#where are all the theorycrafters

[elysiaslvr]

the end of the inversion of genesis quest…

THAT WAS FUCKING ISTAROTHS VOICE AT THE END I KNOW IT I JUST KNOW IT BRO THAT WAS SO FUCKING CRAZY IM SCREAMING

[purplelea]

Something that just occurred to be is that is isn't extremely weird for Neku and Sho to only be allowed to use one pin at a time? Because we know for sure that in the og Neku was able to use six of them and we can easily guess that Sho could as well, given his Imagination level. It's likely that Beat could, too, but I'm not well versed enough in the og's gameplay to tell.

In any case, neither Neku nor Sho can use more than one pin at once. Another piece of dialogue from Sho also reveals that the level caps on the pins have been removed, making them usable by any player regardless of their level.

Those two factors are some pretty big changes—we see how surprised Sho is when he realizes the latter. My question is: how were they made possible?

There is no reason why Kariya or Uzuki, when in control of Shibuya, would make those changes. Joshua wouldn't have either, because they make no sense in Shibuya's Game. So that only leaves Shiba, who probably made them to fit Shinjuku's rules better. Only thing is, that Sho has been Conductor before, so he should have been aware that this was a possibility. Yet his reaction makes me believe that he never considered it possible (it is possible that he didn't consider it simply because he didn't think about it or because it wouldn't have helped him with his plans anyway, but I think he genuinely didn't know it could be done) which then leads to the logical conclusion of: only a higher power could've done this.

I believe Kubo's the one who made those changes to Shibuya's Game, or Shiba, but thanks to Kubo's powers—in any case, it's a intervention of the Higher Plane. Sho isn't stupid and probably guessed it right away. I am thus adding this to the list of hints he got in order to guess who was behind all of this

[thisfragilesky]

on the idea of godhood and my one giant lore catchall post

spoilers for dragon age, inquisition, and trespasser dlc, etc.

this plays off of a post i read recently (i didn't remember to save it) that referred to a word used in a codex entry that basically corresponds to 'the idea and worship of power/godhood made real', as in the worship of a figure, at sufficient quantities, granting them real power. the post theorized this was how the evanuris went from being mere generals in a war to being worshipped as mage-gods, same for solas and possibly mythal. i believe it also mentioned the idea that the way the 'gods' were worshipped would've affected the gods' demeanor as well, though that becomes more of a chicken vs egg situation.

anyway. here's some thoughts i've been having.

according to solas, 'Falon'Din's vanity and desire for worshipers was so great he started brutal wars to gain more, killing all who would not bow to him.' it's unknown if the other evanuris did similar things, but the general idea is that: gain worshippers to gain power through their worship.

the chantry's goal '...is to spread the Chant of Light to all four corners of the world and to all races... Once all peoples have accepted the Chant and practice its teachings, the Maker will return and restore the world to its former glory.' (emphasis mine, quoted from the wiki)

so.

would the idea of 'worship of power/godhood made real' apply to this as well? that the meaning of the chantry insisting on spreading the chant of light to all of thedas is to mean that once everyone/enough people worship and believe in the maker, he will have power (again) to affect the world, whether the chantry knows this or not?

going down this line of thought leads me to think.. regardless of whether the maker is Real God or a Powerful Mage Worshipped to Godhood, the concept of the Original Sin would line up with a very primeval 'had his children/worshipers turned away from him, thus diminishing his power' that may have happened before the actual original sin.

would the same apply to how the qunari leaders try to spread the teachings of the qun? as far as i can tell, the qun maybe honors the askhaari koslun, but he isn't venerated as a god or as in having powers aside from the tales of his visions and prophecy regarding his teachings. i think. i did a brief skim on the wiki.

in light of it all, this could be an aspect of atheism trying to quell all the powers vying for godhood in the world. don't believe in gods! any of them! you'll give them power! all you need is order and obedience!

in works, in theory.

anyway, the thing that's been on my mind the MOST:

the Forgotten Ones, the void, and the blight. bear with me.

All that the Maker has wrought is in His hand Beloved and precious to Him. Where the Maker has turned His face away, Is a Void in all things; In the world, in the Fade, In the hearts and minds of men.

(emphasis mine, quoted from the wiki as from the canticle of threnodies)

i've read and may or may not subscribe to the theories about the blight originating from the void, from the implication of andruil going hunting in there for the Forgotten Ones and becoming Infected, bringing a plague back to her lands. assuming this story is true, then that is where the initial taint came from that could have affected the primeval thaig in the free marches (it being somewhat close to the forest of arlathan could lend credence to this) before the tevinter magisters ever entered the fade.

according to the wiki, the codex for fen'harel gives us that 'Forgotten Ones are a dark mirror presiding over the worst aspects of existence: disease, terror, spite and malevolence. They serve not as shepherds of the elves, but rather as figures of fear and dread.'

SO. IF:

andruil's plague = blight the plague = came from the void the void = either 'the maker turned his face from it' or 'the maker is not present here' The Forgotten Ones = worst aspects of existence, reside in or were born of the void the evanuris = aspects of the maker? (i THINK morrigan mentions this idea)

the evanuris as the relatively more positive aspects of the maker warring against the forgotten ones, the objectively more negative aspects of the maker, while both try to spread their versions of.. idealogy, i guess?

i say this because i question what the whole point of the blight is. but if the blight comes from the void, and the void is where the forgotten ones are or live or come from, and if the forgotten ones are.. possibly.. negative aspects of the maker... it's less that 'the maker is sending us trials by cleansing fire via the blights' and more 'this splintered part of the maker (the forgotten ones) wants to spread this negative blight to make themselves more powerful'.

the evanuris, though relatively More Positive, also apparently just want to make Themselves more powerful (because ambition can be both good and bad). and maybe initially the war between the evanuris/ancient elvhen and the Forgotten Ones WAS a war against the negative aspects of the maker, to prevent the bad from overtaking the good.

(but perfectly good and perfectly bad are in no way perfection, in and of themselves)

solas says the evanuris were mortal. there's theories that they're spirits, whose identities depend on how they are remembered and worshiped.

i say: who is to say that solas's insistence on their mortality ISN'T just another way to alter their state, to MAKE them mortal just be believing that they are. spirits can alter their reality. and with how cole made himself corporeal, the idea that spirits can just become Real and Physical if they Believe it (or are believed in?) hard enough has implications on, maybe, how some things came to be:

the evanuris: the practice of vallas'lin dedicating (unhappy, ungrateful) slaves to the evanuris affecting their later behavior (madness, vanity, betrayal) the avvar gods: powerful spirits(?) given stewardship over the avvar clans by their reverence and worship. one can even be bound to a dragon, just like how the grey wardens bound demons. just like how you could bind cole, if you wanted. the void: did the maker turn away from those dark parts of himself, whether in fear or shame? did they fester in resentment and give rise to things void of love? the forgotten ones: because every light makes a shadow, whether intended or otherwise. these shadows are black and forgotten, and they want you to know that you are, too. the dragons you fight: were they heroes worshipped to dragon-godhood, like the ancient human tribes of old did? which hero was hakkon made to possess and subvert? which angry soul perverted hakkon's purpose? the old gods: who created them, and for what? (i have ideas.) the titans: did they make the dwarves or did the dwarves make them? (i'm thinking about this) the archdemons: like demons. a spirit's purpose, perverted. the blight: a perversion of life? or the spiritual equivalent of terraforming the world for an incompatible race? the inquisitor: are you who you are or are you what they believe you to be? how do you know? you are, inevitably, a product of society and what it expects from you. the maker: did someone make him, too? what did they expect of him?

...and, you know, maybe i'm a bit crazy to theorycraft in this direction. but you know what?

i wonder if the impression of teyrn loghain on the fade is ultimately that of a traitor or a hero. i suppose that depends on how you, the player, altered his story and what people believed of him, how they remembered him. if he is remembered as both, is he both? can he only be one?

does this make you a spirit? does that make you a Maker?

[mercy-main]

Lifeweavers abilities have been (fully) revealed and life grip looks so much more fun and inpactful than I thought! You can save ppl from death pits, taxi them from back from spawn, and pull allies out of enemy ults (especially Reins, Orisas, Bastions, Dooms, Meis, Reapers, Zaryas, Sigmas).

And in higher ranks (with more coordinated, communicative teams) you could have a tank or dps play super aggressive cus they know you'll be there to bail them out, or pull an ulting ally into the enemy team (eg. Reaper) or onto high ground (eg. Soldier)

I really worried that life grip would be highly situational, or a "get yelled at" button. Cus whether you save their life cus they were out of position or ruin their ult, repositioning teammates (without coms) is always a bad idea, it's better to let them die*. But now I see there's a lot you can do with it, even without a hyper coordinated team. Super exited to try this ability!! 🌸

[imunbreakabledude]

lmao i think tier 5 is gonna be a harder relic choice for me than all the other tiers combined

[lime-bloods]

I honestly didn't ever expect that I'd be in the position where I'd be using this blog not just to analyse what has come before in Homestuck, but to look toward the comic's future and do some real old-fashioned theorycrafting. but the time has come. so here goes; lime-bloods' Beyond Canon theories as of the July 6th 2024 update:

Vriska's Going to Hell

were all gonna help you! / whether you like it or not

a select few eagle-eyed readers already noticed that the sound used in last month's (Vriska: Figure shit out yourself.) is called "hell_tierwav". while it was easy to dismiss this as irrelevant composer shenanigans at the time, it's now become clear exactly what this was foreshadowing. whether it would be more apt to call this "Hell" or "Purrgatory" is probably up for debate - but whatever you call it, Vriska's been placed in a dimension seemingly tailored specifically for her personal torment.

while Vriska characteristically interprets the recreation of her childhood home as a symbol of how badass she was, the ghosts of her past - both literal, as the shades of the trolls she killed as Mindfang, and figurative, in the form of sprites wearing the faces of her dead friends - show us in no uncertain terms that Vriska's childhood home is the stage where traumas play out.

Erisolsprite puts it succinctly with his welcome to hell, but pay close attention to what exactly we're being welcomed to: this update ends on page 665. so as of this next update, we'll be starting on page 666.

Does Homestuck Have Hell?

the exact bubble of reality Vriska's currently found herself in seems to be an entirely new construction of the likes we've not yet seen in Homestuck - but that doesn't mean this kind of cosmic torment is without precedent. because while 666 is a number with Satanic connotations in the broader cultural context, it also has a very particular meaning of its own within the world of Homestuck. indeed, the latter half of the comic almost revolves around it, culminating in a climax in Act 6 Act 6 Act 6.

specifically, this repetition of a single digit is emblematic of recursive storytelling. to summarise what you can already read about in detail in my essay The World / The Wheel: when Caliborn is 'gifted' the Act 6 Act 6 supercartridge, which he is told is an "expansion" of Homestuck, it's a trick. there is no "expansion"; he's going to be trapped in a story that never ends because it keeps dividing into smaller and smaller versions of itself forever. the only way to truly beat the devil who trapped the heroes within a story is to trap him in his own story.

that's what Caliborn's "Hell" is, and that's also exactly what the Alternate Calliope achieved in Act 7 by creating the black hole which Vriska knocked Lord English into, ending Homestuck's story - something that Calliope even hints at in this very update, when she refers to the black hole as "containment"; not an accident, but a deliberately crafted prison. black holes are a symbol of recursion and regression; being sucked into one means being forced to live out your whole life over and over again, forever. so really, this is all we ever could have expected to happen when Vriska stepped into a black hole within a black hole! the presentation of the narrative even subtly hints at this; events in Beyond Canon that take place in the black hole are enclosed (in brackets), and now events that take place in a black hole-within-a-black-hole are contained within {curly brackets}, because you should always use a different kind of brackets to differentiate nested parenthesis from each other!

it is absolutely no coincidence that when Caliborn closes the curtains on his appearances in Homestuck, thinking he's won when really he's been condemned to a hell of his own making forever more, it's with a tribute to this exact same Sweet Bro and Hella Jeff strip.

IF YOU REMEMBER JUST ONE THING I SAY, OF SO MANY GREAT THINGS SAID BY ME, THEN PLEASE REMEMBER THIS. I WANTED TO PLAY A GAME.

So What Does That Mean?

one of Beyond Canon's central missions is expanding upon Homestuck's exploration of the relationships between author, text, and audience. as discussed above, a large part of Homestuck's thesis is the evil of forcing characters to live the same lives and the same stories over and over without the chance to grow or move on, and Beyond Canon picks up on this by placing Dirk in the position of trying to keep Homestuck going forever purely to appease its fans, while the Alternate Calliope continues to oppose this ideology. and while the alpha Calliope outwardly seems not to have taken a hard position on where she stands in this cosmic battle, the question posed by her device seems to be an entirely new one: can it actually be a good thing to regress, to return to ground that the story has already covered? can this path lead to something new, rather than merely stagnation?

it's so relevant that Vriska is being confronted with the crimes of her past, not only in the form of all the trolls she was personally responsible for killing but also in the form of the exact same punishment she condemned Lord English to with her heroism - complete with the herd of horses that are always present at Caliborn's demise! but where being condemned to an eternal cycle was fitting punishment for Caliborn, someone who refuses to break free of cycles of abuse and instead chooses to enact that same abuse on the world around him... if Vriska is someone who can break free of these cycles, who can change and become a better person despite what happened to her, will this punishment have the same effect? or, as Davepeta seems to believe, is forcing Vriska to reckon with her own past and traumas exactly what will allow her to break free of that cycle?

DAVE: [...] ill just be over here in the hyper gravity chamber training to beat lord english KARKAT: WE HAVE A HYPER GRAVITY CHAMBER???

it's hard not to be struck by the parallels in design and purpose between the Plot Point and Dragon Ball's Hyperbolic Time Chamber, and not just because of the Dragon Ball enthusiasts present on Beyond Canon's writing and art teams: albeit in typically Strider-bastardised form, the Time Chamber got a shoutout in Andrew Hussie's own Homestuck (see quote above), in a reference that was even picked up on by prolific theorist bladekindeyewear at the time. for the uninitiated: the Hyperbolic Time Chamber allowed its users to train for extended stretches of time, sometimes even spanning years, while a significantly smaller time period passed in the world outside - something that is actually true of real-life black holes! and with the Plot Point's own emphasis on time, represented by the hourglass included among its mechanisms, it seems to me that an essential part of making the 16-year-old Vriska ready for the trials ahead will be giving her the time to undergo the same growth her adult friends have experienced.

considering that Beyond Canon is already playing in the Ultimate Self space, where there are levels of power beyond merely the "god tiers", it also doesn't seem too farfetched to speculate that Vriska, forced to reckon with the fact that becoming a powerful Thief of Light isn't the be-all and end-all of personal growth, will take another leaf out of Dragon Ball's book here and ascend "beyond Super Saiyan". perhaps this is even the "hell tier" so cheekily alluded to in the Plot Point flash? certainly this kind of evolution would be the perfect way to challenge Dirk's belief that the Ultimate Self is the only logical final step for a character's development.

whatever the case, I believe we can take Davepeta at their word here. I don't think it's just a joke that by the end of this ordeal Vriska Serket is going to be fucking RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIPPPPPPPPPED!

[prettyinpwn]

Mabel Pines: How Well Was She Written... Really? (GF Writing Analysis Pt. 3)

GF Writing Analysis Series: Pt. 1 - Ford Pines: A Masterclass in Writing a Good Flawed Character Pt. 2 - How Gravity Falls Could Have Been Better + Poor Ford and Wendy

Like my previous post in my GF Writing Analysis series, I am a bit nervous to post this, to be honest. I love this fandom, but there are two main topics in it that tend to draw the most debate: A. how Gravity Falls ended and its length/pacing, and B. Mabel's writing.

I already tackled the former in my last post, so today, I'm tackling the latter: Mabel. I like to live fandom life on the wild side, what can I say?

Let me preface this post by saying that I am very neutral on Mabel as a fan. I never especially liked her, and I never especially disliked her. It's nothing against Mabel. I'm just personally more drawn to characters like Stan and Ford the most, and if I'm honest, the only reason I'm drawn to Dipper more than Mabel is likely because I relate to him more.

*Gestures at, you know, this blog's over a decade long history of theorycrafting and analyses.*

So... I'm coming at this post with a very neutral eye and an open mind, and like my other analyses, it will be based as much as possible on writing theory I learned in college and over the years in personal study.

But unlike Ford's post, where I already had a viewpoint in mind and wrote it around proving that thesis, Mabel's is going to be more exploratory, and I will reach a conclusion at the end. Is Mabel really that badly written? Is she written pretty well with just some flaws? Or... is she actually a really well-written character and just misunderstood?

Let's discover the answer together.

Mabel's Introduction + Who is She?

I will quote my general method of analyzing character writing from my Ford analysis post to start:

"When I took writing classes in college (and over years of writing in general and drooling over writing advice podcasts and blogs), I found that the best method for me, personally, when it comes to crafting characters is to focus on two major things:

1. Their want.

2. Their need. On the surface, these look like the same things, but in character writing, they can be vastly different. For example, say that you have a character that greatly desires fame and recognition. They want these things.

But what’s the real reason behind it? Is it because they had a parent that was famous and want to live up to their example? Is it because they want to be adored by people? Is it because they were told they’d never amount to anything by someone and want to prove them wrong?

This real reason behind it all is the core need. Yes, they want fame and recognition, but they need it because, say, they have low self-esteem and need copious amounts of outside validation to boost it.

Tied to this need is usually a backstory reason (sometimes called their wound). Say your hypothetical character was bullied a lot as a child. Or abused by a parent. Etc. Whatever the wound was, it caused a big, painful hole in their heart that they try to fill and fix with their want.

So they go on a journey. The want is often the external journey. The need is often the core journey / character arc. Our example character seeks fame and recognition on an external journey, but deep inside, they realize they need something else, which is to understand that their past trauma/wound doesn’t define them, and fame and recognition will not be the balm they expect it will be. Often, they realize they had what they needed all along. They grow past their flaws associated with their seeking this want through understanding and instead pursuing the need."

So... what is Mabel's core want and need as a character? And what's her wound? Who is she? Let's identify these things by looking closely at the very first episode, Tourist Trapped. Tourist Trapped establishes the following things about Mabel:

Optimistic; likes to look on the bright side of things. ("Yay, GRAAAAAASSS!", "Check out all my splinters!").

Go with the flow / easy-going / accepts things at face value. ("Yes, you can keep chewing on my sweater!", learns Norman is a bunch of gnomes and instead of punting them immediately she tries to gently turn them down).

Romance obsessed. No examples needed. *Gestures at whole series.*

Assumes the best in people / accepting of others. (e.g Norman).

Naive / overly trusting (e.g Norman again).

Cares about her family (protecting Dipper).

Clever (ever notice how she tricks the gnomes almost like how Stan tricks Bill near the end of the series?).

(Quick side note because this part always blows my mind: Tourist Trapped is a microcosm of the whole series, by the way. Two siblings get into an argument, one gets swept into the paranormal, and the other saves them from it. The former tricks the paranormal in a clever way to stop the paranormal threat from harming them both, and the two make up at the end and go on more adventures. Sound familiar?)

Back to Mabel, let's identify her core want and need and wound from her character traits. I struggled a long time with identifying this, because Mabel seems like such a laid back character that it's harder to pin these down for her compared to, say, Ford (false validation given to use me vs. honest but selfless love) and Stan (earning worth vs. knowing inherent worth). But I think I pinned it down...

Yins and Yangs

And guess what? Hers and Dipper's wants and needs match Stan and Ford's, but not in the way you think. Dipper has Stan's struggle, and Mabel has Ford's. Just like how Tourist Trapped is a microcosm of the whole series where one twin gets whisked away into the weird (Ford and Mabel) and the other needs to save them from it (Stan and Dipper)... their wants and needs are the same.

Granted, it manifests in different ways. Using Ford as an example, Ford's want is love and acceptance, but in a "praise me and my science and my accomplishments and accept me for who I am" way. Mabel's want is love and acceptance, but in a "must find boyfriend and keep loved ones close" way. Or in another way of explaining it, Ford desires introverted love, and Mabel desires outgoing love; makes sense for their characters. Ford is a Mabel if she were an introvert, and vice versa. Just like how Stan is a Dipper if he were an extrovert, and vice versa.

So... yeah. Ford and Mabel are the same character... sort of. Because as much as Ford pursues the unknown, Mabel pursues love (both romantic and familial). And Stan and Dipper are the twins that chase after them, anchoring them back to reality, sometimes even literally.

And that's where we come to the concept of balance, AKA why the twins are good for each other. You ever notice how the Pines at their worst is always when they're alone? Stan alone is a depressed criminal. Ford alone is both paranoid and naive. Dipper alone is insecure and pessimistic. And Mabel alone is also too trusting like Ford and delusional.

What fixes this? Their twin. Stan with Ford is happy and with purpose again, Ford with Stan is protected (thanks to Stan's people smarts) and grounded, Dipper with Mabel is more confident and optimistic, and Mabel with Dipper is protected (thanks to Dipper's logical smarts) and realistic.

THAT'S why the show had Mabel and Dipper stick together at the end. THAT'S why there was such an emphasis on why Stan and Ford being apart caused so many issues. THAT'S why Dipper chose to stay with Mabel over the apprenticeship. Because time and time again, the show states the thesis that a Pines without their twin is a dysfunctional Pines. Agree with it or not, that's the theme with their characters.

Because - and I say this lovingly - the Pines are kind of stupid at times without their twins. Stan's purposeless and turns to crime, Ford's too naive and trusting, Dipper's too pessimistic, and Mabel's too optimistic. Ford gives Stan purpose, Stan gives Ford some actual common sense, Mabel gives Dipper some needed levity, and... Dipper gives Mabel a reality check (GEE, I WONDER WHY MABEL'S WEIRDMAGEDDON EPISODE WAS CALLED 'ESCAPE FROM REALITY', AND WHY DIPPER WAS THE ONE TO BREAK HER FROM IT? *Cough beats people over the head with a theme but somehow people still didn't get it cough.*).

Sorry, Caps Lock rant aside, honestly, I should just make a chart to explain the Pines. We'll be using four scales: introverted (I) vs. extroverted (E), gravity (G) vs. levity (L), active (A) vs. reactive (R), and book smart (B) vs. people smart (P).

(Yes, we're gonna make our own Gravity Falls Myers-Briggs, because I'm that insane.)

This system also reflects the Pines on a layer level: Stan and Mabel's outside personas (E and P) seem more similar, but their cores are different (GR vs LA); the same goes for Ford and Dipper (shared outside persona of I and B, but different cores of LA and GR).

This is why, in the fandom, we often look superficially at the Pines and say, "Dipper is the Ford twin because smart nerds, and Mabel is the Stan twin because outgoing fun ones". No, my friends: Dipper is the Stan twin, and Mabel is the Ford twin. Dipper is just Stan in a Ford coating, and Mabel is just Ford in a Stan coating.

We'll come back to this later for the next section, but for now, let's focus on answering the main question: is Mabel written badly, or is she written well?

Well... she has core wants (fun and love and escapism and childhood). She has a need (reality and gravity and facing the future). And... well, they never really explored her wound AKA her reason why she desires these things like they did for Stan and Ford.

But... my guess is that reality has often wounded her and popped her bubble in the past (maybe bullying at school, hence her desire to not face growing up alone without Dipper), so she avoids it in order to keep her optimistic fantasy alive to avoid pain. Just like... I dunno... that whole episode that centered around that thing called Mabeland? Metaphors, people.

So so far, Mabel checks the same boxes as my earlier analysis on why Ford is a well-written character:

Want? Check. Need? Check. Realizes she had what she needed all along (Dipper to ground her)? Check. And our last point, I'll refer back to my quote from earlier: "They [well-written character] grow past their flaws associated with their seeking this want through understanding and instead pursuing the need."

Yeah. Mabel has flaws, associated with her pursuing her wants. They manifest in that, yeah, sometimes she's selfish. And that's the flaw most people in the fandom have criticized her for.

But guess what? ALL of the Pines are selfish at times.

Stan? Ford gets captured in Weirdmageddon and Stan - although we get why he's bitter - is reluctant to save him again.

Ford? Ford received a college grant and made no attempts to reach out to Stan who was poor and struggling - although we understand why Ford was bitter, too - and reaches out to Stan not to make amends but to ask him to do him a favor.

Dipper? Probably the least selfish of the Pines, but still... at times he's selfish, too. The Time Traveler's Pig explores this. He repeatedly rewrote the day of the fair because he wanted a chance to be with a girl we know he never would have gotten with anyways. Did he think about what Wendy wanted when he did that? No. Did he think about what Mabel wanted? Well, no, at least until the end, but the moral of that episode is that Dipper learned to sacrifice his selfish want to make someone else happy.

So if people dislike Mabel for being selfish, well... they should dislike all of the Pines, then. And there are times she gives up her wants for Dipper, too, albeit shown less often. She trashes her sock puppet show - her chance at impressing a guy and compromising her core want of love - to save him, inspired by all the times he sacrificed for her. She lets go of a land of perfection and her delusion - albeit one that really wasn't real - to help him fix Weirdmageddon and save Ford.

Because here's the thing: a well-written character has flaws. There'd be no story if they didn't. A character without flaws has no arc and is poorly written. Mabel - just like the other Pines - is flawed and that's great. Because it means... she's well-written. I'll quote my post on Ford again:

"This is why Ford is a well-written character. He has flaws and suffers for them until he makes up for his mistakes. They are understandable flaws, but like in real life, just because it’s understandable why we act poorly at times - be it because of trauma or upbringing - it doesn’t mean we’re justified in continuing to hurt others or ourselves because of those flaws. We must acknowledge them, grow past them, and do our best to do better in the future, as well as apologize to those we hurt along the way."

Just like Ford, Mabel has flaws - albeit understandable ones based on who she is and her history - and she suffers for them. But in Escape From Reality, she acknowledges them, grows past them, and does her best to do better in the future.

As for the other hate on her I've often seen, including the way she gave the Rift over to Blendin/Bill... my friends... she did the same thing Ford did. And the flaw Bill took advantage of to do this was the same flaw she had in Tourist Trapped: her naivety.

Bill: "Hey, naive Pines twin, I have something you want (for summer to never end / validation and knowledge). Just give me something (the Rift / possession and build this portal) and I'll let you have it. I swear I'm innocent and on your side and have your best interests at heart!"

Bill is a master manipulator. So if we don't judge Ford for the way he was manipulated at the age of his late twenties, then why the hell do we as a fandom judge Mabel for falling for the same trick as a 12 year old?

And so we return to Tourist Trapped. Mabel's flaw in that episode was the same as the flaw she had by the end of the series. Drawn into a fantasy, lacking realism and logic about it, sibling saves her, apology to sibling, and working together to fix the mess. The difference is, is scale and stakes, and at the end of the series, it's a permanent change of growth. Mabel learns to accept reality; that life won't always be love and rainbows and sunshine, and that's okay.

I also want to highlight how the Pines' flaws are often their greatest strengths, too. Dipper often pops Mabel's fun bubble with his pessimism and realism; sometimes it rains on her parade, and sometimes it breaks her out of a delusion. And vice versa: Mabel often is too optimistic and naive, and that leads to Dipper having to save her from some manipulations and delusions, but sometimes she's the one who lifts him up when he needs it and he's too pessimistic and insecure. Case in point, Gideon Rises, where Dipper insists he needs Journal 3 after Stan takes it, and Mabel tells him, "You're a hero whether you've got that journal or not.".

And as for the hate on her "holding Dipper back from his apprenticeship", I'll quote this here, said by Mabel after Dipper convinces her to leave Mabeland:

"Hey, Dipper? I appreciate what you said back there, but if you want to take Ford's apprenticeship, I won't get in your way."

She offers him a compromise; she allows him to go for it. Because she learned her lesson of accepting the reality that, sometimes, people grow apart instead of things staying the same forever. She's become selfless. And at that point, it was Dipper's responsibility and choice to take it or not.

So if you're upset that Mabel "held Dipper back", no. She gave him room to leave, and he said no and stayed. If he'd wanted it that badly, he'd have gone for Ford's apprenticeship. And remember the series' thesis on the Pines I stated earlier:

"A Pines without their twin is a dysfunctional Pines. Agree with it or not, that's the theme with their characters."

So... we've now arrived at our conclusion about Mabel's writing based on the points we've explored above:

Once and for all, and I'll bold and make this big to emphasize my point, because I hope it quells some of the Mabel dislike: Mabel is a well-written character. She's flawed, yes, but that's the point. So... Why the Mabel Hate, Then?

There have been some ideas thrown around as to why Mabel has received extra scrutiny compared to the other Pines characters. One theory that's been thrown around is her gender, as she's the only female character of the four Pines, although I would lean towards that this isn't the likely main cause, due to the fact that there are other female characters that are liked in this fandom. Wendy receives little to no hate that I've ever seen (and in fact, I mostly see wishes to have gotten more writing featuring her character). Pacifica is liked, especially when it comes to shipping her with Dipper. So... why Mabel, specifically?

I would argue it's not her gender, specifically, but more her femininity. Mabel is very stereotypically "girly". Wendy is a tomboy, and Pacifica - although "girly" - is more of an aggressive character before her growth. Mabel is feminine and passive. She also is into many stereotypically "girly" things, like romance, knitting, crafts, etc. So people that are uncomfortable with the stereotypically feminine might have a subtle, unconscious "ick" reaction to Mabel for that reason.

And... combine Wendy's tomboy quality and Pacifica's association with a male main character (at least, when shipped with Dipper), well... er... I think that may be one potential reason why Mabel is disliked more. She's A. "girly" and B. she has no inherent "value" to a male character.

Dear God, I feel ick even writing that. But when you think about it... that could be one potential reason why she's the most disliked female character in the series. She's girly and is not a prize to be won to add value to a male's life. I shudder to think that this may be the case in today's world, but that may be the unconscious bias some people might have against her, and instead of realizing that, they blame it on "Mabel's selfish / poorly written".

Or, it could be the expectation that women need to be more selfless than men. Let's take after Ford for a moment and do some science: "The reward and learning systems in our brains work in close cooperation. Empirical studies show that girls are rewarded with praise for prosocial behavior, implying that their reward systems learn to expect a reward for helping behavior instead of selfish behavior. With this in mind, the gender differences that we observed in our studies could best be attributed to the different cultural expectations placed on men and women. This learning account is also supported by findings that indicate significant differences in the sensitivity of the reward system to prosocial and selfish behavior across cultures." (Credit/source).

Translation? In society, we praise women for being selfless, and we praise men for being selfish.

Getting this back to Dipper and Mabel, many have viewed their character conflict as "Dipper's being ambitious, and Mabel's holding him back". And with Dipper being a boy, and Mabel being a girl, fans might judge her overly harshly for her selfishness yet are easy on Stan, Ford, and Dipper for their selfishness because, yes, possibly... gender bias. "Mabel should have been less selfish!", they yell, yet people who criticize this flaw of hers are awfully quiet when it comes to addressing this same flaw in the male Pines.

Another reason why I think this is a strong contender for the most common reason why Mabel is disliked, is because of the parallelism between the two sets of Pines twins. Stan does the same thing as Mabel does: wanting his twin to stay with him, not wanting him to pursue his ambitions, wanting things to always stay the same...

So why do people not criticize Stan for the same thing? Why does he get more sympathy, yet Mabel gets ire? When Stan does it, he's a loving brother who just wants his brother to stay. When Mabel does it, she's "too selfish".

Feminist literary lens aside, sometimes I think Mabel's dislike can also be defense of one Pines twin over the other. I've seen this a lot with Ford and Stan in the fandom, where people vilify Ford yet see Stan as innocent in their squabble, as was common shortly after Ford was revealed at the time of airing.

Added to that was the fact that Ford got less attention from the writers and less time in the show to justify his flaws and understand his character (see my previous Gravity Falls writing analysis here that covers this topic), and, well... of course there's a high likelihood people are going to sympathize with Stan more than Ford. The show gave us more reasons to. But that doesn't mean Ford is inherently more wrong or more flawed than Stan. It's just that... people might like Stan more than Ford, so give him more stink-eye.

So I think the same happens with Mabel and Dipper, although Mabel and Dipper got roughly the same amount of airtime, so that leads me to my next point:

I have a little side theory here I want to test (but I could very likely be wrong) regarding why some characters in Gravity Falls are well-liked by certain people and vice versa, as well as why some characters are more vilified or idolized in this fandom. Let's return to my Pines personality chart:

Please ask yourself these questions honestly:

Who is your favorite Pines?

Who is your least favorite Pines?

Now, write these letters down depending on your answer:

Are you introverted (I) or extroverted (E)?

Are you a realist (G) or an optimist (L)?

Are you someone who goes after what you want (A) or waits for it to come to you (R)?

Are you more book smart (B) or people smart (P)?

Now, create your four letter Pines personality (e.g ILRB).

With your Pines personality, count how many letters you have in common with each character.

Now, answer this: do the Pines you share the most letters with happen to be your favorite Pines, and do the Pines you share the least letters with happen to be your least favorite Pines?

Personally, my favorite is Ford, and my least favorite is Mabel (although like I said earlier, I do not dislike Mabel, I am just neutral at worst with her). My own four letters are ILA/RB, meaning I'm introverted, trend towards optimism/levity, am split on active and reactive, and am more book than people smart.

I share 3-4 letters with Ford, 2-3 with Dipper, 1 letter with Stan, and 1-2 letters with Mabel.

And lo and behold... my favorite Pines is the most like me, and my least favorite Pines is one of two least like me.

So here's my theory as to why there's Mabel hate, since we've already established why Mabel is actually technically written very well: a combination of possible unconscious gender bias and personality matchup. Because if there's one thing us humans are good at it, it's, "Ape like me, me like, but ape less like me? Me throw rock! Insert war/hate/prejudice/online fandom hate, etc here.".

Therefore, in final conclusion: Mabel is well-written, and she's criticized unfairly. Anyone that criticizes her as "too selfish" needs to honestly analyze why they might not apply that same criticism to Stan, Dipper, or Ford.

[itsnothingofinterest]

So now that the stories basically over I’m starting to think horikoshi never wanted to actually make any commentary or do anything with the societal issues and he only had them there out of obligation. We know horikoshi is a huge fan of American media especially comics. A lot of what he brought up, discrimination and mutant racism villains who are also victims and you can see where they’re coming from like magneto domestic issues with neglectful and abusive fathers and lingering trauma following a legacy, all of it is in comics that have been trying to make commentary on society and bring up actual societal issues. Maybe horikoshi really was just making a story with what he thought was cool in the moment, and he included all that stuff just because it’s been in media he’s consumed before and he was writing what he knows. Maybe since the start all the theorycrafting people has been for nothing and Horikoshis end goal was always no matter how bad stuff is as long as individuals can be good everything will work out just fine and everything will get better. I dunno just rambling here since the manga is ending so soon.

Honestly, I could see a bit of these arguments. This whole epilogue had made Horikoshi, an author I really respected the writing of not too long ago, come off as a bit of a hack.

I don't think it's quite as simple as him just throwing in whatever he thought was cool or what comic books make look interesting; I personally suspect it may have started out more as "what motivates these villains that they'd fight so hard for," but I do think he put a lot of thought into these set-ups and circumstances hat led the villains to think destroying society was the right & reasonable way to go about things. One thing he was really good at was finding logical conclusions to a society of super powers; stuff like quirk marriages, prejudice against people who's powers make them ugly, or dangerous, or suck, and especially the consequences of "Super Hero" being a professional industry.

His problem was just that he had no idea how to solve these things at all, least of all by teenagers (teenagers who're minor celebrities by the end, but also sidekicks at best). So the villains, who he set to to get saved to make the kids seem more heroic, die anyway because that's all the kids could do for them. And then everything that needed fixing just solves itself because of ~good vibes~ and 'zomg Deku's so inspirational' that suddenly no one is awful anymore (again, read in this tone). And for some reason it never occurs to Hori that he could've had his villains live and go free through means as contrived as heroes getting free time because of those ~good vibes~.

In short, Horikoshi could write this stuff once upon a time; but his main problem looks to me that he simply couldn't write satisfying resolutions to the society-scale issues he set up and stick the landing to save his life.

[torchstelechos]

i looove act 3 because the King convos are so. inch resting. especially since Siffrin iirc pretty much just completely ignores the party while talking to the King

imagine being anyone else with Siffrin on this whole journey and then as soon as you meet the King, the big bad evil guy, your bestie Siffrin just. starts talking to him? he doesn't pay attention to you trying to figure out why he's doing that. he's just talking. about what? remember what? all these questions about King? why are they talking like they know each other? why does the King get so sad about Siffrin and why does Siffrin seem to care so much about King?

none of this gets answered for the party because as soon as Siffrin is done suddenly chatting up the King they go in for the kill again like That Didn't Just Happen and then they have more pressing stuff to deal with

like huh. what. what just happened there.

bonus points for the entire "SAY IT BRIGHT ONE...!!!" event. if the timelines continued on without Siffrin i would pay money to be a crab in a fishtank listening in on however the hell the party is freaking out once Siffrin and King mutually KO each other trying to say "it". whatever the hell "it" is.

the party would lose it oh my god, that's like an assisted suicide action. They won but at what cost? The whole country is safe! And they'll never know why they were saved, or how, and neither will the party. The party will always be lost behind Siffrin as Siffrin goes forward in a direction they can't follow, because Siffrin won't let them. The leader who guides but won't let them follow. Do they think it was premeditated on either side? Do they think Siffrin gave them self up on purpose? Do they think the king made him do it somehow through craft? Did they wrestle with the body and pour healing craft after healing craft down his throat and beg for it to work? Did they cradle their body as it lay limp? Asking him why, why, why? Did Odile cry and whisper cold things to the kings corpse? Did Isabeau scream in denial before crying over a cloak that is now stained dark? Did Mirabelle stay frozen, her hands on Siffrin's neck, as she realized she couldn't save him and that is the worst thing she has ever done to him? Did Bonnie cry and cry and cry over the fact Frin did it again? But this time with a cost too high? Did Euphrasie come to check on them only to jerk back and clutch her face, as something is failing, rotting, breaking?

Now for less serious;

Aauuggghhhh, in the loops where it's not the SAY IT BRIGHT ONE I bet Odile is thinking back on that assassin thing and going, hmm maybe they're ex's?? Instead?? And Isabeau who is the other theorycrafter of the party is like MADAME PLS, PLS LET ME HAVE THIS. DO NOT SAY THEY WERE EXS I DONT THINK I CAN HANDLE IT. Mirabelle definitely is like... The backstory!!! The lore!!!! What is going on!!! Are they friends?? Past allies now enemies??? FAMILY???? WHAT AM I MISSING??? Bonnie thinks Siffrin is a crab and doesn't want to think about the king more than they have to. Siffrin is debating whether or not to use the dagger or just talk to Euphrasie. Euphrasie is like, hmmm, same shit as always :)

[mozillavulpix]

Okay, the Six Sparkles Theory

aka: the best theory so far that Satoru and Daifuku are Precure and will transform in the TV show

disclaimer: i am not an expert. i'm just someone with a lot of copium and the ability to search twitter. i don't even speak japanese.

The original source:

(this account posts a lot of theorycrafting like this)

You can translate some of that if you want, but the strongest part of this whole little essay to me is this

After the final transformation pose, a big ribbon appears and then splits into six little sparkles

That by itself doesn't necessarily mean "there'll be six Precure", but there's a few things that support it.

First is that there's a weird amount of empty space in the scene of them all holding hands before doing this pose where you could easily fit one or two more people joining in.

The second is the symbols that appear themselves: two paw prints, two ribbons, what looks like a five-petalled flower and a circle.

It seems like a random group of symbols that have nothing to do with each other, but it actually lines up perfectly with the four members and even the rabbit boys from what we saw of them in the movie.

Basically the symbols correspond to what their 'shield' attacks look like.

Wonderful and Nyammy have paw-prints, Friendy has a ribbon, and Lilian has a 'net' that looks like a five-petalled flower.

Which leaves one ribbon and the circle left. But does it correspond to them? From what's shown in the movie, yes.

According to Japanese fans who have watched the movie like 6 times (if this really does happen, I think the otaku deserve a lot of credit for funding this movie lmao), Daifuku and Satoru's attack looks a bit like this

The idea I guess being that it's like a combination of what Daifuku and Satoru's normal 'shield' attacks would be. Which isn't that weird, they've done combination attacks in the TV show like that too.

But basically it's saying Satoru's shield would be ribbon-shaped, like his girlllfriendddd

and Daifuku's I don't know, it's all 'wrapped up' so it's hard to tell what shape it would be if it's used as a straight shield, but maybe it's a circle like a full moon and moon rabbits and that symbolism. It's very clearly a closed shape at least.

also daifuku wouldn't have a paw shield like Wonderful and Nyammy because

thanks for the animal facts, satoru

so yeah

we put that together and at the very least, the group pose has room for satoru and daifuku. And it fits with what was very briefly seen of them in the movie.

so that's why i've still got hope

[autisticlalna]

The Visit

WE DID IT, EVERYBODY. WE GOT THE REVEAL FOR VIKING'S UNRELEASED PROJECT.

BOY HOWDY.

okay, so: the video itself. Wanderer (the Viking previously seen in Youtube Hardcore and his non-SBK Skyblock series) teleports into a cherry grove. he walks up to a grave and leaves blue and red flowers there. he watches the sunset, walks away, and then teleports back to wherever he came from. then the video glitches and ends.

Wanderer's Ruby is dead.

god. i'm still reeling from this and i'm not sure where to start. i've got a lot of things to cover and all of them damage me emotionally. holy hell.

Viking's been hinting at doing something with Wanderer for a bit now (and Rubyco confirmed on stream today that they've had this in the works for A While), so we knew something was going on. this got me thinking about Wanderer, and i remembered when Ruby made "is that a Rubyco reference?!" jokes when seeing Wanderer's clock (because, y'know, clock and compass). Wanderer had the clock as part of his design before Viking met Ruby, and therefore before their shared lore was established, but my little angst gremlin brain went "what if it was a Rubyco reference".

so i drew something. ...and Viking commented on it.

and now we have a video of Wanderer visiting Ruby's grave.

BUT, AS ALWAYS, THAT IS ONLY ONE PART OF THE PUZZLE.

because, obviously, the SBK Community Discord catches fire. and when SBKCD catches fire, Viking and Ruby are there to fan the flames.

(as a side note, Avid has mentioned the OSSHA arc is ending soon, and Viking has reacted with in-character confusion when the other Vikings are brought up in the discord.)

first theory: wait, is this Cherruby? the grave's in a cherry grove after all, Cherruby was from somewhere else before crashing into the Kingdoms, and he's mentioned that he misses his family. if Wanderer couldn't find them after the storm, he might assume they're dead when they're still out there--

oh, right. plus we still don't know what's up with Cherruby and hir opinions of Viking-- if ze has a counterpart Viking, then bringing up that she was told to not trust Summertime (or Viking in general, maybe?) is weird. the whole situation is weird. Cherruby what is your deal

...anyway, this means that, yeah, Wanderer's Ruby is probably dead.

second theory: wait, is this how Skyblock happened? after all, isn't it bad if a Ruby or a Viking that's part of a matched pair dies? i mentioned it in my explainer post of the spacetime siblings, but it's been mentioned in Twitch SMP that if they die, things cease to exist:

Sapphire: Hm! Death. The end. If you die, or if I die… Navigator: But you know what the end looks like? Sapphire: …things cease to exist. So. Death isn’t really… the best option.

we now know that Wanderer... had a Ruby, but if ze's dead then either they weren't doing the whole spacetime thing or things did cease to exist. after all, we don't really get a good look at the area besides it being maybe on a hilltop, and the two series Wanderer's been in have been a) post-apocalyptic and b) Skyblock. which is also assumedly sorta post-apocalyptic seeing as it's in the year 9600 and crosses over with Avid Adventures.

somewhere in the middle of that theorycrafting, Ruby said this:

...and we don't know what that means. it was after arya-saphira asking about how the "they're only demigods sometimes" thing worked, but that's still pretty vague. also, uh, this Ruby appears to be kicking enough to be able to leave ominous messages in the discord, so. maybe there's a ghost situation going on?

in short: A.

[nadas-dirthalen]

Meet My Rook <3

We've got 7 days til Veilguard! I'm sure a million people are doing this, but I'm gonna dare my moots to start tagging people and letting me see all their wonderful Rooks before launch. Include photos/refs if you have 'em, or don't!

Art by the eternally lovely @infernaldaydreams, loml, fave theorycrafting buddy. <3

I tag: @infernaldaydreams, @opheliaorophile, @brekkie-e, @mythalism - but anyone is free to participate! Tag me so I can see, if you like!

Name: Thenera Sa'renan Aldwir Nickname/Alias: Nera Pronouns: she/her Lineage: Elf (Dalish) Faction: Veil Jumpers Class: Mage (Spellblade) Potential Romance: Lucanis Potential Friendships: Bellara, Harding, Davrin, Taash, Varric, Solas (eventually), Emmrich (of course!) Potential Rivalries: Neve (sorry bbgirl; I, the player, love you!) Tattoos/Scars: Falon'Din vallaslin (complex; centre only), lightning scars over her whole body Notable Appearance Details: She really roughly chops her hair right after the prologue. Before, it was nearly down to her waist. Nera is also almost always in very oversized layers. When in the Lighthouse or somewhere where the ground isn't dangerous to tread, she does not wear shoes, like many Dalish. She nearly never wears earrings or metal jewelry of any kind, on account of the potential to mess with her lightning magic. Anything Else You'd Like To Share: Nera is my most unhinged Dragon Age OC to date - yes, including Hawke! Not only was she asked to leave her clan at a young age (because mage), but she lost her mother to the aftermath of the Fifth Blight. She is a pile of angst, but also awkward humour, and I love her to bits.

[fog-rolls-in]

Pulp Musicals Theorycrafting: Firestone

With the ending of Episode 3 and now Episode 4, Pulp Musicals has introduced the concepts of orreries, the Blazing World, and time travel in its overarching story.

After some thought, there are a few dots that I've connected in my hunger for Pulp Musicals lore. To preface this, I could be completely off the mark but it is a fun idea after all. And that's what this is all about, imagination running at breakneck speed.

Ultimately, this theory boils down to Margaret (as most things do in this series). To get to that point though, we need to talk about a few things first where I will explain my thought process...

An orrery is, as we all now know, a model of the solar system. The orreries in Pulp Musicals are especially important, as the Travelers use them for navigation. But that's not all, we learn that very few orreries capable of time travel. Or more specifically, we know that they are definitely capable of time travel to the past.

We've seen both kinds of orreries at this point, both time travel capable, and not. The Antikythera's orrery is the former, while the Nautilus' is the latter. Other than being explicitly told what kind of orrery each one is, as Addison does to Samuel in Masterpiece Containing Masterpieces, I believe there is a feature that divides the two.

When the Antikythera's orrery is first introduced in Ahlaam and the Orrery, it is described as featuring a "glowing sun". Fastforward to Episode 4 during Dropped from the Clouds, it no longer shines.

The main change that has occured between these points is that the orrery was used to send Rose back in time. Therefore, it would be reasonable to assume that the glowing sun is what gives the orrery its time travel power. Especially when we consider that this feature is not mentioned when the Nautilus' orrery is described, despite similar phrasing.

This feature is mentioned one more time though, and that is what fuels this theory. Once again during Dropped from the Clouds, and immediately after the Narrator stating that the glow is gone, Rose hands the orrery over to Dakkar. He then makes this observation:

Once again, we can make a reasonable assumption about this. The glowing sun is called a firestone. So, let's do a brief recap of what we know so far:

There are (at least) two types of orreries used by the Travelers

A regular orrery cannot be used for time travel, while the other can (at least) be used to travel back in time

The distinctive difference between the two is that the latter has a glowing sun at its center

This glowing sun is called a "firestone"

Okay, so what does all this mean? Nothing, really. It's largely just speculation based on information we've been explicitly told. That being said, remember those dots I mentioned connecting? Here's another one, courtesy of A Spell is Just a Rule Made With Magic...

Huh, that's interesting. There's no denying that a "fire burning in her chest" could simply be wordplay based on her longing for a place called the Blazing World. However, the wording is interesting. Especially when we also consider one last piece of evidence. During Masterpiece Containing Masterpieces, Addison says the other orrery capable of time travel was "lost long ago".

Let's cast our minds back all the way to Episode 1 for a moment. During Margaret and the Moon, Margaret explains her feeling of being completely alone, of missing something. She describes it as a sort of "phantom pain", saying that something inside her was, that's right, "lost long ago".

Now, here comes the crazy thought as a result of all of this...

What if orreries, or at least time travel orreries, are the result of a traveler dying or ascending? Maybe, when a traveler dies, they become an orrery. And the 'special' ones have a firestone that remains intact. Or maybe every traveler (or perhaps just those capable of movement) has a firestone and these orreries are the result of it being extracted in some way.

Perhaps Margaret's firestone is, or will become, the other orrery that was lost, and that's why it's paramount that she reaches the gate.

I would like to reiterate that I know this is all quite a stretch. All of these associations could easily be entirely coincidental. But I had a lot of fun thinking about this possibility, and I hope you had fun reading it.

~ Scott

[terminalblue]

Time for some theorycrafting about Draag.

Hello. Hi. It seems we're in the MCR cycle of cryptic messages leading up to Something Big, so this period of time wouldn't be complete without some outlandish and far-too-long theories from music-starved fans. We all know by now that they're going on tour in America, a complete surpise to many in how they're "digging up" The Black Parade 17 years after loudly proclaiming that it was Dead. What are they doing? Are they becoming a Greatest Hits band? Is creativity dead. No, not at all my friends. Rather the opposite. This is all just part of a grander plan. And when I mean all, I mean all. Everything going back even possibly to the occult/witch era where the reunion was first announced.

Let's first consider the most recent announcement, the tour, and the trailers coming out for it. The sheer level of lore that got dropped out of absolutely nowhere. A whole world being opened up in front of us with the nation of Draag. An industrial nation led by one 'Immortal Dictator' seventeen years after the Black Parade was 'sent to the MOAT', whatever that means, I still have no idea. But what is abundantly clear is that this specific backdrop to present the tour in is explicitly a sequel to the story of The Black Parade, not an AU, not a prequel, not an afterword, all that stuff. A sequel. A paper-white fascist kingdom reinstating a beloved old band to perform on behalf of the state.

How did this dictator rise to power? Usually such things happen during times of great peril and uncertainty for a country, searching for a strong and charismatic figure to lead them through the worst times. An event that led to The Swarm, perhaps? Flies are typically related to death and disease, and what happens in the world that causes such widespread death and disease if not war?

Now The Black Parade, the album, is on it's surface a story about the death of a cancer patient, but there are many, many overt references to war all throughout the album. Much of the aesthetic of the album reflects these time periods, The Civil War, WW1, and WW2. Now those last two can be valid perspectives going forwards, but I'm going to focus on the latter date of 1945, the end of the Second World War. 17 years after that is the year 1962, famously the year of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the absolute height of the Cold War where the world was on the brink of destruction. Now this alt-history is likely not 1:1 and the dates might not line up exactly to what I've put, but what I'm saying is that I believe this is some sort of parallel to real life, with the Cold War having 'boiled over' into a Hot War, nuclear armaggedon ensuing.

Is The Swarm supposed to be literally, or metaphorically, nuclear extinction? Hard to say personally. But if we go by the established representation before, then it would actually fit better as a follow-up to such a thing, after the dust has settled. Because of their relation to death and disease, flies are also harbingers of evil. Going by the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of 'Swarm', it is "a great number of honeybees emigrating together from a hive in company with a queen to start a new colony elsewhere". Sounds an awful lot like the start of a nation, huh? One that begins in the wake of worldly annhiliation?

The Swarm, in this sense, is this nation of Draag, or at least the ideology of it, a great many people falling in line with evil because the world is broken and that's the easiest solution. Let somebody else lead you, even if they have the worst intentions. One that people continue to have to resist the call for, wondering if falling in line is easier than fighting for what you believe in, even if it doesn't feel like it matters.

This is exactly what "The Foundations of Decay" is all about, the sheer ease that is giving up and not doing anything, yet it's a song that is kind of arguing with itself about doing what is easier vs what is right. Ending on a note of the main voice yelling at itself to get up, coward.

How does that fit into this new lore? Well, this time period is named 'The Concrete Age', and what is built from concrete? Well, a lot of things, but one of those things happens to be foundations, a lot of the time. I believe The Foundations of Decay is set after The Concrete Age, after Draag has fallen. It's an ending.

Because evil eats itself eventually, fascism is self-defeating. You could say, in a sense, that Draag is a Paper Kingdom. Grand and beautiful, but incredibly fragile. One spark is all it could take for it to all burn down, and really it's only a matter of time. Leaving nothing but Foundations of Decay. But what would exist in the settled dust is hope, perserverence, a chance to fix your heart, to let it all wash away, instead of simply laying down in the foundations. Don't repeat the mistakes of the past. MCR5, which I'm fairly certain is real at this point, may follow the Black Parade in documenting this nation. A beloved band rather abruptly reinstated by a fascist nation, that likely exiled/killed them in the first place, to twist its nostalgia into its own messages and propaganda. People were confused as to why MCR were announcing TBP in full again rather than something new, but that's the point. Because fascism is inherently unimaginative and anti-art. They can only steal from what has already been created and claim it as their own. TBP will play their great album to huge fanfare, before moving onto their 'second' album centered around the nation of Draag under orders of the Immortal Dictator.

But The Black Parade are a band that exist within death, taking souls through to the other side after ferrying them back through their lives. They themselves could be considered harbingers of death. So to me, it would make sense that this would be an album that follows the height and subsequent burning of Draag, as its image falls apart and collapses due to its own ignorance.

[melonteee]

Do you wanna know how frustrating yet delightful theorycrafting for One Piece is? I spent the last two hours obsessing over Raijin Island, the one where lightning strikes all over the place and there is a creepy old lady selling umbrellas. It was one of the places Roger Pirates were shown visiting, so that's already enough to raise eyebrows. Smoker thought Straw Hats would sail there, because of Luffy's danger fetish, and they only didn't because of Punk Hazard weirdness. The island constantly rains lightning, so one immediately thinks of Luffy when they read about it, and how his Devil Fruit is uniquely suited to exploring there. Considering what his Devil Fruit turned out to be, that's kinda huge. Urouge the Sex Machine is the only pirate in the Worst Generation who has recieved no focus so far, and HE was the only one among them who was shown visiting there, so maybe that's how he will get re-introduced to the story? The island Nami spent the timeskip studying weather in had a book detailing Raijin Island's weather, and that's the only book we are explicitly shown Nami reading aloud. The island was properly introduced in Punk Hazard, where we were shown the effects a Logia user can have on an island. I don't think that's an accident. I think the weirdness of Raijin Island isn't regular New World weirdness, but someone with Enel's fruit in the past who changed the island irreperably like Aokiji and Akainu did to Punk Hazard. Then we are shown, like I said, UROUGE, a "mad monk" from a sky island, visiting there. I think we were meant to make that connection. How did Enel get his Devil Fruit, when Blue Sea resources are nearly impossible to get in the White Sea, and all Devil Fruits are shaped after fruits you find in the Blue Sea? IS RAIJIN ISLAND HOW ENEL GETS RE-INTRODUCED, TOO, SAILING DOWN FROM THE MOON WITH HIS ROBOT ARMY?!?!?! IS THIS ALL CONNECTED??!?!?! WHAT DOES UROUGE THE SEX MACHINE FROM HEAVEN KNOW??!?!?!?! THE MAN WITH A BURN SCAR ACTUALLY HAS LICHTENBERG SCARS AND I WILL NOT LET CIA SILENCE ME

my brain is so so so tiny I cannot keep up with this but I commend you for being able to look this deep cause what the fuck

[itsbeenliketenyearsitsprettywild]

Thing to remember about Cat’s magician theme: while yes, it does imply there’s some stuff that we just won’t get to see due to it being hidden, it’s also hinting at something meant to help us:

Don’t get caught up in any misdirection.

One of the big things about this music video in particular is that there’s a lot of stuff thrown at us really fast and quick, multiple times. A bunch of busy, flashy, dramatic sequences that are sure to draw most people’s eye and theorycrafting!

But, just as a magician uses their skills to get the audience to look away from the actual trick that they’re pulling, Kazui is subconsciously pulling the same stuff on us. Like, just in considering what one of the slower sections of Cat showed us:

People have already pointed out that the guy in the wedding audience is the same man who was bartending in Half. But I think there’s even a bit more past that that Kazui’s given to us as context. Which is to say: Consider the ring on his finger and the woman behind him.

Know what other woman in Kazui’s videos we’ve seen who has brown hair and been right next to this man?

Which actually puts the bar scene from Half into a completely different context.

The picture above wasn’t Kazui cheating on his wife: it was him getting to know the woman his childhood friend was going to marry. 

By having their meeting in a casual setting, with both Kazui and her sitting right up next to the bar where the guy was working, all three of them would get to talk and hang out when things weren’t too busy. And when things did get busy, Kazui and this man’s future bride would be easy to check up on via a quick look down the bar counter, with alcohol as an added social relaxant so things would hopefully never get too tense and awkward. With all this in mind, I think it’s really important we consider the art of misdirection when looking through the rest of Kazui’s Cat video: If our attention is being drawn to something in particular, look at everything else first.  That’s gonna be how we crack through Kazui’s shell and get to the truth.