic but it’s not as terrible as it is in the manga. This makes it easier to establish romantic feelings earlier on, and might have been changed in order to achieve just that, or possibly also to appeal to a younger audience. Maybe both? Who knows.

“You can’t sit with us!”

With Natsume presented the way he is in the anime, it’s easier to make the claim that he’s simply a good guy who acts the way he does to protect people. And it’s true! He is! But he is also so much more. In the manga, he’s a more complicated character. Although he is a good person, he still requires character development, which is something he does go through, and something I’ll talk about more in his meta analysis later.

Most of the events at the beginning of the anime parallel the events of the manga. Mikan goes to Alice Academy at the same time of year, Natsume shows up with an explosion, Mikan has to go through the Northern Woods, she discovers her powers in her fight with Natsume, etc. Some of the continuation from episode to episode is different than the transitions between chapter to chapter, there’s extra scenes inserted to fill up time, and some of the exposition seems strangely presented (in the anime, Mikan finds out more about the school when she finds Narumi and Iinchou waiting for her at a tea party, which is…. Super weird…), but all in all the information and events are mainly the same. The big differences start with the dodgeball episode.

“Look how happy she is. Makes me wanna barf.”

Episode 7 vs. Chapter 9

I love the dodgeball episode. I feel like for the most part, the anime does deviation from the manga pretty well. With the last arc as an exception, I generally enjoy their changes and additions to the plot. The anime has to be different, has to progress at a different pace, has to introduce topics at different times. They have an episode to fill, and less time to build relationships. Natsume and Mikan are both different characters in the anime but it’s very subtle and has to happen due to the fact that the anime is shorter and seems more designed for younger audiences, in addition to wrapping up before the manga could explore more of the story.

Anyway, let’s talk about the dodgeball episode. AGAIN THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN IN THE MANGA THE SAME WAY so when discussing NatsuMikan as a concept, the anime events cannot be treated the same as the manga events. A lot of people maybe forget that the manga is very different than the anime when it comes to this episode. I see the two media conflated in plenty of fanfics, where seventeen year old NatsuMikan reflect on the dodgeball game from their youth that changed everything, and I get it because the anime version of the dodgeball game is cute! It's shippy! It's fun! But it doesn't happen in the manga the same way.

There's a similar trope with the sakura tree, which I can only remember from the anime, and yet it's such a fundamental aspect of NM fanfic it might as well have played a vital role in both anime and manga. Nothing wrong with any of this, of course. I'm just making it clear that my analysis will cover the two media as separate for the sake of a cohesive essay. Separating them in fanfic is far less important.

This look could probably kill someone. I’m surprised Mikan is still alive, TBH.

The chapter’s focus is Mikan starting to feel more at home in Class B, making friends with her once-hostile classmates, but the episode is more preoccupied with Natsume and Mikan’s perspectives on each other. While in the manga, the game ends with a tie and Mikan accidentally hits Hotaru in the face with the ball, the anime draws out the game to fill an episode and to introduce an evolution in the way Natsume sees Mikan. The first part of the anime episode is Mikan introducing her friends to her new senpai, Tsubasa. After she invites her friends, we see Natsume glowering at her and promptly ditching the next class, saying to Ruka that he can’t stand being in the same class as her. This addition to the plot already foreshadows that their relationship will change in some way by the end of the episode.

Tsubasa tells a frustrated Mikan that if she wants Natsume to be less unpleasant, he’d need to release some of his toxic energy. Thus, the sporty Mikan introduces the concept of dodgeball to the unwelcoming class. When they finally agree, Natsume gives one condition: that they play with the notorious Alice Ball, which is powered by the thrower’s alice (a detail absent from the manga). This Alice Ball is particularly terrifying with the threat of Natsume’s dangerous fire alice. Mikan also needs to get more people on her team, another aspect absent from the manga. While in the manga, Mikan only had her few friends on her team (including a wandering Ruka) and this ended up playing to her advantage, the anime has a humorous plot of Mikan tracking players down for her team, including a fake mustache she makes with her pigtails (she’s so cute, I love her), paying Hotaru to be on her team, and blackmailing Ruka to participate. This was mainly to fill time, but it makes the dodgeball game more important as well.

In the manga, we don’t see how the game ends, just that the teams tied and that everyone in class is having fun and bonding. In the anime, more emphasis is put on the “Mikan vs. Natsume” aspect, so a tie like the manga’s would be anticlimactic. Thus, the anime concludes the dodgeball game with Mikan and Natsume being the only kids left on the court, and Natsume not using his alice when he throws the Alice Ball. Even Hotaru leaving the game is something she does out of boredom instead of injury, further separating the other characters from the plot. It’s about Natsume and Mikan, and everyone else is mostly a side character. (Though Ruka also plays a vital role to this episode AND chapter, and it’s at this point that I think he started developing real feelings for Mikan as well. So when it comes to the anime, he and Natsume fall for Mikan around the same time, but in the manga, Ruka likes her first and the “he liked her first” argument for Natsume vanishes, though he never had that “advantage” to begin with.)

“Thank you!”

Natsume wins (something that shocked me at twelve years old) and is ready to walk away with his handy “tch” and all but Mikan thanks him for not using his alice and he goes off on her, demanding to know why she’s still smiling despite her loss. She says she’s happy that he had fun and was involved with the rest of class for once, and that in a way that means she wins. For Anime!Natsumikan, this is it. This is the turning point. “I just wanted you to be happy and have fun,” is what Mikan might as well be saying. “Really, this was all for you!” It’s sweet and it’s thoughtful and I don’t think Natsume ever imagined he’d be on the receiving end of her kindness, especially after all their beef. Manga!Mikan would probably not say these things to him, even if she meant them, for the sole reason that Mikan is stubborn and holds onto her pride, especially when it comes to her early relationship with Natsume, but Anime!Mikan is much more forgiving and much more willing to extend an olive branch, like in the dance episode. In any case, Natsume starts falling right then, and it’s obvious too, because he is pissed, and even more angry because he’s not even mad at her. He’s angry with himself for his change of opinion. This is the girl he was fully content to hate forever and yet here he was, starting to like her. Not ideal.

This scene, something so crucial to the development of Anime!Natsumikan, is completely absent from the manga. In the manga, Natsume still dislikes her by the end of the game although he does have fun.

He's not angry, just disappointed. In himself.

I’m not going to say one is better when it comes to starting up NatsuMikan because they’re very different creatures and I actually thoroughly enjoy both.

Anyway, the NatsuMikan after episode 7 is almost the same as in the manga, but the events carry a different weight since we know Natsume likes Mikan now (even if he would never admit it).

Summary

I hope this first part was interesting, and that it introduced the idea of Anime!NatsuMikan as being a little different from the manga's version. Yes, it is more or less the same story, but with so many thematic and plot changes, they take a different form as well, in a perhaps more subtle way, kind of like a slightly canon divergent fanfic. Fanfic where Natsume starts liking Mikan a bit earlier on in the story.

Next Part ->