#which imo is important context to consider

[noxiatoxia]

I don't know if this is common knowledge, but Komaeda's talent in Japanese is not "Ultimate Lucky Student". It is "Ultimate Good Fortune" (or good luck).

I know the word "lucky" has connotations with being good luck, but "luck" itself seems neutral to me at least.

I think the fact Komaeda is praised for, and has his talent be centered on, his good fortune is a very important nuance. People only see the good that happens to him. People keep telling him what happens to him is "good luck". His parents dying and getting kidnapped end up being called "good luck" in the end. I think this reinforces his pattern of thought more than people just saying he has extraordinary luck (good and bad). It's a minor difference, but it adds a lot. I have been thinking about this for a little bit now.

Because of the fact it is good luck specifically, I wanted to find parts where Komaeda specifically talks about bad luck. Lines such as "my awful luck/dreadful luck..." doesn't make much sense in the context of his Japanese talent. It made me wonder if those English lines even existed or if it was a "Luke, I am your father" situation. I don't have either the English or Japanese script memorized.

I checked the Freetime Events because of this, and found an interesting thing. There's a number of mistranslations, or simply translation choices I don't really agree with.

The freetime events heavily misrepresent how often Komaeda uses the word "luck". He uses both 不幸 and 不運 an equal amount I'd say. Maybe the former more. The former means "misery" "sorrow" or "misfortune". The latter means "bad luck" or "ill-fortune".

Likewise, 幸運 means good luck, but it also means good fortune. It's the word used in his talent as I described above.

Now, that's not to say I think Komaeda's "talent" should not be referred to as luck, nor am I saying he should never use the word luck. I think good and bad luck is a perfectly apt English word to describe his experiences. I just think the English translation overuses it. It wouldn't have killed them to make him say "isn't that just awful" or "what a tragedy, right?" instead of "isn't that such bad luck?" every conceivable moment. Maybe I'm just nit picky.

Now, onto the free time events. I want to talk about them.

I'll be talking about them in order as they appear. Also, I am only going to talk about the 3rd event onward, after Komaeda's chapter 1 reveal.

Freetime event 3

A minor nitpick, but "friends" is not the word I'd use here. It's true you can translate it that way, but considering everything else about Komaeda, at this point in the game, he wouldn't readily call Hinata his friend. Especially considering the connotations that holds for him.

That's precisely likely why he, in fact, doesn't say "friend" in the Japanese text. He uses 仲間 which like I said, while can and does translate as friend when used in that way, it just means people of a common thread. Like, a group, I guess.

My TL:

Because we both share the common goal of seeking out hope!

Freetime event 4

This is a really bad translation IMO. Hope is never said once in the original dialogue. I don't know why they put it there.

My TL:

Hinata: It's pretty ironic that you got wrapped up in this shitshow considering your "Ultimate Good Luck". Komaeda: It's not ironic at all! This is no doubt just the beginning of the good things to come my way! Komaeda: Um, let's just say the "good luck" I was born with is a little less straightforward [than the name would suggest]... Komaeda: once this is all over, I'll be rewarded with good fortune of the highest caliber.

And though this next one isn't much of a "mistranslation", I want to offer an alternative translation that highlights my criticism of "overusing the words good/bad luck".

My TL:

Komaeda: The greater the misfortune I experience before hand...the greater the good that comes my way afterwards! It completely cancels out everything before it!

Freetime event 5

I sadly cannot find in-game pictures of this since it's one of the wrong dialogue choices, so here's the script file text for it instead (sorry)

I remembered this line in English specifically because I always thought it sounded weird for Komaeda to say - "It's rare to hear you give such a half-assed answer".

While not a mistranslation totally, I think the tone is a bit off.

I would write it more as, "Ah ha ha! That's quite the answer, Hinata-kun!"

It literally translates as "for Hinata-kun, that is a very suitable answer!" but it's clearly supposed to be teasing/sarcastic. So he means to say "oh, wow, Hinata-kun, you're answering with that?" but in a lighthearted tone.

Freetime event 6

Almost didn't include this because it's the mistranslation we all know and hate, but it's worth mentioning in case people don't know.

My TL:

Please, just one last thing...don't ever forget...that from the bottom of my heart, I love y...I love your hope that sleep dormant inside you.

Though he does just say "please, don't forget", he uses どうか which is a pretty polite turn of phrase for Komaeda. It also is a way to emphasize a request, as in please do this to the benefit of me.

He backtracks pretty heavily. The verb comes at the end in Japanese sentences, so giving an exact one-to-one would be hard, but I'll try to explain it.

ボクはキミを... キミの中に眠る希望を心から愛していると。

Boku wa Kimi wo... Kimi no naka ni nemuru kibou wo koko kara aishiteiru to.

の/no = possessive. Such as, "Lucy's cat" "David's car".

を/wo = verb particle. There's no real English equivalent but you use it to signify some verb is being done onto something. Such as, "I kicked the ball" ("ball wo kick") or "I pet the cat" ("cat wo pet").

��/wa = topic particle. Commonly translates as "is/am" but that is NOT what it means. It just signifies everything that comes after it relates back to what comes before it. It's most accurate to think it as "as for the topic of..." Such as, "my damaged car wa had to go into the repair shop." After wa, "had to go into the repair shop", you ask, "what had to go into the repair shop?" you can find the answer in the topic, which is before wa: my damaged car. (or... me no damaged car.)

So, with this knowledge, let's break down the sentence.

Boku = I/me.

Kimi = you.

So this would make Boku wa Kimi wo in it's most literal form: as for the topic of me (aka, speaking for me), I, onto you...

Then he trails off. wo becomes no.

I, onto your hope sleeping inside of you...

and then we return to wo:

from the bottom of (one's) heart, love [the hope sleeping inside of you].

One could easily see it as Komaeda quickly changing the wo to no to add extra steps to not make the confession so head-on. Because if we remove everything after no and just continue where the wo leaves off, we get:

Boku wa Kimi wo koko kara aishiteiru to.

As for me, I, from the bottom of my heart, love you.

Now...one could also read it as him not backtracking, but adding. Saying I love you and the hope that lies dormant within you. Both are equally plausible. Listening to the audio it can go either way, but the way he quickly and softly drops off when he gets to the first wo makes me feel like it's a backtrack. Or maybe the background music is just too loud haha.

Well, that's all I got for now.

[mamawasatesttube]

i feel like ppl push back against geoff's narrative by claiming he was the first to posit kon being actually kryptonian but this is just not true............. sb94 itself and wf3 both heavily imply/outright state that kon is a clone of superman with a small amount of stabilizing dna from paul westfield. this is an internal inconsistency with his established intro in rots and adventures of superman, but it's still like. in text stated. just look at hypertension arc. black zero talks explicitly about all the kons across the timelines being clones of superman who simply haven't grown into their full powers yet. geoff isn't the originator of this idea y'all he just retconned the human dna donor into lex instead of paul.

[mesetacadre]

hi, i hope you dont mind me asking this question! i often come across lists of reading recommendations for communists, and they are usually focused entirely on communist theory. which is important and im already on that, but i wonder if you also have recs for learning about history? especially the history of the soviet union, but also other past and present socialist states. i sometimes find myself reading theory and understanding the concepts in a vacuum, but with very little understanding of the historical context they were written in, if that makes any sense. and id like to get a basic grasp of the history of various socialist projects that isnt just the typical western "the ussr was evil!!!!" thing

Hi, historical context is indeed very important for works of theory, especially if it's more than a hundred years old. Lenin's What is to be Done, for example, is very conditioned by its historical context of Russia still being predominantly feudal, with only a timid appearance of the proletariat in St. Petersburg and Moscow, and therefore the very first trade unions, which he talks about. The understanding of these texts is amplified, and quite often enabled by knowing at least the basic historical context. Below I'll list the historical works I've read (and others) with some commentary, but I encourage anyone who has something to add to do so, since I am as of only recently getting more into historiography.

Anything by Anna Louise Strong (I've read The Soviets Expected it (1941) and In North Korea (1941), there's also The New Lithuania (1941), The Stalin Era (1956) and When Serfs Stood Up in Tibet (1959) for example). Her works, which I'd consider primary sources since they are written from her own experience witnessing events and talking to a lot of people, are extremely useful if you wish to form an idea about how some aspects of socialist states worked. The limitation of her works also resides in this specificity and closeness, these are not works that present a broad view of long processes, but a slice of the present with the sufficient historical context. They are still very, very good.

The Open Veins of Latin America (Spanish versrion), by Eduardo Galeno (1971). This one is focused on the history of imperialism in Latin America, how it evolved from the moment the first Spanish foot touched ground to the time it was written in (It talks about Allende before he was assassinated but after achieving power, for example). Perhaps it's not exactly what you're looking for, but it contains very important general context for any social movement that has happened since 1492 to 1971

The Triumph of Evil, by Austin Murphy (2002). I have mixed feelings about this book. While it insists on this weird narrative of absolute evil, which IMO takes away a lot of value from the overall points made, it is an astonishingly in-depth analysis of the economic performance and general merit of socialist systems against their capitalist counterparts. Most of the book is dedicated to comparing the GDR to the FRG, and both the economic and social data it exposes was very eye-opening to me when I read it about 2 years ago. If you can wade through the moralism (especially the beginning of the introduction), it's a gem. I've posted pictures of its very detailed index under the cut :)

Blackshirts and Reds, Michael Parenti (1997). Despite the very real criticisms levied against this book, like its mischaracterization of China, it is still a landmark work. Synthetically, it exposes the relationship between fascism, capitalism and communism.

Red Star Over the Third World, Vijay Prashad (2019); The Russian Revolution: A View from the Third World, Walter Rodney (2018). I'm lumping these two together (full disclosure, as of writing I'm about four fifths of the way through RSOtTW) because they deal with the same topic, Prashad being influenced by Rodney as well. Like both titles imply, they deal with the effects the October revolution had on the exploited peoples of the world, which is a perspective that's often lost. Through this, they (at least Prashad) also talk about the early USSR and how it functioned. For example, up until reading Red Star, I hadn't even heard of the 1920 Congress of The Toilers of the East in Baku, or the Congress of the Women of the East.

From here on I'll link works that I haven't (yet) read, but I have seen enough trusted people talk about them to include them

How to Cast a God into Hell: The Khrushchev Report, by Domenico Losurdo (2008). This one talks about how the period of Stalin was twisted and exaggerated through destalinization.

Devils in Amber, by Philips Bonoski (1992). This is about the Baltics and their historical trajectory from before WW1 to the destruction of the USSR (I'm not very sure on those two limits, perhaps they fluctuate a bit, but it definitely covers from WW1 to the 60s)

Socialism Betrayed, by Roger Keeran and Thomas Kenny (2004). This one deals with the process leading up to and the destruction of the USSR itself.

The Jakarta Method, Vincent Bevins (2020). This is about the methods the US used in the second half of the 20th century to stamp out, prevent, or otherwise sabotage communist movements and other democratic anti-imperialist movements.

I know some of these aren't specifically about socialist states, which is what you asked, but the history of its opposition is just as important to understand because it always exists as a condition to these countries' development and policies chosen.

[cobragardens]

The Colors of Crowley

Black is the color Crowley uses to cover himself, red is the color that represents Crowley to himself, and yellow is the color that represents Crowley to Aziraphale. What each color symbolizes and how it's used give us important information about Crowley (and to some degree Aziraphale) and about the ineffable relationship.

I feel kind of dumb writing this post because I'm sure it's glaringly obvious to everyone else, but there's this Metro UK article of all things (the Metro is owned by the hardcore rightwing Daily Mail, btw, so please don't link to it) that mentions the red stitching on Crowley's gloves in 1867, and it made conscious some details I had only subconsciously noted, so fwiw to anybody else, here are my notes on the colors associated with Crowley in Good Omens and their significance in the context of the way each one is used.

I don't think we need to cover black-as-evil in Western color symbology. [And yet here's a long-ass paragraph about it anyway! --Ed.] Light:dark::good:evil has been a thing with Christianity since before Christianity was even Judaism. The Israelites picked it up from the Zoroastrians way back before YHWH had subsumed El as 'God,' which may have been before they were Israelites as well; I mean it was a LONG time ago. Good Omens has been using black and white to represent Hell and Heaven, respectively, long before the show. In the UK, the book was published in paperback with a choice of black or white cover with an illustration of the contrasting character in the contrasting color: Crowley illustrated in black, Aziraphale in white. The current hardcover is grey.

Crowley wears black, and the Bentley is black. At the metanarrative or authorial level this is obviously for the purposes of the black/white demon/angel contrast, but on the intra-narrative level, the Watsonian level, it's interesting to note that Crowley doesn't have to wear black. He's obviously not free to choose from the full color palette, but Furfur's shirt and sash are is dark emerald green, Dagon is in ultramarine (as befits a marine Elder God), and Shax has only been on Earth for four years before she's wearing head-to-toe oxblood. When she shows up later in battle dress she's got a lot of oxblood there, too. And yet Crowley wears black.

Authorial reasons aside, black suits Crowley for a couple intra-narrative reasons. For much of history, black was the most expensive color to dye and maintain in clothing, and as a result it has always been fashionable. And for several centuries in Christendom, wearing black was also a sign that you were in mourning, which was a social and religious obligation when someone close to you died. Whether you could wear other colors with it depended on how long ago that death had occurred.

Again: black is what Crowley chooses to cover himself, and as there is a sharp distinction between how Crowley presents himself to fulfill his obligations and who he thinks of himself as being, there is likewise a distinction between the colors that represent those two quantities as well.

Red is the color the show uses to represent Crowley to Crowley. The most obvious reason is his hair. This is another change from Book Omens, where Crowley is described as having hair that is "dark." A lot of fans in the UK hated the change when S1 came out because fans hate change and the British have a thing against gingers, but Crowley's red hair suits him better than dark imo because the Mother of Demons in Jewish religious literature, Lilith, is traditionally depicted with red hair. Red hair has been associated for more than a millenium in the Middle East and England and Wales with sorcery, witchcraft, demonic influence/possession, and satan-worship.

Crowley wishes his mom was this cool with snakes.

A good case can be made that Crowley genuinely likes the color red in addition to considering it demonically appropriate. I say this for three reasons. Firstly, because when he has a (limited) choice of (again, demonically appropriate) colors, he always chooses red. The marble of the desk in his apartment is not green or grey. He can have any color stitching on his gloves or lining of his jacket collar he wants, but it's always red. Secondly, it's not only red he chooses, it's almost always bright red.

We know Crowley's red isn't supposed to represent blood or violence, because we have another demon character whose use of red represents just that, and it's not the same red:

Compare Shax' oxblood and burgundy to

and

and

and

Crowley's red isn't just red, it's lipstick, cherry, crimson red. And in case we weren't sure that we should read this red as symbolizing passionate, romantic love:

Romantic symbolism aside, bright red is also the color of passion (romantic or otherwise), optimism, heat, vitality, life, (hell)fire, and warning.

Red and black says don't fuck with Jack.

The third reason I think we can safely say that Crowley actually likes the color red is that he hides it. It's always tiny little touches, some of which you have to look for to see. (I still don't know where they snuck in the red on his Elizabethan habit, e.g.) And we know this color is a risk for him, and that he is right to hide it, because Ligur, who doesn't approve of any of Crowley's less-than-fully-demonic embellishments and may share Hastur's opinion that Crowley has gone native, comments on one of Crowley's more noticeably colorful items.

And I think the red tells us one more thing about Crowley, too.

Bright red is the colorest of colors, you know? When we can choose only one color to represent all colors, to represent colorfulness itself, we choose bright red (even in cultures where red symbolizes other meanings than it does in Western art).

Remember how Aziraphale gives Crowley's jacket a tartan collar when he swaps bodies with Crowley and impersonates him in Hell because Aziraphale feels the need to maintain some small secret token of his identity, some tiny unremarked sign of something he loves and thinks is beautiful, when he is down there alone in the gloom among enemies?

Crowley is down there alone among enemies every second of every day and night, whether he's in Hell or on Earth. And he's already had his identity stripped from him once. If you were someone who said

about this

and then you got recruited by the fash downstairs bc the fash upstairs threw you out for not being fashy enough and you had to start wearing nothing but dark colors and more importantly had to hide everything that made you feel warmth or softness or joy, and that was it, that was the deal for eternity, but you could add one (1) little touch to everything you wore to remind yourself that there is some beautiful part of you left, something you loved once, that no one has yet been able to steal or brutalize out of you...what color would the stitching on your gloves be?

Lastly, Yellow represents Crowley to Aziraphale. I'm going to skip the chain of evidence for this bc I think it's obvious, but the way it's used also lends itself to some inferences supported in other areas in the show.

Here's where I think changing Crowley's hair to red from Book Omens' dark is a good decision in another way. Crowley always has red hair, and if he has any color in his clothes it's going to be red. Red is eye-catching; it always stands out, but it doesn't stand out as demonic. And yet the color Aziraphale associates with Crowley and calls "pretty" isn't red.

I suspect that when Aziraphale says he can make Crowley an angel again, Crowley hears "You're not good enough for me to accept you as you are, let me fix you" because these are words Aziraphale has said to him many times, and has meant some of those times. But

tells the audience differently. The color Aziraphale associates with Crowley, the color he calls "pretty," is the color of Crowley's only overtly demonic feature. Aziraphale doesn't love the angel he knew who isn't Crowley, he loves Crowley, the demon, the person he is now, his yellow demon irises.

Yellow appears in three other places in S2, and they're all symbolically significant, and in fact serve to establish another symbolic significance to the color yellow in addition to that of Yellow Is the Color of My True Love's Eyes.

One of them is a feather duster:

Crowley reacts to a feather duster like a cat confronted by an unfamiliar object

The other three are private conversations between Aziraphale and Crowley:

The walls that surround Crowley and Aziraphale when they speak openly about their situation and how they will handle it are drenched in yellow, and that is super interesting, because in Western color symbolism yellow is the color of fear. The archangel of whom Crowley and Aziraphale are both (rightly) terrified wields a tool the color of fear. The color of fear saturates the backdrop of conversations between Aziraphale and Crowley when they have to discuss their situation and their actions openly.

Remember how Aziraphale's voice shakes here?

Crowley realizes the crows have just handed an angel evidence the angel can take to Hell and use to have Crowley killed

Even the Bentley, that clear sign of Aziraphale's love for Crowley, is also a yellow coffin enclosing him. For Aziraphale, thoughts of Crowley are always entangled with fear, because Crowley is not just Crowley, he is also Crowley's Fall.

And I think fear is what Crowley's eyes themselves represent. For Crowley, fear is now a fundamental part of his perception, his nature, his identity.

The angel Aziraphale once knew is not Crowley, and yet from what we've seen, the chiefest difference in character between this sweetheart and this mischief-maker--

--is that the Starmaker does not know yet that he should be afraid, and the Serpent does. That knowledge and its fear has, shall we say, colored his view of the world.

Aziraphale learns that fear early by observing others rather than Falling himself, and knows enough that by the first time we meet him in the Before, he is already afraid.

Pink was once symbolically equivalent to red; in modern Western color symbology it is a color of innocence, youth, beauty, and first love. Hashtag just sayin'.

The cruellest thing this suggests to me is that, rather than rebellion or his propensity to ask questions, rather than the knowledge of good and evil, the Starmaker's Fall was caused by his innocence. it wasn't the questions that were the problem: it was that he didn't know any better than to speak them out loud.

Y'all, Crowley and Aziraphale do not suffer from communication problems. Despite both being male-coded and British, they don't even seem to lack emotional intelligence. What they do have is a universe of silence and fear they have to communicate within and around. What they lack is the safety to speak and love freely. The true color of Crowley is crimson, but someone gave him those eyes, and Aziraphale either watched that happen or knew about it, and now Crowley covers himself in black--which btw is also the symbolic color for mystery and secrets--and only lets Aziraphale see him as he really is now, because Aziraphale won't judge him for his yellow eyes (or punish and forsake him for his questions). Because Aziraphale carries that fear with him too.

[katyusha454]

I think I've found the most tragic ship in BG3 and I need to rant about it

I've seen a decent number of people discuss and write about Dark Justiciar Shadowheart, but they always focus on what she's like post-game when she's fully committed to Shar. Which is a fine thing to focus on! Especially when you're writing smut where she's a mean domme. Post-game DJ Shadowheart is a fascinating character. But I feel like people neglect to consider what she's like during the transition phase of Act 3, where she's become Shar's Chosen but hasn't yet Done The Thing that caps off her personal questline. And there is SO MUCH potential for angst and drama during that time frame.

IMO the most important aspect of this stage of her development is that she is not evil yet. She simply made a single bad decision and now she feels like she's in too deep to do anything but double down on it. She's spent her whole life trying to "fake it 'till you make it" and she's only just now starting to transition out of that and into sincere belief. All the misgivings and insecurities she's shared with you are still there, just buried deeper. That desire to love others and do good hasn't yet been completely stamped out. In my Dark Justiciar Origin run, I try to do good things whenever possible as long as I can find a way to rationalize it as benefiting Shar. (but I still ended up saying enough evil-sounding things to make Minthara incredibly horny for me)

So where does Karlach fit in?

Well, turns out when you play as Origin Shadowheart, Shar doesn't make you break up with your partner. In fact, Shar says absolutely nothing to you about your romantic situation. This is really weird if you're romancing anyone other than Karlach, but I think it makes perfect sense for Shar to tolerate a relationship with Karlach for the time being. It's the ideal opportunity for Shar to prove a point. Karlach is dying, and no matter what Shadowheart does, this relationship is going to end in painful loss. Shar wants Shadowheart to fall in love with Karlach only to have that love abruptly ripped away from her. It perfectly demonstrates everything Shar believes about love: that it's fleeting and will always hurt you in the long run. Better to just avoid it entirely so you don't get hurt.

And Shadowheart knows all this. She's studied Sharran scripture extensively, after all. She knows that Shar is trying to teach her a lesson, she knows that the longer the relationship lasts and the more emotionally intimate it gets, the more the end is going to hurt. So why doesn't she break it off? Partly it's because she loves Karlach and doesn't want to end things; she's probably in denial at least a little bit. But I think it's also partly because she's a bit of a masochist. She thinks she deserves to suffer because she knows, at least subconsciously, that she's still not a very good Sharran. She can see the loss coming and she hopes the experience will bring her closer to Shar.

You'd think Karlach would be unwilling to put up with DJ Shadowheart's fanatical bullshit, but personally I think Karlach would stick it out for a whole mess of reasons. Number one, she can still see the good in Shadowheart and she refuses to give up on her partner. She's clinging tightly to the hope that Shadowheart can still be redeemed, even though she probably understands that it's a long shot at best.

Number two, she blames herself. When you play as Tav/Durge or another Origin, Shadowheart will have a conversation with you before deciding what to do in the Shadowfell. But if you play as Shadowheart, none of your companions says a word to you. In the context of this ship, I choose to interpret that as Karlach being too trusting. She's seen the good in Shadowheart, after all. She's so certain Shadowheart will do the right thing that she doesn't think she needs to speak up. It's not until too late that she realizes what Shadowheart needed was for someone to say "hey, are you sure about this?" So now she feels she needs to make up for that failure somehow by continuing to try and nudge Shadowheart in the right direction even though it seems impossible.

And number three, Karlach's just plain lonely. As fucked-up as this relationship is, she's still getting companionship and intimacy, and she doesn't think she has time to cultivate a new relationship if she breaks up with Shadowheart. She wants someone to be with her and hold her hand at the end, even if that someone is a brainwashed cultist.

In sum, both of them know that their relationship is extremely unhealthy; that it's hurting them now and will hurt them more in the future. But they both refuse to end it for their own reasons. And good gods, the ANGST. ARE YOU FEELING IT NOW, MISTER KRABS?

[charmac]

Which episodes have the best Dennis and Mac ship moments?

I wouldn't necessarily say Mac and Dennis have "ship moments" that you can pick and label as the "best" (other than what would make sense as scenes for compilations/edits?) and I'll defer to @psymachine's answer to a question similar to this: don't watch this show for Macdennis moments/episodes.

I can pretty confidently say that Mac and Dennis (and the show) will be lost on whomever decides to go at it through the lens of "best ship moments". Because what is considered a good "ship moment" for something as fucked as their relationship?

Mac is canonically admittedly in love with Dennis, so it's not hard to pull a ton of "ship moments" from his relentless pursuit: you have attempted kissing, erotic dreams, baby trapping, sex doll Dennis, room trapping...all stellar attempts on Mac's side and all important aspects for their relationship (Gets Romantic being one of my favourite episodes), but those moments are almost all, in the most blatant way to put it, sexual harassment. Sexual harassment of Dennis that was essentially born and grown from Dennis' conditioning of Mac's sex life in the seasons before: making and recording sex tapes for him, teaching him the best way to get sex is through carefully orchestrated systems and schemes made up of lies and deceit, that getting off has very little to do with a second (willing) participant.

Barring their individual personalities and mental illnesses, what ends up coming from Mac heavily relies on what comes from Dennis years before, and what is eventually ongoing between both of them (reaching batshit levels of sex chicken) exists among and within that all. IMO, placing any specific "best" on a moment for them as a ship is almost impossible without reference to everything before it (and an actual understanding of it all).

That being all said, what I would call the best ship moments for the two of them are what's hidden between and underneath the hard punches of their back and forth, the subtleties that are continually ongoing (mostly the ones that lead you to understand that Dennis is in it, even when Mac is on the offensive), this shit that's impossible to pin out of context:

The way Dennis gets even stupider when he's wrapped up in an idea with Mac (Timeshare, for example) and the way he attempts to cut off his outbursts when dealing with Mac's own stupidity (see Frank Retires) (and Recession is great for both of these). The fact that Dennis will push past his own grievances for little reason other than to make Mac happy (Suburbs) and the fact that at the end of it all, he's always going to end up going home with Mac (Divorced.. mm). (For all of this in one shot: Inflates)

And for Mac, in more recent events with Dennis on the offensive, when his ever desperate vie for Dennis' attention and affection is pushed back on in favour of being the Mac Dennis truly wants. The Mac Dennis fell in love with decades ago.

[dekusleftsock]

HMMNGGGSHSHHSHD IM SO LATE TO THIS BUT THERES SO MANY THINGS IVE WANTED TO SAY FOR SO LONG AND IVE JUST BEEN TOO DEPRESSED OR BUSY TO DO IT

I did just re-read the chapter, hazbin/helluva hyperfixation is gone y’all I’m back and ready for more.

Okay so, a couple of things I noticed. Let’s start there.

Throughout this chapter, it really is heartbreaking to see how Izuku regards one for all as Allmight’s power, and therefore a disrespect to him to give that away. Which is quite frankly insane given the nature of what the power is, but regardless it still shows me just how deeply he still cares for and admires allmight.

It also makes the transfer Izuku makes to Katsuki in the heroes rising movie all the more intimate; izuku wouldn’t just give the power to anyone, if not for himself (which is also clearly due to that fact since he still sees ofa as the thing that makes him a hero, not his characteristics), then simply out of respect for allmight and his legacy.

It’s just the anger you can see, feel in those words as he demands to know why. I’ve personally been in the boat of “Izuku dislikes Kudou immensely bc he hasn’t proven to be heroic and amazing like Katsuki has, and also he insults him a lot why would he like him”, since Izuku does genuinely have self respect (a common mischaracterization imo), he’s just also more forgiving and faithful to those he admires or loves (or both).

SPEAKING OF SELF RESPECT AND MISCHARACTERIZATION!

I want to highlight the words “But even so, this boy refuses to throw in the towel”, bc it’s such an important part of Izuku and his character.

He isn’t overly self sacrificial, he isn’t a masochist, he isn’t even a martyr—especially not a martyr.

Izuku is stubborn. That is not the same thing as wanting to constantly die for others; izuku is like Katsuki, he wants to fight for others. Giving up just simply isn’t in his morality.

And if “giving up” also includes letting someone die or failing to save someone out of his own negligence, that’s not because he wants to die.

I can’t explain how much the interpretation that Izuku wanting to die, even for others, is so fucking out of character. Izuku is stubborn, he’s stubborn in the way that he won’t just fall over and let the ground take him. Given the circumstances, Izuku would fight for his life just as he would fight for another.

THIS HAS BEEN THE CASE SINCE, I DONT KNOW, CHAPTER FUCKING ONE?

“Idiot! If I’d really jumped, you’d be charged with bullying me into suicide!! Think before you speak!!”

“Idiot…”

Like he’s so unaffected by the awful comment outside of being angry at the DISRESPECT of said comment. This is why all those damn suicidal Izuku fics have always felt so ooc. Izuku isnt a moody, brooding ball of depression, he’s a stubborn, courageous, and angry ball of depression. There is a difference.

Even before this, he literally attempts to say something or fight back to Katsuki, honestly it looks like he’s about to punch him here.

The only reason he DOESNT is bc HE DOESNT WANT TO GET HIS ASS BEAT

Btw for anyone who has or ever will be in Izuku’s position, punch him. I love Katsuki But hit him in the fucking gut. If you get your ass beat at least you can say you can took it like a champ.

Speaking from someone who regrets not punching three girls who were trying to gang up on me in middle school🫶🫶🫶

Anyway, I’d argue that Izuku not taking Katsuki in a fight was made out of self preservation, something he very much has.

And last but not least, we get to this lovely fucking page.

First of all…

Hm, ain’t that strange?

I’m not saying it’s fully a parallel, I’m just saying it’s something to consider.

Especially with the context that I don’t think Izuku feels shameful here.

He’s been a hero who didn’t look like one once before, I’m sure a snide comment through Shigaraki is nothing in comparison to the literal hundreds of civilians afraid of him.

Or, even more interestingly, what if he’s shameful of it, and okay with that? Now THATS some control over your emotions. This is demonstrating the very thing Banjo told him in the first place; using his emotions to fuel him. Let himself live with them, breath with them. They exist, and they hurt, and that’s fucking okay.

But it begs the question…. Why bring attention to it?

Clearly horikoshi WANTS you to see that Izuku is the one who looks like the monster now. He even looks devil like, blackwhip coming out of his back the way it is just feels like wings.

But maybe… maybe this is how he stops sweeping problems under the rug. Maybe this is him, Izuku, at his most animalistic form. Him. At his core. This is the Izuku he doesn’t want people to know.

The faceless, long clawed, oozing black monster.

He’s a kid who can take a fucking beating. He’s not Deku the useless doll, nor is he Deku the hero. He’s simply Izuku.

And you know what’s even more likely?

The black pit of anger that Shigaraki has formed, fueling his uncontrolled emotions and anger and despair, with the light tear showing something underneath…

What if, this was Izuku’s black ball of anger and shame, except this one is escaping his body, pouring out and showing all of that for what it truly is. Pent up rage, uncontrolled emotion, anxiety and shame, all mixed into one hell hole of a person—but a ball that can be molded, controlled, torn apart from the inside out.

See, the same way Kudou tears at Shigaraki’s mental breaking to see what’s underneath, so have the ofa users for Izuku. Slowly, but surely, the people in Izuku’s life have, while created that ball in the first place, also worked to destroy it. The final piece of the puzzle is for Izuku to choose to let it happen, and he is.

Learning to sit in one’s fear, doubt, hatred, anger, sadness, grief, happiness—without that emotion having to be something, simply something that flows through you, that you can choose to act on or not; this is where Izuku’s arc is coming to its tipping point. We are nearing the climax, I can feel it.

[greenqueenhightower]

Hey.

I constantly argue back and forth with TB stans that Jace, Luke and Joffrey aren't legitimised just because Laenor, Corlys and Viserys go along with Rhaenyra’s lie about them being "trueborn". As I'm sure you're aware, in Westeros only a king can legitimise the illegitimate by first declaring their bastardy and then legitimising them afterwards. And TB stans. Just. Don't. Get. It. They also seem to think that the King's word is law in Westeros. They don't understand that this a feudal monarchy where the king and his vassals are reliant upon each other and both must respect the social contract in order for the Westerosi social structures e.g. monarchy to be maintained.

IMO, they fall for the narrative trap of the Targaryen characters. Just because Viserys and Rhaenyra say that the King's word is law doesn't actually make it law. It's only law as long as the king has the ability to enforce it. Therefore, if a king did something insane in the eyes of his noble polity, e.g., try to place his bastards in the line of succession, they'd rebel proving accurately that the King's word is in fact not actually law. Aerys's overthrowing is a great example of this. As is the reign of Daeron II: if his word was law and everyone had to obey him, no one would have joined Daemon Blackfyre's rebellion.

Anyway back to TB stans. I think alot of them don't actually realise how the world works. Even GRRM confirmed the bastardy of Rhaenyra’s 3 son's for goodness sake. Every time they try to deny it using the aforementioned argument it only confuses me. Are they insecure about Rhaenyra having illegitimate children? Is that how far they're para-social relationship with her goes?

They also have another stupid argument that Rhaenyra's kids having her blood means that they can inherit her throne. No no no no no no no no no. THAT'S NOT HOW IT WORKS TB. If it was Westerosi lords with bastard relatives, it would allow them to inherit. You have to be trueborn. It's unfair but these unfair laws are what keeps Westeros from constant civil war. That's the point of inheritance law in the Seven Kingdoms.

Anyway, sorry about the rant. It's just that sometimes when I argue with certain TB stans they don't seem to understand the laws of the world they're fans of. They will bend over backwards to excuse their faves, not understanding that you are allowed to criticise a character you like (& in their case love). I think Rhaenyra is an interesting character - moreso in the book TBH - I just don't get why so many TB stans willfully refuse to understand the way in which the laws of the world she inhabits work. Any thoughts?

Hi anon, it took me forever to get to your ask but you're right! 💚

Not all TB stans share the same views, and there are people in here with whom you can converse intelligently, but I have also seen the discourse you're referring to, and it is very annoying when the stans don't get it.

You put the Westerosi legitimization process very well. If we consider the greater Middle Ages-inspired world-building context that Westeros is based on, it makes sense why bastardy is a stigmatized social issue. Blood "purity," lineage, and legitimacy are important because they are the only way land and titles are bequeathed and inherited.

The King is the only one who can legitimize his own illegitimate children as heirs, but he can do so for other illegitimate children, regardless of whether these are related to him by blood. King Louis IV, for example, legitimized John II Duke of Brabant's son, Jan Cordeken, after a petition John wrote to him thus enabling him to inherit his father's fortune and found the House of Glymes. From Ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome to Enlightenment Europe, there are examples of Kings legitimizing not only their children but also the children of their officials, courtiers, and friends. It was seen as granting a favor to them, and when it came to personal matters, a King might choose to legitimize his children when he ran out of heirs, or in the case of Louis XIV, because he could and wanted to.

In other words, Viserys, who knew of but chose to ignore Rhaenyra's sons' (his grandsons') bastardy, had ample time and opportunity to legitimize them but chose to blind himself to the truth instead. What was that about Alicent calling Viserys "weak" in one of the deleted scenes of S1? Well, "weak" isn't the only word I would use to describe him... also irresponsible, foolish, and inadequate.

Nevertheless, the legitimization process in history was seldom favored by the court, the King's vassals, and the people, and caused quite a stir. As you say, the King's law didn't hold up that much ground compared to the law of tradition and at times the Church. The people didn't care if a King legitimized a child by naming them heir... the stigma of being born "illegitimate" wasn't washed off that easily, because bastards were seen as devilish, impure, half-breeds, unnatural hybrids, and so forth. So Viserys choosing to ignore the issue face front was bound to be catastrophic, because no matter how he tried to silence the tongues that wagged by threatening to cut them off, the issue of his grandsons' apparent bastardy remained, and THE REALM would not accept any of them on the Iron Throne, for the same reasons.

And Viserys did nothing about it. He could have confronted Rhaenyra when Jace was born and reminded her of the stark reality of the consequences of what she was doing. Not only did he name Rhaenyra (a woman) as his heir, which alone was controversial and unprecedented, but a woman with three illegitimate children, whose existence never even tried to correct or prevent. Viserys alone weakened Rhaenyra's claim with his lack of foresight and counsel.

If TB uphold the "Viserys loved his grandsons and he accepted them as they were" narrative, they are not only deluded but lack media literacy as well, because Viserys DIDN'T CARE if his grandsons were trueborn or not, or if that would plunge the realm to war, the same way he didn't care that he had named Rhaenyra as his successor when the realm, who was so used to having Kings for centuries, knew he had THREE legitimate sons of his own.

So my two cents on the discourse would basically be that those who don't understand the social and political repercussions of Rhaenyra having bastards, not being counseled as to why this is destructive, left on her own to raise them, and having to cope with the consequences of her actions as she realizes that the father she so loved and admired didn't protect or support her at all, are missing out on a much more interesting character in Rhaenyra and a more complex dynamic with her sons, who she now understands are exceptionally vulnerable and potentially threatening to her cause.

This is a far more intriguing reading than anything TB stans are getting at with their "no criticism" ban on Viserys and Rhaenyra.

[moonshynecybin]

what would you consider essential marc and rosquez watching? i don’t mean races but the stuff happening around it, there seems to be so much and idk where to start 😭

BIG ass question. i think it depends what you want outta this and how you best interact with content slash consume information. for me (not to brag but. winner of multiple historical essay writing competitions in high school. for context on the kind of freak i am bringing to the table here.) the research is kind of the fun part ! like i just started googling shit! i would go to inactive blogs and just search 'marquez' on them to see what would happen ! a lot of the times that works ! but it also takes a lotttt of time lol so i'll chuck some good resources your way, why not...

okay im not sure how basic we're talkin here but um. background. so the documentaries are, i think. the best place to start. theyre entertaining and offer a good amalgamation of clips to provide context for the actual racing. and like i know you de-emphasized racing (which is fine lol who cares) but it really is like the most important thing in the world to these fools and its a pretty visual sport so i think its at least helpful. like yes sepang IS about the press conference, but its also about the conversation they have ON the race track using their motorcycles. which is also somewhat a conversation that they HAVE been having all year long...

i'd start with hitting the apex (2013), its a GREAT introduction to the "characters" that does a lot of legwork to contextualize everything. lays the scene for where vale is at coming into his relationship with marc (both personally, wrt to marco simoncelli, and career-wise concerning his flop at ducati), and also how insane marc's whole deal is in general. the second half is. materially a study on what him entering the premiere class did to the sport as a whole. the introductory chapter in many respects

marc marquez: all in. MY introduction and blissfully free online. marc comma in his own words, with all the implications of that. a self-produced documentary where he is giving feedback about the edit of said documentary straight to camera and no less vulnerable because of it which is very marc imo. revealing both intentionally AND unintentionally about his whole deal with injury, vale, and his image.

motogp unlimited. im gonna be real kind of boring. like i would still watch it ! but do it kind of later, once you know the major players so youre automatically more invested. it doesnt really give you more than marc says himself in all in tbh, and i get the sense him and vale were NAWWWT interested in doing more than the bare minimum for it.

marc's rookie doc. free and subtitled on the youtubes. the first half of this is deadass just him wanting to fuck vale so bad while every comment from vale has me saying GIRL. out loud because the foreshadowing would be genuinely shocking if this was fiction. anyways the laguna seca of it all....

next i would hit up PODCASTS ! i think it makes sense after the documentaries, because these are all podcasts that arent strictly about rosquez (even if they are in many ways the main characters lmao) and personally it helps to put faces to lesser known names that might pop up before i listen to a purely audio product and get lost in the soup of sounds. the paddock pass podcast has two retrospective episodes about the 2015 season that are really good at context, oxley bom pod has a fun recent episode on valentino that i love, again just poke around a lil

videos. these guys have never filmed a lot of content together tragically. what i wouldnt give for someone to make them do an escape room. anyways ranch visit HERE (post explaining the ranch visit here). sepang presscon (sowwy) here. vale unhinged podcast interview the month after marc's documentary came out here. vale retirement interview where he gets asked about marc here. vale talking about asking marc to the ranch here. vale postrace at argentina 2018 here. UCCIO postrace at argentina 2018 here. theres a lot moreeeee just go on my blog archive and filter for rosquez and vids its easier lol

journalism. hello. okay so you should genuinely spend some time reading through mat oxley's stuff he can write (theres a paywall but you can run that shit through wayback machine). he also loves an insane comparison which i do enjoy.... again this is one that can be solved by googling his name and tacking on 'marquez' or 'rossi' or a specific time period or race it will probably reap some dividends. in terms of specific ass articles this one is kind of load bearing in terms of sepang and some of the interpersonal competitive tensions at play. that being said there are manyyyyyy crazy interviews and snippents of articles from other journos floating around motogp tumblr (like literally too many to link) adn its fun to dig around to find them, but mat oxley gets a shoutout because i was reading this article TODAY !

other content. honestly one of the best resources I'VE found for plotting out the arc of their relationship is @kingofthering's everyrosquezpodium series. you can REALLY see it play out lol. also her tagging system rules she very neatly lays out years and races... so if something jumps out at you, CLICK ITTTT ! also all of @ricciardoes fave presscon moments series. insane.

all this to say a small little rpf fandom like this rewards some digging! i would just recommend following narrative threads that interest you ! its also a small fanbase that is pretty research oriented, so if youre ever confused about somethin, just shoot an ask or run a search on someone's blog (@kwisatzworld has endless vale resources and @batsplat is one of the most thorough researchers ive ever seen, for example) like for real theres so much... i also have a primer that i made forever ago that has some links on it so you can peruse that if you so wish. but frankly a lot of it is just using those research muscles and being sufficiently deranged enough to be screenshotting reddit threads at one am so you can post them to tumblr because they mentioned marc and vale in the same sentence and that lit up some of the neurons in your brain

(and i know you said outside of races but i think theyre good benchmarks as turning points soooo you should do some diggin on laguna seca 2013, jerez 2015, argentina 2015, ASSEN 2015, sepang 2015 obvi, argentina 2018, and misano 2019. those are the big tentpoles of insane rosquez relationship drama imo. i mean theres many more but. im limiting myself.)

[aeternallis]

A Deep Dive: Kim’s Fight Scene in Yok’s Bar

I’ve been thinking about this scene a lot lately, and I just have so many thoughts on it. 

Like low-key, but imo what makes this scene so mesmerizing yet also chilling at the same time is the fact that Kim never eliminates the possibility of Chay turning around at any time and witnessing Kim kill in order to protect him. 

Whereas Porsche tends to protect Chay by keeping him from seeing the reality of the mafia life (and tragically blindsides both himself and his brother because of it; Chay because he remains ignorant of his new environment and Porsche because his judgement of the risks in keeping Chay ignorant is impaired due to his overprotectiveness), Kim protects him only from the danger of it.

It’s an all around interesting narrative choice from BOC, especially considering that it’s Kim’s one fight scene in the entire series. 

I’ve seen many posts on here before of how Kim leaves the dead bodies for Chay like a feral cat or that he really took the mantra “nobody disturbs my man” up a notch or two, and while I definitely agree with all that on a surface level, I can’t help but think there’s so much more going on. Dare I say, maybe even a little manipulative? Hmm. 

Because for reals, there’s a reason why this fight scene makes such an impression on so many fans--the KimChay fans (including myself), in particular--and I think it’s because so much of the context of the fight, as much as the fight itself and the events leading up to it, reveals so much about Kim’s character post-break up w/ Chay. 

Like yes, there’s the aesthetic reasons and ofc, Jeff Satur and that beautiful face of his that looks like it was sculpted on a Saturday by the gods, but there’s just so much to be said in the way he’d fought and more importantly, ended the fight. 

@wildelydawn​ wrote up an amazing meta post  about how Kim fights, for which I highly recommend y’all read if you haven’t already. I definitely agree with the idea that Kim likes to play with his prey when he fights; he knows how to improvise and use his environment as sources of weapons, and he’s definitely got a bit of a sadistic streak going for him, lol. 

Now, where am I going with this? Well, let’s very briefly look at the events leading up to the fight: from the moment they break up in ep 11, to one of the very last scenes in ep 13 when Kim finds out that Porsche and Chay have left the tower, somewhere in between those events, Chay had become Kim’s singular goal and most important priority. Whereas before his goal had been to investigate Porsche and Chay’s connection to the Theerapanyakun family, directly after the break up is when this plotline falls through because his investigation hits a dead end at the temple. 

For me personally, methinks it’s the moment he finds out that Chay skipped his college interview in ep 12 and what a massive fuck up he’d just committed. As much as I adore him as a character, I don’t really think he knew the repercussions of his own actions until it was too late, alas. Ultimately, he’s not responsible for Chay’s choices, but he can’t deny that his previous actions influenced them. 

Whether it was wanting to confess his own feelings to Chay, or perhaps setting him straight because he skipped his college interview, or wanting to keep him safe, or even just to talk to him and clear the air--the point is, regardless of his reason(s), getting to Chay becomes his next target. And more than that, once Kim sets his crosshairs on a goal--especially on this one person he’s got a romantic attachment to--he is positively ruthless. 

You barely see it from how fast the camera cuts out, but if you pause at just the right moment, you can see how Kim’s expression is absolutely seething when Korn stops him from going to look for the Kittisawasd brothers (or perhaps even just Chay himself). 

This is the expression of someone who’s more than willing to obliterate anyone who gets in the way of him and his goal. This is an expression of utter resentment. This is the expression of someone who’s itching for a fight, because the universe dared to get in between him and his goal. 

(Side bar: I’m pretty sure part of the reason Jeff got the role of Kim Theerapanyakun is because of how intense his method acting can be. He doesn’t have many roles under his belt just yet, but if you haven’t seen He She It, I recommend giving it a go. His acting in that mini drama is a little rough around the edges, but the raw intensity by which he plays the character of Mike definitely highlights some of Jeff’s natural talent. He knows how to act with his eyes and his entire body, and when given the right director to guide him, as we’ve seen when he portrays the role of Kim, he truly thrives in his role.)

Yet still, for all his anger at being prevented by his father from getting to his goal, he’s mindful enough to know that he can’t just go against his orders either. Korn is the enemy of an entirely different caliber, and Kim perfectly knows how and when to pick his battles.

But it isn’t until we see him in the next ep quietly watching Chay from the bar that another facet of his character growth is revealed to us: by this point in time, he’s comfortable in his feelings for Chay enough that he can finally allow himself to luxuriate in his presence, even whilst knowing he’s in the metaphorical dog house.

His arms are propped up, his legs are loosely crossed, his body language is relaxed, whilst still very much aware of his surroundings. Keep in mind, this is the first time since the morning of the kidnapping that we see him perfectly content in Chay’s presence, now fully aware that there’s no reason for lies between them anymore. The only one left is the one he has to fix.

Yet, after all this time of trying to get ahold of Chay ( @bitacrytic​ wrote an interesting piece about Kim’s unsettling behavior when he realized Chay had cut him off, which I also highly recommend), why didn’t he take the opportunity to talk (or whatever it is he intended to do) when he was finally within sight? The camera shot of Chay talking to Yok on his phone, as well as of Kim sitting on the stool, lingers for a good 20-25 secs, so the audience is given a hint that Kim has been there for a while.

So why not take advantage of this chance?

And the answer to this question, I think, is what’s at the heart of the matter and basically defines the connotation of the entire fight.

Kim is not a fool, he knows for the time being he’s number 1 on Chay’s shit list. And because of this, it may be a stretch to say it, but I will anyway: perhaps off screen, from the moment he had him within sight, Kim may have realized that it would do him no good to talk to Chay at that moment. Not when there’s an imminent threat lying in wait, not when the heartbreak is still too raw for both of them. 

Most of all, Chay has no reason to trust him right now; it would just be a repeat of their disastrous confrontation in the club.

And he knows all too well that he cannot afford to sabotage what truly little standing he has left in Chay’s good graces. So he plays it cautious and takes the next best thing: he’ll bask in Chay’s presence, keep him company (albeit one-sided). If you scroll back up real quick and see his expression in the promotional image, it’s almost as if he’s thinking to himself, ‘keep your eyes on the prize--on him. he’s the only one that truly matters.’ 

But even so, Chay’s safety is his priority for the moment and there’s just so many reasons Kim is itching to vent some anger and frustration: the boy he loves has cut him off completely, Daddy is hatching up some plan again, besides the ongoing 4D chess game he’s got going on with all his sons, his investigation led him nowhere. Yet lo and behold, here comes some goons who not only disturbed his peaceful serotonin-gathering session (unbeknownst to Chay), but are also looking to either use the love of his life as leverage in a conflict that barely has anything to do with him, or just outright kill him. 

Really, no one can blame Kim for going a little overboard, not when these poor suckers basically offered themselves to him on a silver platter. Lol 

While I won’t go too deep into analyzing the physicality or choreography of the fight itself, I’d like to instead focus on all the things Kim chose/chose not to do, which again, says so much about his character and brings me back to my overarching thesis for this long ass rant: Kim never eliminates the possibility of Chay turning around at any time and witnessing Kim kill in order to protect him.

Kim doesn’t call out for Chay to run: this makes sense, it’s a practical choice; he doesn’t want these men to draw their attention on Chay. So long as they’re focused on him, so long as he distracts them--he can kill them one by one. 

Kim doesn’t draw the men away from the bar: an interesting choice that seems like it never crosses Kim’s mind. He’s more than agile enough to have led them away from where they’d entered, yet he keeps them all inside. 

Kim didn’t wait for them outside: another interesting choice. Arguably, it would have been more efficient for him to have taken some bodyguards and do a stake out. Further still, it’s also arguable this choice is more an emotional one (he wants Chay where he can see him, dammit), but that’s up for debate. 

Kim waits until the last possible second to use a gun: a risky choice, but he pulled it off quite well. He doesn’t go for the gun until the goons have him surrounded within Chay’s vicinity, so he goes for fast kills to end the fight even if it’s not his personal preference. Imo, it’s very obvious throughout the fight that he finds some satisfaction in twisting limbs and breaking bone, so good on him that he got to indulge for a bit. 

And finally, immediately right after the fight, he never tries to pull this one over Chay’s head: 

This one is pretty self-explanatory, I think. Hahaha. 

But after Kim shoots the last man, he doesn’t linger for too long. Which again, why doesn’t he take advantage of yet another chance that’s fallen onto his lap to talk to Chay? The danger has been dealt with for now, after all. Why not at least attempt at some sort of clean up, maybe pile the bodies on one corner so Chay doesn’t trip over them? :’D If not to talk to Chay, why not at least linger in the shadows, to make sure Chay is all right (he’s bound to turn around eventually)? 

Instead, he walks away, still panting a bit from the fighting and without a doubt, from the adrenaline rush. His body language is hard to read because his silhouette is blurred, but it’s at this point that BOC could have easily concluded this scene. 

They could have left this scene as is, and made the aftermath of the fight as vague as possible, because for what it’s worth, it would have still accomplished one of the main points for KimChay: Kim’s priority is Chay’s immediate safety. 

But it’s not the end of the scene. BOC made damn sure that we would see the aftermath, and with it--the changed dynamic between these two characters and the very implications of it. They didn’t leave it vague whatsoever, they pretty much shoved it in our faces. 

This scene--this f*cking scene RIGHT HERE--blows wide open a potential trajectory of KimChay’s love story if/when we ever get a season 2.

I think for the first and only time in the show, this shot of Kim sitting on the stairway, enjoying a cigarette after a murder spree, mind you—is the first time we see him fully stripped away of any pretenses in not only the way he loves and protects someone, but how far he can get lost within his own emotions when he has no reason to hold back. He doesn’t even look the least bit concerned for Chay’s emotional well-being, because that’s not his priority when he chose to leave those men lying on the bar’s floors. 

If anything, in this specific situation, not holding back benefits him greatly. 

For the first time, his character in the show is explicitly elevated to the same level of batshit insane as Kinn and Vegas, perhaps even beyond them.

We’ve seen how WiK had won over Chay, of how tender Kim could be with him, but the fight in Yok’s bar and the conclusion of it afterwards, demonstrates how far Kim’s sharpest, most deadliest aspect of himself—Kimhan, will go in order to win back Chay. Even in trying to get Chay within his orbit once more, he remains just as calculating: he doesn’t let his own gut instinct (actually wanting to talk with Chay) get the better of him; he uses the situation, in this case--even Chay--to give himself the best advantage. Can you imagine how terrifying that is? 

It’s no wonder Korn calls him the strongest, yet most dangerous of the Theerapanyakul heirs: regardless of whether Kim holds back or not depending on the given situation, he remains just as sharp, just as deadly, just as cunning. In the first KP novel, Korn presents a question to the readers indirectly: in their world, is love a weakness or is it strength?

For Kim, the answer is obvious: it’s a weakness, but he won’t allow it to be one for himself or for Chay. 

And due to all this, there’s only one conclusion I can come up with as to what this shot of Kim sitting on the stairway outside Yok’s bar was trying to accomplish:

Kim—this conniving, devious, gorgeous motherfucker—absolutely wanted Chay to see the dead bodies now littering Yok’s bar.

In fact, I can even argue that he seemed to have been waiting for confirmation that Chay saw his “present.” That he had all the time in the world to make sure his bae got a good look at his kills.

Why, you ask? Simple. Kim trusts Chay’s backbone made of steel. He trusts him to be able to handle it. Why else would he let himself enjoy a smoke after killing 6 people in 6 mins? Why doesn’t he look concerned?! Why not give Chay some comfort, goddamn...! We know this fucker is in love w/ Chay, the dumbass was crying over his polaroids earlier that day. //sobs 

But in all seriousness...Kim has firsthand experience of going up against it, doesn’t he? He himself saw how determined Chay could be when he cut himself off entirely from Kim, both from when he pulled his hand away in the club and then blocking his number a day or two later. I don’t necessarily think it’s that Kim overestimated Chay’s love for him, but rather he initially underestimated Chay’s resilience in keeping him away after breaking his heart so terribly.

This son of a bitch (affectionate) sobbed his pathetic heart out after finding out Chay blocked his number, probably took a good look at himself (and Chay’s cute polaroids), and came to one conclusion: “yeah, Chay can handle me. I can go all in now.”

In fairness, Chay’s steadfastness can only improve and strengthen from here on out. Kim--although in love with Chay, but does have his moments of volatile moods and cold verbal wit--is not an easy person to love, as Chay is slowly finding out the hard way. He must be able to confidently call Kim out when the latter needs to be reminded to respect him, that Chay will not take any of his shit. 

Ironically enough, in creating an original story for these two characters in the show, it also brings them closer to the dynamic they have in the novel, imo. I myself have only read parts of the novel, and because we barely see KimChay in the book, it’s hard to tell how much closer show!KimChay is to novel!KimChay, but there’s hints of some similarities here and there in terms of character dynamics. Make of that what you will~ 

Let’s play Devil’s Advocate for a hot sec though, and address the rebuttal: “but won’t this only drive Chay further away from Kim and a life in the mafia?”

My answer to that is: will it though? Chay has more reasons to stay in the world Porsche forced him to enter than he ever has in leaving it. BOC cemented this fact when they decided to keep Namphueng alive, nevermind the fact that Chay’s one positive, healthy parental figure, is now the minor family head and as much as he’d like for it not to be true, he’s still in love with Kim. 

But to reiterate, Kim trusts Chay’s backbone made of steel in a way that Porsche doesn’t (again, due to aforementioned overprotectiveness, which also serves as the fundamental difference in how they both protect Chay). But the reasoning behind placing his trust in Chay isn’t entirely selfless either. 

He trusts Chay to be able to handle the disturbing scene of the dead bodies he left behind, because he has something to gain from it.

By leaving behind the dead goons for him to find, Kim inadvertently breaks another piece of Chay’s upright perception of the world, ensnares him further into Kim’s reality—and most of all, to Kim himself.

It’s a terrifying level of honesty (and wooing??) coming from Kim because it’s so brutal in its execution. What makes it even more frightening is that he’s genuinely doing this out of his desire to be with Chay. His priority during the fight is Chay’s safety, yes, but his overarching goal after their break up remains the same: to get Chay back. 

It drives home the fact that although Kim loves only a handful of people in his life, he loves them fiercely to the point of questionable insanity.

[returquoise]

ATLALA, aka Avatar the Last Airbender Live Action

Sooooo, I finished the first season and had thoughts (just like everyone else lol). First context, non-spoilery thoughts, and then spoilers under the cut, yadda-yadda.

Why context? Because for a lot of people OG ATLA was their childhood, and they have super strong feelings about it and about any adaptation that exists. I'm not one of those people.

The first time I watched OG ATLA I was over 20 years old, which means I was an adult and had adult viewpoints about the story – worldbuilding, character writing, etc. It was never the hallowed most perfect show ever for me. It was and still is a fucking good show with some amazing writing and worldbuilding but I did have some gripes.

So when ATLALA was announced I remained neutral – I've seen the movie that shall not be named and din't really like it but shitty adaptations have always existed. When we started getting photos and trailers and news pieces, I was feeling pretty positive about the visuals, but neither news pieces or trailers actually tell you shit about what the writing or worldbuilding is like. However, I was about 70% optimistic.

Because what indications I did get about visuals, writing etc, were very reminiscent of another adaptation that had come out recently, about a series that was actually a bit more important to me on an emotional than ATLA. I'm talking about One Piece, and OPLA which came out last August. I've been a fan of that for 10 years longer than ATLA, and while they did a lot of changes, the spirit of the story was there.

So I copied my optimism and good feelings from that, going into ATLALA.

Now, the thoughts.

Visuals are pretty good. There are moments when I can tell they left some visuals out due to trickiness/budget (the "is Zuko's ship real?" review after the premiere). Some things look fake or plasticy, some stuff is too clean. Bending looks a lot better than in the movie that shall not be named.

Writing has issues. Some of it is very expositiony which makes it wooden and the shots uninteresting (there were so many badly framed shots with characters just awkwardly standing and talking). There are some lovely bits of dialogue that gave me feelings, but those moments were in the minority. And some writing choices were also quite childish, even for an adaptation of a kids' cartoon, so I'm a bit confused about the intended age demographic – except there are some really violent bits in there, which leave me even more confused.

Pacing was either frantic or okay-ish. The writers clearly had trouble paring down the OG series, and then ended up cramming stuff together. I could keep up with it (knowing what certain characters roughly meant for the plot, even if they were at a different place and time), but I'm not quite sure if someone uninitiated in the OG series could. The last 2 episodes had probably the best pacing and even then there were some things that made me go "hmmm."

Some actors have issues emoting – main and extras. I agree that the Gaang has lost some of their flaws compared to the OG series. Maybe some of them will make more of an appearance in season two when everyone's more experienced at acting? Especially considering that they'll likely have stuff more spaced out there – there are some episodes I'm pretty sure they'll outright skip, just based on the choices in this season. But we'll see. There were some fun and interesting bonding moments between different characters.

Sokka, Zuko, and Suki were the standouts from the younger cast. Suki is considerably different from the OG but it was acted and written well, and is an interesting choice. Sokka's quips, while not as numerous as in the OG, were fun. Physical comedy is obviously more toned down because real bodies can't do the same shit as cartoons. More about his arc choices later. Zuko was a bit toned down from the OG but IMO also the closest to it. And as someone who's almost finished with a Zuko AU fanfic, I was positively cackling due to the fact that some of the choices made for the character are similar to something I've done in my fic.

As for the rest of the main kids, there'll be more in the spoiler bits, BUT, they're different, and feel less experienced in acting. They're not bad but some choices were definitely different than in the show and they offer interesting opportunities. We'll see how they pan out, but be prepared for some speculation from me.

Fight scenes sometimes had IMO slow moments in the choreo, and they could have been better. Some were excellent, some a bit ehhh.

On the whole, I think this is about 7 out of 10. Some moments were 8 out of 10. It's a passable adaptation

Spoilery thoughts waaaay down.

Whoo boy. Where to start here?

Let's start with the cramming. As far as I can tell from my notes, the episodes are roughly divided like so:

EP1: 3,5 and bits (Boy in the Iceberg, Avatar Returns, Southern Air Temple, half of the Storm, bits of Avatar and the Fire Lord)

EP2: 1 and bits (Warriors of Kyoshi, part of Waterbending Scroll)

EP3: 3 halves (King of Omashu, Jet, Northern Air Temple)

EP4: 1, 4 halves and bits (King of Omashu, Jet, Northern Air Temple, Cave of Two Lovers, half of Winter Solstice P1, bits of the Avatar Day,)

EP5: 2 halves and pieces of 3 (half of Winter Solstice P1, half of Bato of the Water Tribe, part of Southern Raiders, part of the Library, part of Siege of the North) AND timeskip mention of the Great Divide and the pirates from Waterbending Scroll

EP6: 2, two halves and bits (Winter Solstice P2, Blue Spirit, half of Bato of the Water Tribe half of the Storm, part of Siege of the North)

EP7: 2 (Waterbending Master, Siege of the North)

EP8: 2 and pieces (Siege of the North, Return to Omashu, bits of Northern Air Temple, part of the Library)

Waterbending Scroll is a bit of throughline because you see moments of training in pretty much all of the episodes.

Episode 1 was very full, and felt rushed at times. There were a few places where they could have shortened some parts (like the earthbender spy scene at the start) to give more time for other stuff. Biggest gripes are the convenience of timing – Aang going off to clear his head only for everyone to die that very night. HOWEVER, me and my friends talked about it being likely Spirit shenanigans going "fuck, Air Nomads are gonna die now, we need to deepfreeze the Avatar for storage." We also concluded that the sudden current of Sokka and Katara finding Aang was either physics we don't understand, or Spirit shenanigans. Also the thing about all the Air Nomads coming over for the Great Comet festival? And then having so few of them on screen? Sorry, but I ain't buying it. Having such a sparse population in one temple I could have bought (with caveats) but adding in the gathering, nah.

Episode 2, Sokka-Suki was beautiful. I think it works even with the removed downplaying of girls capabilities (this change also brought some other stuff to Sokka I absolutely adored in later episodes but I'll talk about that when I start ranting about the characters). This was pretty close to the OG episode in many ways and I really don't have other problems with it, besides the somewhat childish end discussion about hope and shit with Aang and Suki's mom (Suki having a badass mom is fun). Manifesting Avatars and being able to talk to them only at their shrines will be an interesting take on stuff. Because that will affect some stuff on later seasons and I'm not sure how.

(And considering how scared Aang is of the Avatar State this early on, we might end up skipping the Avatar State in the next season. At least partially. Because we did get a lot of info now.)

That's a very full itinerary and it was hardest to follow at eps 3-4 because there were so many things going on. Jet's and the Mechanist's conflicting storylines made for an interesting drama (though, again, hard to follow) and gave Sokka and Katara something to do – which they didn't really have in the OG Omashu episode, which was what Aang was mostly dealing with here. In my opinion these two episodes didn't get a proper handling, because they're one of the few instances were we get people from the Earth Kingdom doing questionable shit, but we don't really discuss it. And while everyone know marketing is a mistake (it makes no one happy), considering that this series was trying to sell itself as a more mature take, that feeling is left kinda lacking in regards to Jet and the Mechanist. I do appreciate Bumi being fucking bitter, like Yass, you go king, as well as the bit with the Earth Kingdom soldiers speaking of grief and mistreating Iroh. That complexity is what was left lacking with Jet and the Mechanist, and how Katara and Sokka dealt with that emotionally. Also loved Zuko getting hit by a broom and Iroh taking the fall for him. The Zuko-Zhao alliance was an interesting angle to take (after messing it up pfft) and establishing early that Azula is a master infiltrator? I liked that move, also the fact that there are Fire Nation rebels. Although I fucking loved the quick fake marriage.

5 and 6, despite being about as full if not fuller, were weaven together really well in my opinion. My biggest gripe with that two episode storyline was how the Fire Sage Shyu-Aang team-up was done – not that it was any better in the OG to be fair but it is more jarring in live action. I just about died at the 41st twist because holy shit that's an amazing angst take and I appreciate it so much. And while we do get Aang planting an acorn, it feels like a really small moment and I think the Hei Bai issue should have got a bit more attention as the episode was resolved. Koh was fucking terrifying and the appearance of Wan Shi Tong – and in the last two episodes the appearance of the celestial objects calendar machine, as well as the fact that Zhao got his dirt on Tui and La from a Fire Sage – leads me to believe we won't be getting the Library episode next season.

(The only way I can see Return to Omashu happening is if it's remixed with Imprisoned which was totally left out of this season, or we get the important info aka neutral Jing info all from the Swamp, or from a letter Bumi sent. I personally think Return to Omashu-Imprisoned remix is more likely, just so we can prep Teo and the Mechanist for the Day of the Black Sun which we saw flashing by on the celestial objects machine just before we finally got the confirmation that Sozin's Comet is still a thing. Although The Avatar State could also be remixed into this in a sort of "yes, Earth Kingdom needs to free Bumi etc but I can't do it in Avatar State, we need to be smart.")

Episodes 7 and 8 were pretty chill in pacing issues. I thought Yue was a bit too quick in warming up to Sokka but considering how it was explained I can accept it. Also, the fact that Tui and La are intelligent enough to not be fish 24/7/365 is a change that makes sense although the whole Ice Moon (is it the local Halloween?) thing was very out of left field. Women joining the fight was a wild update and definitely more of a modern take than an early 2000s take. Do I have other thoughts? Sure, but I don't want to write bajillion essays and I just want a general overview in one post.

Zuko is, like I said, a standout. Absolutely love his conspiracy board, and as someone who writes a fic with a more scholarly inclined Zuko, I loved him being able to draw, being the foremost Avatar expert in the world (you can't tell me there can be more than one or two people out there who know more than Zuko at this point, look at his research), and having opinions about calligraphy brushes. Ugh, my heart. There's some absolutely wonderful acting happening and he does action really well. Is he a bit less explosive than in the OG? Sure, but one must remember, that adaptations are just licensed fanfics. His abuse background is in the performance, and my biggest question is the Agni Kai. There was a certain desperation in his face, so he must have wanted to make an impression on Ozai, and maybe felt a bit more like he had the right to it – as this show made it clear he had been invited in the War Council and did not needle his way in. Also the 41st twist oh holy smokes I just about screamed. His flaw is still anger and trouble thinking plans through.

Azula (her bangs in the flashback crack me up, was that her emo phase?) is more obviously affected by Ozai's games in this. I know OG Azula has loads of fans and there are loads of deep dives into her character and abuse and etc, but this is actually the first time her writing has made it obvious to me. She's still cold and calculating, but she's affected by more things and that makes her into a more approachable character for me. I know many fans got this from the OG portrayal so I know this is a me thing.

Sokka is another standout. I saw an interview where the actor was like "I tried to interject and ad lib humour where I could" and I appreciate it, because a lot of them made me cackle. There was some really good humour there. As for his arc and conflict; I think it's really interesting that he tries to live up to his dad's image of a warrior, and doing it very much out of duty. It isn't so much that he wants to be a warrior, but he wants to be good enough and I think that came through wonderfully. He can be a warrior, but it ain't his passion. It also offers very interesting bonding possibilities and parallels with Zuko. My heart broke at that ice-dodging scene in episode 5, as well as his heart-to-heart with Katara in episode 4 (fucking SIBLING LOVE TRIUMPHS). Also absolutely loved the fact that he supported Katara being a warrior in the North. His flaws in the OG are self-esteem issues (nailed here), and a certain level of arrogance, that affected his attitude towards girls at times. The latter has been removed but considering it only lasted until episode 4 in the OG series anyway, I don't see it as a terribly big deal. We can still get his "it'll totally work out this way" arrogant moment at pretty much any point in the story in the future.

Katara has trouble emoting. I don't know how much experience her actor has with acting, but I hope she gets better with practice. There are some very nice bonding moments she has with Sokka and Aang that bring emotion out, but she's very stone faced a lot of the time. One could read it as a symptom of seeing her mother being literally burned alive but that depends on how her arc is written in future seasons, and how it's acted. I really like the parallel with Sokka, of him trying to be a warrior out of duty, while Katara wants to be that and has trouble getting the opportunity to do so. This came out really well in episode 4. The fact that she was made a fucking commander of sorts at North was amazing moment of proving to her that she can be, that she is, a warrior. I'm kinda sad her temper has been left out of the writing, because with her being a self-taught water bender (which I'm okay with because we see her practising every fucking episode) there's a threat of her sliding into so-called Mary Sue territory. Hopefully Toph's inclusion brings her temper out next season. She's also missing some of her naiveté, although having a crush on the first good looking outsider (with fucking mirrored shots) just like her brother is hilarious.

Aang is... to mature. He gets a lot of really good and morally and ethically right speeches, and while he expresses that he's scared and doesn't know what he's doing, it still feels too mature. He also doesn't have that many dumbass child moments (what was that episode he just went "oops" in, that was funny and felt childlike, and then there was the water fight he had with Katara). It could be because we're going through stuff so fast but it'll be hard to fix later. I kinda like how his connection with Katara is being the last of their kind and loss – and then the small really good acting in ep7 when Katara says stewed sea prunes taste like home, and you can just see him go "oh, there's still someplace she can belong to, unlike me." I loved his calligraphy brush discussion with Zuko, because there was the beginnings of a bond there. As a friend said, it's nice they removed the Disney princess like love at first sight thing from the OG. If this turns into a romance (I have thoughts on that... later) I feel like it has a better chance to grow organically. No, I never shipped Kataang, please refer to the context part of this post.

Suki had a fun isolated, but curious, and socially awkward vibe to her. She's obviously different from the OG, but it's a fun and interesting difference, as the most characterisation we ever got for her was badass. Yue was interesting, more assertive and playful, which I liked. I also liked the fact that she had obvious duties and was expected to be the next chief. Even if the Northern Water Tribe sexism was kept, this felt like it added some dimension to it. June flirting with Iroh was hilarious, enough said. Mai and Ty Lee are blanks of wood. Their writing, and the direction they were given was horrible, and they're a prime example of that awkward standing and bad framing issue I mentioned way earlier. Ty Lee could have at least been bending herself into a pretzel, and Mai could have been using a knife to dig stuff from under her nails or something. I hope they get better writing and direction in the future.

Iroh was honestly pretty enjoyable. There were some moments of skilled evasive answering, but I was left missing him saying that Zuko was like a son to him. They do have really good chemistry though and you can see the care between the characters. I hated the long monologue at the end of episode 6, that felt very much beneath whatever target audience they were aiming for, and failed show not tell. Not perfect but can improve. Also, that one part where they played Leaves on the Vine, I almost died.

Ozai being a manipulative, abusive game addict is different but offers him some agency and motivation besides megalomania, which I appreciate. He had a peculiar expression when he burned Zuko, and that smells like hidden lore to me.

That's probably every character I feel like addressing at this point. However, I did mention romance in Aang's section, and I have to agree with the other whispers on the net. The fucking scarf scene. At this point, it's more likely for this show to be Zutara than Kataang IMO. BUT before people go and blow up about it, some points; cartoons offer more leeway in visual age differences, I feel like they would need to extend ATLALA plot line to last several years (instead of like, 9 months it's in the OG) to make it visually make sense. The Fortuneteller (as well as Katara's obsession with love?), and Aang's love at first sight have all been written out. Cave of Two Lovers was used for sibling love on the first season, and we ain't visiting that location again, not with how efficiently we did pretty much all of the Omashu stuff this season. Most of the Kataang iconic moments have been left out deliberately. Does this mean we'll get Zutara? Of course not, but due to the scarf scene, as well as that rivals thing they have going (we literally have two fights between Zuko and Katara this season, and the water sprout she used to thwart his fireball in episode one, and if that isn't a traditional beginning of a rivalry, nothing is), it's certainly more likely at this point than Kataang.

But we'll see, just like with everything else. It's an okay start, it's far from perfect, but it does offer new viewpoints that I find fascinating.

What's in the future.

I already explained my Return to Omashu-Imprisoned-Avatar State mash-up idea above, and that we'll likely miss the Library. I also think Avatar Day will be left out. I do however think, that we'll get the Deserter next season. We also need a way for Aang to learn about the Comet coming again and if Library is out (and probably also the Desert), best chances are IMO the Swamp or the Fortuneteller (remixing those two together is also possible). Or maybe Yeong Yeong has spies and they tell him about the Comet and he tells the Gaang. I also think they'll be foreshadowing/setting up White Lotus a bit more than we got in the OG.

I don't quite have my thought together enough to make any other guesses, but we will get Toph, Ba Sing Se, and Azula's Mean Girls Squad, but no clue yet how they'll be remixed. Season 2 has a much clearer timeline structure, whereas season 1 had a lot of episodic stuff that doesn't timeline wise offer too many roadblocks for remixes, as we saw with what they did with Omashu.

I think that's about everything I can think off. If you have comments, please be nice. This was mostly rambling, and tin foil hat baiting.

[alexxncl]

‼️NIGHTBRINGER LESSON 49 SPOILERS‼️

lesson 76 spoilers

gonna be using race and racism as an allegory and an explanation. don't like, don't read

masterlist | theories/spoilers | all lessons | season 3 | lesson 48.1 | lesson 48.2 | lesson 49.1 | lesson 49.2

(for context, the other response was something along the lines of "he really cried his eyes out, huh?")

regardless of how much luke has grown and matured, he's still a kid. like, a kid kid. they cry when they're upset, when they're angry, when they're throwing a tantrum, and when theyre confused and/or overwhelmed. i feel like the latter might be the case with luke, which is why i chose the "i'm sure he'll be ok" option

luke was raised with ideals that painted everything in black and white, as good and evil, and as right and wrong. up until his time as an exchange student in the devildom, he was, for lack of better phrasing, undeniably racist and prejudice to all of demonkind because of the way the celestial war was taught to him, because he was taught to think that way during some of the most foundational years of his life

he was thrust into a world that forced him to not only unlearn every harmful and incorrect thing that the people he believed knew best, that knew everything there is to know about the world, but it forced him to realize that everything that was taught to him was built on some sort of lie, that the life he'd been leading and the way he'd been treating the demons he interacted with made him act no better than, if not even worse than, the way that angels believed demonkind acted in their everyday life

with all of this in mind, he understood why the brothers fell and became demons. they disobeyed their father for (imo, not at all) selfish reasons and started an all-out war, costing who knows how many lives. while harsh, the punishment could be seen as justified

but with simeon, it was different. he was someone who disobeyed their father by stealing a ring with the intent of saving not just the celestial realm, but all three realms, and was banished to being mortal. being punished for acting selfless, for risking your life and immortality for the sake of billions doesn't make any sense, right?

and what makes even less sense is that despite his good deeds, despite being on the right side of the war, despite being an overall good person with good moral standing, despite already beinh punished to a life of mortality, simeon still is faced with the same fate as people who committed treason against god himself and cost thousands of angels their lives

imagine how hard it would be for a 10-year-old or 12-year-old to understand and process his entire life and moral code being flipped on its head, still working through and unlearning his negative biases, followed immediately by his big brother/pseudo father figure being faced with an unimaginably harsh punishment for a "crime" that shouldn't even be considered a crime

luke, to me at least, is an example of why it's so so important to teach kids at a young age how to live in and interact with the people and the world around them, whether they're part of a marginalized community or not. it's so easy to fall down the alt-right pipeline given how easily accessible the internet is to young boys, and unlearning the prejudices, biases, racism, sexism, misogyny, etc. that those things can teach you is not only extremely difficult, but a long road to walk down

idk how many people are gonna read this, and i doubt that it's gonna go outside of the obey me community, but i felt like i had to talk about it

[familyabolisher]

Sorry to ask something somewhat related to the recent discourse, but do you have any advice to someone trying to teach themselves lit analysis or lit theory? Seems like most online advice ends at "get an English degree lol"

first of all sorry for leaving this for so long, between work and various other Demands in my life i didn’t really have the time/energy to sit down and write up a proper answer for a while. anyway: imo, what’s more important than working your way through a long list of critical theory is honing an ability to respond to a text yourself; being able to take notice of your emotional responses, being able to ask questions about what the text does and what it responds to and whether you think it succeeds or fails. questions like ‘what is the text about?’ are often too vague, and assume that critical practice is a task limited to investigating the ‘correct’ metaphysical properties of a text that we have to uncover, as well as presenting literature as wholly utilitarian (under this framework, a text becomes a vehicle for a ‘theme,’ and nothing more.) in the list below, i’ve tried to be a little more precise about the kinds of questions that can help you become a more confident + critical reader.

[disclaimer: i am not any kind of expert, i have studied english lit at degree level and i do read a lot / make a habit of talking about what i read, but i would not consider myself especially ‘qualified’ and nor should you. i’m explaining a process that works for me, not providing a one-size-fits-all solution to the question of analytical methodology.]

the essence of literary practice is that a text has a terrain where it has to be met with, and where it will be accountable to forces that are often beyond its control or beyond its immediate borders, and a terrain where it asks to be met with, and towards which it will attempt to navigate the reader; the reader’s job is to meet with it on both terrains, synthesise them, and respond to them. so, some of the questions you should be asking about a text include:

what is its context? this can mean a lot of things: when and where was it written, and how might the conditions contemporary to its creation be informing the inner working of the text? is it considered part of a particular literary movement; how does it interact with the core characteristics of that movement? does it invoke other works; if so, how does it respond to them? what biographical information about the author might be relevant to the piece? some books will come with an introduction which, if written well, would cover at least the outstanding details on this list; you can also have a look on wikipedia or other such websites to get a feel for the conditions under which the text was created.

how does it respond to this context? rather than assuming a text to be a passive body onto which its external conditions are exerting their unilateral force, we should always understand a text as being in active dialogue with the context that shaped it. what are the questions typically posed within the movement or genre to which it belongs; how does it answer these questions? does it build on its predecessors in any way? if it’s a responsive text (ie. consistently invoking an earlier text), what does it have to say about the text to which it responds; how does it develop or contravene the template from which it was building? how might it be responding to the questions of its time; which paradigms are challenged? which are endorsed, actively or tacitly? what goes unmentioned? i emphasise critical engagement with context so heavily because it’s often where the meat of the text can be found. 

what are the conditions which made this text possible? this is a little different to questions about context, which have a far broader scope; this is a question which seeks to treat a text not as a thing that came into existence of its own accord, but as a thing that emerged as a result of a process of material production that depends upon particular conditions. is it a mainstream publishing house, or an indie press, or self-published? how does this affect its authority, or the standard to which we hold it? how does this affect its relationship to narratives of cultural hegemony? what can that tell us about what hegemony can and cannot absorb? this is me being a big marxist about it but i think this question is woefully neglected in literary studies lol

why did the author make the choices that they made? one of the most important things to remember when it comes to literary analysis is that every choice made in a text is deliberate; every choice about what happens, what a character says and does, what a character looks like, how particular characters interact, how scenes and objects and settings are described, what prose style is employed, what word is used in a sentence, etc., is a deliberate choice being made by an external agent (ie. the author, sometimes/arguably also the editor, also the translator if a text is in translation), and those choices are accountable both to the deliberations of the author and the external cultural narratives with which they necessarily enter into a dialogue. ‘why does a character behave in a particular way’ is not a question that invites you to treat the story like a riddle for which you can find an ‘answer,’ but a question that engenders the following: what does their behaviour reveal about the character, and how might this be situated within the discourse of the wider text? does this behaviour reveal any biases on the part of the author? what sort of expectations does this behaviour establish, and are those expectations met or neglected or subverted? the same process can be applied to themes, settings, plot beats - anything, really. why is this particular adjective used - does it have other connotations that the author might want to draw attention to in relation to the object being described? why does this chapter end here and not here? nobody in a novel has agency that extends beyond the boundaries of the novel itself; part of the practice of analysis means discerning which choices were made and why, and whether those choices were good or bad. 

what is your response? analysis is a misleading term for this practice; it’s less about dispassionately picking at a text in search of an ‘answer’ and more about evaluation - assessing the text’s successes and failures and cultivating your personal response to it, which means paying attention to your responses as you go along. some people would argue that ‘did you like/dislike this’ is a juvenile question, but i would disagree - knowing whether you liked or disliked something and being able to describe why it evoked that reaction in you is crucial to an evaluative practice. a text can be conceptually excellent, but falter if its prose is clunky or uninspired or unimaginative; being able to notice when a text isn’t engaging you and asking why that is is an important part of this evaluative process. similarly, what do you make of the themes and developments present in the text; does it dissect its themes with precision, or does it make broad gestures towards concepts without ever articulating them fully? is it original? does it have sufficient depth to it? do you agree with it? are you compelled by it? if you were asked the questions that the novel tries to respond to, what would you say; do you think that the novel misses anything out? has it challenged your own perspective? what are its limitations?

literary analysis is a learned skill, but by its nature of being a skill it gets a lot easier over time, and some of these questions will become intuitive. a good way to hone the skill and develop a greater intimacy with a text is through close reading; this refers to the practice of selecting a passage (or even just a sentence) and picking it apart line by line (word by word, even) to describe in intimate detail exactly how the sentence(s) came to be formed in the way that it/they did. i’ll use the first few sentences of daphne du maurier’s rebecca as an example.

Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again. It seemed to me I stood by the iron gate leading to the drive, and for a while I could not enter, for the way was barred to me. There was a padlock and chain upon the gate. I called in my dream to the lodge-keeper, and had no answer, and peering closer through the rusted spokes of the gate I saw that the lodge was uninhabited.

so a close reading of these sentences might identify:

‘last night i dreamt i went to manderley again’ is in iambic hexameter; this rhythmically satisfying invocation makes for a smooth opening sentence, and contrasts with the longer, more complex sentences that follow on. the change in rhythm through such a contrast helps to maintain momentum throughout the paragraph.

the first sentence also introduces a few key pieces of information - that this story is being told from the first person, that we are opening with a dream (and that the narrative places stock in the significance of dreams), and that the speaker is going to manderley ‘again’ - ie. that this is opening after an event in which manderley was significant. that the speaker going to manderley ‘again’ in a dream holds importance implies an exile from manderley in the ‘real’ world; this already gives us hints at the broader shape of the narrative. 

the speaker’s intimacy with manderley and disregard for ‘telling’ the reader what it is (we do not get, like, ‘manderley is a house’ or something - the passage continues as though we know what manderley is already) helps to develop our sense of immersion in the dreamscape. it also sets manderley up as a place of immense significance.

both ‘it seemed to me’ and the later ‘i called’ have a matter-of-factness to them, a certain dry reporting of the events of the dream which, rather than situating the reader within the texture of the dream itself, refortify us as outside of it, listening to it be explained after the fact.

‘for a while i could not enter, for the way was barred to me’ continues the theme of implied exile that the first sentence gestured towards. the iambic trimeter on ‘the way was barred to me’ creates a lilting cadence which, along with the use of the passive voice, detaches the speaker from an emotive response to this being ‘barred’; it is a reported dream that will not consciously acknowledge the speaker’s feelings about being exiled from manderley at this time. (we instead infer these feelings through how the chapter develops.)

‘there was a padlock and chain upon the gate,’ as a short sentence, falls into the same matter-of-fact register as that which i alluded to above, partly through the use of the passive voice, and - as i explained earlier - varies the length of sentences such that the paragraph retains a particular buoyancy. 

the development from the speaker calling to the lodge-keeper to not getting an answer to seeing that the lodge is uninhabited tells a story wherein the speaker at first has authority such that a lodge-keeper would respond to her and let her in; this authority is negated by the lack of response; the lodge-keeper is found to be absent in a development that took place whilst she was herself away, presumably in the state of exile that we have inferred her to be in. ‘uninhabited’ is the kind of word you would expect to be used for an area of land, often with a colonial connotation; this introduces a theme that this chapter (& the book as a whole) goes on to develop, of manderley being a site of colonial decay; as reinforced by the ‘rusted spokes.’

in my experience, close reading is a technique best practiced on poetry, but it’s a very helpful skill to develop in general, and implementing it with prose can elucidate the nuances of a text far more clearly than you might initially realise. in a well-written novel, language is very deliberate and precise!

i think the best thing you can do to develop your skills as a critical reader is to read carefully, and to keep track of your responses to a text as best as possible. keeping a note of what you think a text achieves and how you respond to it each time you read one can be a good way of sorting your thoughts into something coherent and developing your ability to articulate a response. anyway, hopefully this has provided something resembling a guide for how to develop the thought processes that go behind critical practice!

[irisbleufic]

All right, folks. Timeline of posts in which I make explicit that I believe and support the victims of Neil Gaiman’s abhorrent actions (esp. as a survivor of DV with relatives/friends who have survived SA):

Post #1

Post #2

And then here’s the post I made after the posts above about Terry Pratchett’s legacy regarding Good Omens the novel and why he’s the major reason the story is still worth loving:

Post #3

Post #3 got blazed by someone who gave me the heads-up they wanted to do it. In retrospect, maybe I shouldn’t have applied my laissez-faire philosophy of letting whatever will happen to my posts in the wild happen. Thanks to that action, bad-faith actors (mostly TERFs, go figure) pounced on Post #3 as if it existed without Post #1 and Post #2 as context.

That about sums it up. Post #2 is the important one IMO, because I’m extremely worried about the denial of Gaiman’s actions that I’m seeing.

Also, please consider donating to RAINN if you can! They do important work.

[tamelee]

I just rewatched vote2 and OMGGGG idk if I'm mad at kishi for not getting them together (cuz I know they probably wouldn't be) or just mad that he ended it there and didn't explore narusasu's relationship after all that, but I have so many emotions 😭 I'm just mad that nh and ss got together 🙄 (I wouldn't call them canon, cuz sns love for each other is canon, nh and ss is forced)

Also I love Sasuke so much in this fight that I'm also mad we didn't get to see more of him like this (openly showing his emotions, laughing, crying, being happy for once, accepting Naruto)

But anyway, do you know which fic is best to read after watching the ending? I already know lots of canon fics but idk which one is the best to read. I wanna fil the hole in my heart 😩

Ah VotE2 feels ;-; … I understand, I understand…  (He did accept Naruto though, the very first to do so actually, d'you mean the feelings?)

I still really liked it in the Anime, it’s just that I wish there were a few things they’d done differently as shown in the Manga. Like Sasuke screaming for sure, he's in so much pain and it's so important to show that, especially considering VotE1 where Naruto was screaming. Now it's a reverse and for good reason.

And nah, there’s no way they’d actually get together in the sense that a romantic relationship becomes surface level text and it’s spelled out for the reader.

You know, I was thinking about this and ‘Naruto’ is a story where Kishimoto used every literary device in his creators’ arsenal in order to show the story. Even in dialogue and text, he still pays attention to how something is said and the timing of it. That’s why, in order to understand a message or to pick up on sub-text, context is so important. That's what makes something 'true'. Characters don’t always say what they mean… in fact, the best characters don’t imo. There’s so much heart in the story and you can see it in the slightest expressions, in body language and Kishimoto definitely has a way of showing what he considers important and what isn’t. 

Brt on the other hand… well, it’s just told. It’s called authorial assertion or fiat in literature. They don’t show us why or how something happened, there’s no justification, evidence for any declarations and don’t even question it, because ‘it is just so because we said so’ and they don’t even know either.  

Uh, not right away- homesick for a mountain's song by kintou comes to mind. I have others but I still have to sort them >< A few posts ago I shared what others’ have shared with me. I got a bunch of recs in the past few weeks that I’m going to read, but I’ll save my favorites to share later! 

[seyaryminamoto]

Do you have any particular thoughts on Netflix Avatar Season 1? I haven't watched it myself but I would be curious to hear what you have to say.

I do indeed! I didn't watch it right away, but I have watched it indeed. I think there are merits to certain changes they did, I can see the sense in many of them, that doesn't mean EVERYTHING they changed was good, but it does feel like they were engaging with the original content in a far more creative way than a lot of people are willing to acknowledge or try themselves. No, it isn't a perfect remake of ATLA, but being the critic that I have been of the original show, nobody could ever convince me that the original was perfect, just as this new show isn't perfect.

I want to make a big post on the subject one day and try to get to everything it brought up... once I have more time on my hands, I'll try to do that. But, to give you a bit to chew on... I'll try to do one good vs. one bad on my part, of whatever I can remember right now.

GOOD: I actually do not mind the multiple prologues in the first episode, even though I don't think the changes were handled perfectly. I do believe that showing the genocide is not nearly as bad a choice as a lot of people pretend it is (the way it was portrayed is questionable mostly from a tactical point of view but that's just me being a freak about that... studying basic warfare really fucks up your suspension of disbelief when it comes to war scenes). Mainly, I think it IS important to show it due to the amount of people who are still convinced that Aang didn't suffer nearly as much as most other popular characters did -- that soooo many people have made these claims without a care in the world throughout the twenty years since ATLA first aired proves that the genocide was not treated with the severity it should have been by the OG show. I'm not even sorry to say it. It doesn't feel like a trivialization of violence, it feels like actually setting straight the degree of violence a genocide entails. People asking for a less intense version of genocide basically appear to be asking for the actual gravity of such events to be sanitized so they can chew on them more easily... and that's exactly what leads to it being trivialized, minimized and not taken seriously, if you ask me.

BAD: I don't particularly like the way Fire Lords are so... casual with commoners. Both Ozai and Sozin stood on the same level as a rebel/spy right before setting them on fire, no doubt it's meant to be some sort of flex, but... men of their ideologies and pride would not want to be up close and personal with anyone they consider that far beneath them. Odd choice there, imo.

MOSTLY GOOD: Aang does feel way more serious and has much more dramatic gravitas in everything he does. And this is not a bad choice, in essence. I don't particularly love that they tried to lessen it with occasional "Aang's a silly kid!" verbal reminders that don't actually have any proper visual evidence, because most the silly things he's up for are things the two older kids (Sokka and Katara) are perfectly fine with doing too, hence, he doesn't feel childish at all and it comes off out of place for him to talk about being more childish than he actually is. So... they really didn't need dialogue to try to emphasize his childhood if they weren't going to write him being a goofball. It's fine if he isn't one. He always could be a more serious character, it's only a problem when there's no further substance to him than just brooding (which is what I remember from the Shyamalan movie...).

WEIRD: Aang and Katara both had weird scenes of standing around doing nothing but smiling at their hometowns in episode 1. Maybe it was done as a parallel between them, but it felt a bit... overly theatric? If that makes sense? Like... I know we need to see their daily lives and the context in which they've lived... but it doesn't feel entirely logical for that to happen with them just standing in place and smiling fondly at their world. Most people do not do that in their daily lives...?

GOOD: ... Contrary to what a lot of the fandom seems to think, I actually like the suuuuuper slowburn Kataang here because any potential romantic payoff those two might get isn't nearly as in-your-face as it was in canon. The way their friendship is growing feels far more organic. And some of my favorite character moments in the show were actually between them. Which is not something I'd EVER say about the original show. There's a different sense of maturity for the characters here, and I like that.

BAD: I... do not like Sokka's changes. No, it's not about the sexism. It makes sense to me that this aspect of his character would be changed, updated in a sense: you can even still read him as sexist in some regards! It just isn't as simplistic and straightforward as it was before. But that's... not what bugs me the most. The show genuinely surprised me by taking him far more seriously as a character than I anticipated they would, but they absolutely picked weird choices with him in stuff like his family issues (... the Hakoda changes are just straight-up cringe for me, there's no justification for making him some sort of bitchy soccer mom who congratulates his son but then shits on him behind his back??), his insecurities as a warrior and the frequent remarks about how maybe that's not his path in life even though he does just fine at it, and... his romantic relationships. It's wild, because I actually think they did Sukka a thousand times better than it is in canon, and yet in doing so, they absolutely deadlocked themselves into a whole other problem: Sokka bonding that much with Suki and then hitting on a random Fire Nation soldier like two episodes later?? Then having the romance of his lifetime with Yue by the end of the season?? Ngl, it feels like we're watching one of those sitcoms where characters switch love interests in the blink of an eye. Changing this element of his character this way, when Suki's romance in particular was given new qualities and way more substance... may not have been a great call since it makes him come off insanely shallow, ready to get with any girl he comes across, and frankly, he didn't feel like that in the original show to me. He's also not really funny when he's supposed to be? Part of what made Sokka funny originally was his role as a voice of reason while everyone else ignored him. They occasionally tried to mimic that here... but in ways that didn't really work? Also, the Ron-Weasley-In-HP-Movies brand of comedy of "watch this guy scream, it's soooo funny" is... so trite at this point. Please, don't. Personally, this really feels like a whole other character who isn't Sokka. And some people might think that's great... I'm not one of them. Maybe I'm just experiencing the crisis a lot of people are over Katara with Sokka? But where changes with her do seem to go for things I actually wasn't fond of in her character, I don't really feel like they did better with Sokka in the least.

GOOD: ... "Katara learned waterbending too fast", they say: she did in canon too. A month of training under Pakku is not nearly enough time to justify her being deemed a master in canon. Complaining about how she didn't get that training at all here and still got deemed a master gets a "meh" out of me because I frankly do not see it being remotely as different from what canon did as people want to think it is. Katara was fighting Pakku with way too much power in the OG show for a kid who never got formal training to begin with, and somehow nobody minds that. I don't think someone who was on that level of power in the OG show was nearly as inferior to a seasoned master as a bunch of people want to believe. So... outrage about how they sped up her learning process when we in fact see a LOT more internal growth for Katara, and a lot more depth to her bending source here, makes no sense to me.

Along with that: bending has always been connected with a bender's internal energy, which is related to their peace of mind and internal balance. This show did not invent that. Firebenders are the ones who are most explicitly shown to be connected to their feelings that way, sure, but if you needed ATLA or LOK to non-stop feature characters talking about how a person's chakras had to be cleansed and their hearts clear and their every spiritual thread cleaned up in order to reach their best possible shapes as benders? You probably have bigger problems in analyzing this show than just whining over whatever the liveaction did. A straightforward connection for Katara with her emotions and bending isn't a negative choice in the slightest to me, more so with a character who has constantly been characterized as deeply connected to her emotions: it makes sense that her bending works and evolves the way it does in the liveaction to me. Sorry not sorry.

BAD: Zhao. Uh... I've seen people say they like him here? I felt like I was watching a con artist. It's not the actor's fault, clearly he was given this concept to work with and he did the best he could with it, but the idea of removing Zhao from all prior connection to the Royal Family, making him a total unknown who came out of nowhere and rises to prominence through conniving and scheming feels like they decided to merge him with Long Feng, maybe? And it might even backfire if they DO have Long Feng next season (... they should???) and he has a very similar profile to what they did with Zhao. I didn't enjoy his characterization at all, he was just... weird. So, not a change I was big on.

GOOD: Iroh. My god. I hate the fact that I'm saying this. But I will say it was insanely cathartic to watch that EK soldier beating him up. And that's not all: Iroh actually seems to be struggling actively with right and wrong here, showing hesitation over the war, and most importantly... HAVING A PERSONAL DYNAMIC WITH AANG??!!! I never imagined I would be that happy to see that, but I was. The few moments those two had together were damn solid, some of the best in the show (and the best for Iroh, sorry not sorry, I have never ever been an Iroh-Zuko obsessive fan and I genuinely find myself more intrigued by Iroh's potential bonding with other people, never thought about it with Aang but this show 100% blindsided me with it in a good way). It seriously made me mad that the OG basically never gave them that chance besides... that one scene in the catacombs that was very much just Iroh being a fortune cookie? Aang actually being an element that basically waters the seeds of doubt in Iroh's head is a GREAT change. I said it and I'll stand by it.

BAD: Hahn and not because of the usual reasons: their characterization rework of Hahn was fine. More than fine. The actor they cast was also very pretty! All of which makes it EXTREMELY questionable that Yue somehow has this perfectly decent guy and... uh... chooses the reworked Sokka instead? Like, I know that's how the OG story went, but when you turn Hahn from an opportunistic dick to a perfectly admirable warrior and individual, and feature Yue saying he's great but he's "not the boy of her dreams" (you... dreamt about him ONE TIME?? He's never been in the Spirit World besides that, so wuuuut...??), it makes her choice in romantic interests feel extremely questionable and weird. I'm all for Yue being given more to work with, but this seriously feels like she's... a little crazy. Hahn comes off waaaaaaay too decent for her not to be interested in him... ofc, as long as she's someone attracted to men, which, considering she picked ANOTHER GUY, it's to be assumed that she is?? Ergo nothing makes sense to me. Come to think of it, a lesbian Yue rejecting Hahn is probably the only way her rejection of Hahn would make sense... and it would also not cast such a questionable light on reworked Sokka if he and Yue weren't romantic at all, right after he had that big connection with Suki back when the show began?? So, heh, maybe lesbian Yue is the only thing that would've made sense if Hahn gets reworked for the better like this, sorry not sorry....

GOOD: The full-blown, outright display of Ozai's abuse on Azula rather than subtleties and insinuations. Again, much like in Aang's case with the genocide: PEOPLE DENY AZULA WAS A VICTIM OF ABUSE ALL THE TIME. People pretend Ozai actually loved her on some weird level or that she FELT loved, ergo she was fine and Zuko's the one who was abused. This is not new. We've been dealing with people barking that kind of nonsense since almost twenty years ago. And the backlash from that exact crowd when this show made it evident proves that they refuse to accept Azula as a victim of abuse to this day. Ergo, sorry not sorry: I'm glad they handled it as they did here because it makes it undeniable that Ozai is pushing Azula to extremes and she's pressured to deliver and become the weapon he wants her to be.

BAD: ... the Mother of Faces. That may have been the most egregious offensive and bullshit moments in the entire show. I was so mad when she was brought up at all. It was awful. I hated it. It really must be my most hated moment in the whole thing. UGH.

GOOD: Katara apologized to Sokka once. You know. One time. That, I think, marks the single time in any official Avatar content where she has done that. Call me a salty asshole, but I'm genuinely impressed that they did that, so they get a point for it.

BAD: Bumi. I know some people think the rework for Bumi is great... I could not disagree more. His treatment of Aang is really unacceptable, his behavior is very irresponsible but this time in a vindictive way... I was even reasoning with the fact that he knows Aang is the Avatar, which ALSO happens in the OG, without having known it in the past! The difference? It feels too arbitrary and random that he'd know that here, whereas in the OG show, he IS random and arbitrary, yet somewhere amid so many nonsensical ramblings, he shows insight and intelligence that makes you think there's more to him than meets the eye. I may need to rewatch episode 5 of the OG show in order to confirm this, but I also think that most of the implications there regarding his challenges is that they were actually harmless even if it doesn't look that way all along. Here? They're not harmless at all, he's basically vindictively trying to get Aang to either die for his "sins" or get himself killed through him and neither thing sits well with me at all with this character.

GOOD: Gyatso, expanding on his character and making him a much more straightforward equivalent to Iroh for Aang actually is really helpful, it makes him less of a "stock character" victim to the Fire Nation, it gave him more depth and it makes Aang's bond with him feel much more real. I am very sorry to all OG apologists, but I continue to believe Aang's cheerful behavior was written primarily to appeal to the children demographic that Nickelodeon was aiming for as their audience, which meant he could not be particularly human and truly grieve for everything he had lost. This show doesn't hide that pain at all, and it's particularly good that it does that by showing what a constant presence Gyatso was in Aang's life and by letting them have a manner of final farewell in that episode (... even if I didn't particularly like the episode, but still, it wasn't a bad idea to do that).

BAD: ... call me a consistency freak if you will, but I did not spend all these years obsessively trying to make sense out of the wobbly worldbuilding of the Avatarverse to be told that the entrance to the Cave of Two Lovers is within Omashu and that it leads into the arena within Bumi's Palace. Sorry. I can't accept that. I can't. I legit laughed throughout that whole situation because that's not where the cave of two lovers was, the badgermoles would be causing earthquakes non-stop through the city, and the sewers system would not even work because they'd constantly get fucked up by the creatures (as we know, there's a scene in Book 2 of the kids climbing out of the sewers, so either they won't do the pentapox or they'll forget about the badgermoles conveniently by then...). So. No. Sorry but no. Also, why did they kill Oma??? I know they turned both lovers into women, but... precisely because they did that, why exactly was there any need to change which one died?? Either one you kill is a woman now anyway so... what's the difference? WHY the difference?? Odd.

GOOD: ... Zuko keeps a notebook on his research and investigations into the Avatar. There were many changes to his character but that's the one that stood out the most to me. He actually seems a little bit more methodical, if not smarter, but you know? Kinda smarter anyway for at LEAST thinking that keeping a book with the results of his investigations could help?? Feels like he's actually trying rather than just whining about how rude the world is and how hard he has it. Which, in the end, might ALSO come down to him actually having some hope that Ozai didn't hate him irremediably... which, too, is a good change. I've talked about it before, other people have too: a firstborn firebending male prince has no business being discarded because of incompetence unless he's just THAT pathetic, and even in canon, Zuko wasn't as bad as to justify pushing him out and treating him as shittily as Ozai did without an actual, THOROUGH, exploration of Ozai's motives. You can elaborate, but the show never really did it, and if anything, it offered a bunch of conflictive information about why Zuko thought his father liked him. Here, it makes more sense that he thinks Ozai isn't as much of a bitch as he really is: the Agni Kai is a lot more interesting because they merged both Zuko vs. Zhao and Zuko vs. Ozai into one. The fact that Ozai actually burns Zuko and defeats him BECAUSE he was punishing him for not taking advantage of an enemy's weakness? It's a million times more telling about Zuko's character than what we saw in canon, where he was down to fight an old man out of hybris and then shat himself as soon as his father stepped up instead. So... I don't like this Zuko, which tells you they're doing him right anyway x'DDDD but I find there are a few elements about him that make him at LEAST a little more respectable than he was in the OG show. Among them? He's not constantly ranting about honor but actually lashing out at dishonorable choices out of principle, which makes it sound like he has a WAY better grasp on that concept than he does in canon :'D sue me. This is a Zuko rework too, and fortunately, not ONLY geared towards sanitizing him (even though there IS a fair amount of sanitizing too... which annoys me, but what else could we expect in the era of political correction).

BAD: ... Why the fuck did they decide the way to fix Iroh harassing June was to make her horny for him? Please? Of all things??? All they had to do was just... not make any romantic/sexual implications there. At all. Was that so hard to achieve? This is probably the second worst thing for me in the entire show, ngl. I do not understand the need for it at all. Most of all when they CLEARLY changed it due to knowing Iroh absolutely was a bastard in the OG with his behavior towards her. Isn't it easier to just NOT put any implications of attraction in there? I mean, I should be happy June didn't fully harass Iroh but the way they presented it, it felt like he wasn't even comfortable with it either! This... is not the way you take revenge for a character sexually harassing another one. Bad, bad take, I don't know what made them do this but they absolutely did not "fix" this, they overcorrected it and made it gross as fuck to me anyhow, most of all with the context of knowing that Iroh was the one being inappropriate as fuck back in the OG.

ALRIGHT. I know there's bound to be more, and I probably could think of more soon but I think I'm giving you this for now or else I'll end up making my major post here x'D

All in all, I don't think this show is unwatchable, I absolutely understand people who think it was fun, I also understand people who couldn't get used to the changes and outright dropped it. What I can't understand/accept is either pretending this show is the greatest thing ever (much like I don't think the OG ATLA is...), or pretending that it's the worst one either. This show engaged with a lot of elements in different ways than the original did: not all of it was a miss, not all of it was a hit. And I feel like it's a matter of fundamental, human decency and respect not to go completely berserk taking a ten-ton dump on this show, which to this date is the biggest production in Hollywood with a primarily Asian cast and crew of all time, from what I know, by pretending it has destroyed this franchise completely and that any support for it must come from brainwashed idiots or "not true fans". The gate-keepy attitude comes as absolutely no surprise in this fandom, ofc, but it's still disgusting to see. You CAN be critical of this show with dignity. You CAN do it while respecting other people who enjoyed it completely. It's not too much to ask. I may have learned that lesson the hard way with the ATLA comics, but even then, it wasn't my M.O. to jump into every single comics-positive post to tell people why they sucked and how dumb they were for enjoying them.

That's what I've got for the time being :'D hope it's enough for now.