#which means everyone who does interpretations of him in modern media always does the same goddamn thing for him

[primordial0riginator]

Me, the only Ares and Nyx shipper on planet earth: 😏

[softieskywalker]

I vibe with your interpretation of luke sm! He's my main blorbo but weirdly he gets mischaracterized so much? He's such a difficult character to portray I think, without him sounding so slightly off kilter, both in canon and fandom material. Your posts had me go finally, someone who gets it

So I was wondering if you had any good reccomendations on books/comics that has good luke characterization?

Oh thank you!! I think Luke is hard to get as a character even when he's so simple because he's unusual in how textbook hero he is. Because people are so used to tragedy, where characters have little agency, and dramas where everyone is too cerebral. What I mean is that modern media is too focused on the struggle between emotion and action in characters, and sometimes you have characters who speak like they're trying to get an A in therapy. Luke is nothing like that. He's simple in a great way: he's all action. He makes his own choices without second guessing himself. I've said this before but you know someone doesn't understand Luke when they make him insecure. He's the total opposite! He's cocky, he's so sure of himself he doesn't waste time thinking twice, be just acts on his will. He's not arrogant about it, which also confuses people, since they're used to confidence being equal to arrogance. But take Han: he's very arrogant, but deeply insecure. But Luke isn't. That's part of the problem, that's what he needs to learn. Action based purely on impulse is a path to the Dark Side. The Jedi way is about taking those second to think about your actions and their consequences. That's why interpretations of Luke as someone who doesn't act feel so jarring. That's why so many of us reject sequels Luke. He's just not the type of guy to sit there and do nothing, even if he has fucked up. I could never take a Luke that does nothing, the same way I could never take a Luke that's so overpowered he just has to lift a finger and boom, problem solved. He's a character designed to go through the trials and tribulations of life! He's The Hero.

Anyway! Back to your question. I always recommend the original Thrawn trilogy, I really like Luke there. In canon, I like the Aphra run where Luke shows up, the screaming citadel I think it's called? The 2015 Star Wars run has great Luke moments too, I love the Grakkus arc. I also like Storms of Crait, it has the unfortunate thing of being sequel tie in but I love Luke and Leia in there.

[wprowers]

i want to talk about sonic boom characters.

Long post warning.

First of all i would like to say that i really enjoy sonic boom !! I think it has a really healthy and silly humor that for me it's always welcome, so i like this show and its characters. But don't take my opinion as something biased bc i don't really think it is, i can't be biased towards a piece of media that holds little to no value to the true canon mainline games.

I have seen people dragging this show to hell, and at the time it came out it recieved a LOT of criticism for VALID reasons, valid when it comes to comparing them to the actual canon personalities of these characters (which varies from media to media but its mostly the same concept, but you can't say they haven't fucked up in the characterization of certain characters in mainline games but thats for another day).

But neither sonic or amy or tails or whoever in boom actually have any meaning at all, do they have a backstory? a purpose? any serious fight? is eggman even their enemy? Absolutely not!!

BECAUSE THIS SHOW IS NOT MEANT TO TAKEN SERIOUSLY !!

If we are talking about knuckles, he is not smart !! he doesn't have a life mission to protect the emerald !! There's nothing going on for him !! he doesn't even remember anything, in one episode he suddenly realized he didn't have a family and started to look for one, getting manipulated into an "evil" complot and that's he most arc he has ever gotten in boom (found family trope at the end of the ep, rlly cute)

And i did see some worries about the franchise being influenced by the boom! characterization. Mostly for knuckles and amy.

As for knuckles i think that some of you watched the scu shortfilm and immediately thought that they were bringing boom!knux into the mix, i disagree wholeheartedly with this (if s3 comes out and it is like that well then...) i think that scu!knux is just someone who gets represented by his pure heart (as every good representation of knuckles) and lack of knowledge of his surroundings and the people who came into his life. He gets easily manipulated and doesn't know what icecream is, bc he has been a loner for so long !! and he does not know earth, that does not mean he's stupid in any way, and i dont think that's what they would go for in s3.

And for Amy I've seen the discourse that boom! generated around her, some claiming that it was the best amy, for her not overly girly attitude maybe or for the fact that her affection towards sonic was hidden and she didn't show it at all, even though it was stated that she liked him.

So I've seen people saying that due to this amy being well received, it has influenced on how they made her in modern media, which i don't think is that much of a true tbh??? Like besides twitter takeovers, i haven't seen much of boom!amy influence in any other thing, perhaps yes they took a different take for her in frontiers or other modern games, but she has always been true to what really her character is, sonic or not Amy is Amy. Its not about how they made boom! canon suddenly but what is the path they want her character to take while she is still connected to her emotions and love for sonic and everyone.

And no i don't think boom!amy is the best version of amy, i don't think any boom! character is the best version of themselves and they will never be, because there is nothing that conveys their true selves in this interpretation, so it's impossible for these characters to be that.

LETS NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT BOOM!SHADOW because that boy is not shadow at all, then again this is a character that suffered a lot of misinterpretations from his own creators so,,,

So im not making really any point in here?

just simply stating the obvious !! sonic boom is a show that you watch to have fun ! it does not have any action or true emotional moments, never has the team gone through a serious situation. You watch it because it's silly and you don't expect much else from it! Everyone is loveable in their own way if you look at them with the right eyes, so maybe you could enjoy this show without thinking about how out of character most things are.

love you sonic boom i will always defend you

[itsclydebitches]

I keep seeing people calling Good Omens queer bating and a I can't help but ask why? I read the Aziraphale/Crowley relationship threw an Ace lens and they are clearly as close to married as they are probably going to get without stepping on holy ground.... and they love each other... why is it considered queer bating?

Personally, I think it's mostly young queer fans turning legitimate grievances on the wrong target. A case of getting so fed up with queerbaiting in media as a whole that they're instinctually lashing out at anything that seems to resembles it on the surface, without taking the time to consider whether this is, in fact, the thing they're mad at. Good Omens is a scapegoat, if you will. The equivalent of snapping at your partner after a long day. Your friend was an asshole, your boss was an asshole, the guy in traffic was an asshole, and then you come home to your partner who says something teasing and you take it as another asshole comment because you've just been surrounded by assholeness all day, to the point where your brain is primed to see an attack. Your partner wasn't actually an asshole, but by this point you're (understandably) too on guard to realize that. Unless someone sits you down and kindly reminds you of the difference between playful teasing and a legitimate insult - the nuance, if you will - your hackles are just gonna stay up and you'll leave the room, off to phone a different friend to tell them all about how your partner was definitely an asshole to you.

Only in this case, that "friend" is a fan on social media doing think pieces on the supposed queerbaiting of Good Omens, spreading that idea to a) people who aren't familiar with the show themselves and b) those who, like that original fan, have come to expect queerbaiting and thus aren't inclined to question the latest story with that mark leveled against it. Because on the surface Good Omens can look a lot like queerbaiting. Here are two queer coded characters who clearly love each other, but don't say "I love you," don't kiss, don't "prove" that love in a particular way. So Gaiman is just leading everyone on, right?

Well... no. This is where the nuance comes in, the thing that many fans aren't interested in grappling with (because, like it or not, media is not made up of black and white categories; queerbaited and not-queerbaited. Supernatural's finale is proof enough of that...) I won't delve into the most detailed explanation here, but suffice to say:

Gaiman has straight up said it's a love story. He's just not giving them concrete labels like "gay" or "bi" or "asexual," etc. because they are literally not human. Gaiman has subscribed to an inclusive viewpoint in an era where fans are desperate for unambiguous rep that homophobes cannot possibly deny. The freedom to prioritize any interpretation - yes, including a "just friends" interpretation - now, in 2021, feels like a cop-out. However, in this case it's an act of world building (they are an angel and a demon, not bound by human understanding of identity) meeting a genuine desire to make these characters relatable to the entire queer community, not just particular subsets. Gaiman has said they can be whatever we want because the gender, sexuality, and romantic attraction of an angel and a demon is totally up for debate! However, some fans have interpreted that as a dismissal of canonical queerness; the idea that fans can pretend they're whatever they want... but it's definitely not canon. It is though. Them being queer is 100% canon, it's just up to us to decide what kind of queer they are. This isn't Gaiman stringing audiences along, it's him opening the relationship up to all queer possibilities.

We know he's not stringing us along (queerbaiting) because up until just a few days ago season two didn't exist. Queerbaiting is a deliberate strategy to maintain an audience. A miniseries does not need to maintain its audience. You binge it in one go and you're done, no coming back next year required. The announcement for season two doesn't erase that context for season one. No one knew there would be more content and thus the idea that they would implement a strategy designed to keep viewers hooked due to the hope for a queer relationship (with no intent to follow through) is... silly.

In addition, this interpretive, queer relationship between Crowley and Aziraphale existed in the book thirty years ago. Many fans are not considering the difference between creating a totally new story in 2019 and faithfully adapting a story from 1990 in 2019. Good Omens as representation meant something very different back then and that absolutely impacts how we see its adaptation onto the small screen. To put this into perspective, Rowling made HUGE waves when she revealed that she "thought of" Dumbledore as gay in an interview... in 2007. Compare that to the intense coding 17 years before. Gaiman was - and still is - pushing boundaries.

Which includes being an established ally, particularly in his comics. Queerbaiting isn't just the act of a single work, but the way an author approaches their work. Gaiman does not (to my knowledge) have that mark against him and even if he did, he's done enough other work to offset that.

Finally, we've got other, practical issues like: how do you represent asexuality on the screen? How do you show an absence of something? Yeah, one or both of them could claim that label in the show, outright saying, "I'm asexual," but again, Gaimain isn't looking to box his mythological figures into a single identity. So if we want that rep... we have to grapple with the fact that this is one option for what it looks like.

Even if he did want to narrow the representation down to just a few identities for the show, should Gaiman really be making those major changes when he's only one half of the author team? Pratchett has, sadly, passed on and thus obviously has no say in whether his characters undergo such revisions. Even if fans hate every other argument, they should understand that, out of respect, Good Omens is going to largely remain the same story it was 30 years ago.

And those 6,000 years are just the beginning! Again, this was meant to be a miniseries of a single novel, a novel that, crucially, covered only Crowley and Aziraphale's triumph in being able to love one another freely. That's a part of their personal journey. Yeah, they've been together in one sense for 6,000 years, but that was always with hell and heaven on their backs, to say nothing of the slow-burn approach towards acknowledging that love, for Aziraphale in particular. We end the story at the start of their new relationship, one that is more free and open than it ever was before. They can be anything to one another now! The fact that we don't see that isn't a deliberate attempt on the author's part to deny us that representation, but only a result of the story ending.

So yeah, there's a lot to consider and, frankly, I don't think those fans are considering it. Which on a purely emotional level I can understand. I'm pissed about queerbaiting too and the knee-jerk desire to reject anything that doesn't meet a specific standard is understandable. But understandable doesn't mean we don't have to work against that instinct because doing otherwise is harmful in the long run. We need to consider when stories were published and what representation meant back then. We need to consider how we adapt those stories for a modern audience. We need to acknowledge that if we want the inclusivity that "queer" provides us, that includes getting characters whose identity is not strictly defined by the author as well as characters with overtly canonical labels. We need both. We likewise need to be careful about when having higher standards ends up hurting the wrong authors - who are our imperfect allies vs. those straight up unwilling to embrace our community at all? And most importantly, we have to think about how we're using the terms we've developed to discuss these issues. Queerbaiting means something specific and applying it to Good Omens not only does Good Omens a disservice, but it undermines the intended meaning of "queerbaiting," making it harder to use correctly in the future. Good Omens is not queerbaiting and trying to claim it is only hurts the community those fans are speaking up for.

[kaile-hultner]

Nihilism is so easy, which is why we need to kill it

(I initially published this here a couple weeks ago.)

So last night it dawned on me that, after over two years of being relatively symptom-free, my depression snuck back up on me and has taken over. It’s still pretty mild in comparison to other times I’ve been stuck in the hole, but after 24 months (and more) of mostly being good to go, I can tell that it’s here for a hot minute again.

How do I know? Well, it might be the fact that I spent more time sleeping during my recent vacation from work than I did just about anything else, and how it’s suddenly really hard for me to stay awake during work hours. I don’t really have an appetite, and in fact nausea hits me frequently. I don’t really have any emotional reactions to things outside of tears, even when tears aren’t super appropriate to the situation (like watching someone play Outer Wilds for the first time). And I’ve been consuming a lot of apocalyptic media, to which the only response, emotional or otherwise, I can really muster is “dude same.”

For a long time I was huge into absurdist philosophy, because it felt to my depressed brain like just the right balance between straight up denying that things are bad (and thus we should fix them, or at least try to do so) and full-blown nihilism. This gives absurdism a lot of credit; mostly it’s just a loose set of spicy existentialist ideas and shit that sounds good on a sticker, like “The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”

In the last couple years, while outside of my depressive state, I went back to Camus’ work and found a lot of almost full-on abusive shit in it. Not toward anyone specifically, but shit like “nobody and nothing will care if you’re gone, so live out of spite of them all” rubs me the wrong way in retrospect. The philosophy Camus puts out opens the door for living in a very self-destructive fashion; that in fact the good life is living without care for yourself or anyone/anything else. The way Camus describes and derides suicide especially is grim as fuck, and certainly I would never recommend The Myth of Sisyphus to anyone currently struggling with ideation. That “perfect balance” between denial and nihilism is really not that perfect at all, and in fact skews much more heavily towards the latter.

Neon Genesis Evangelion has been a big albatross around my neck in terms of the media products I’ve consumed in my life that I believe have influenced my depression hardcore. It sits in a similar conversational space to Camus’ work, in that it confronts nihilism and at once rejects and facilitates it. A lot of folks remark that Evangelion is pretty unique – or at least uncommon – in its accurate portrayal of depression, especially for mid-90s anime properties. The thing I notice always seems to be missing in these discussions is that along with that accurate portrayal comes a spot-on – to me, at least – depiction of what depression does to resist being treated. This is a disease that uses a person’s rational faculties to suggest that nobody else could possibly understand their pain, and therefore there’s no use in getting better or moving forward. Shinji Ikari is as self-centered as Hideaki Anno is as I am when it comes to confronting the truth: there are paths out of this hole, but nobody else can take that step out but us, and part of our illness is that refusal to do just that. Depression lies, it provides a cold comfort to the sufferer, that there is no existence other than the one where we are in pain and there is no way out, so pull the blanket up over our head and go back to sleep.

Watching Evangelion for the first time corresponded with the onset of one of the worst depressive spirals I’ve ever been in, and so, much like the time I got a stomach virus at the same time that I ate Arby’s curly fries, I kind of can’t associate Evangelion with anything else. No matter what else it might signify, no matter what other meaning there is to derive from it, for me Eva is the Bad Feeling Anime™. Which is why, naturally, I had to binge all four of the Evangelion theatrical releases upon the release of Evangelion 3.0+1.0 Thrice Upon A Time last month.

If Neon Genesis Evangelion and End of Evangelion are works produced by someone with untreated depression just fucking rawdogging existence, then the Eva movies are works produced by someone who has gone to therapy even just one fucking time. Whether that therapy is working or not is to be determined, but they have taken that step out of the hole and are able to believe that there is a possibility of living a depression-free life. The first 40 minutes or so of Evangelion 3.0+1.0 are perfect cinema to me. The world is destroyed but there is a way to bring it back. Restoration and existence is possible even when the surface of the planet might as well be the surface of the Moon. The only thing about this is, everyone has to be on board to help. Even though WILLE fired one of its special de-corefication devices into the ground to give the residents of Village 3 a chance at survival, the maintenance of this pocket ecosystem is actively their responsibility. There is no room or time for people who won’t actively contribute, won’t actively participate in making a better world from the ashes of the old.

There are a lot of essentialist claims and assumptions made by the film in this first act about how the body interacts with the social – the concept of disability itself just doesn’t seem to have made it into the ring of safety provided by Misato and the Wunder, which seems frankly wild to me, and women are almost singularly portrayed in traditionalist support roles while men are the doers and the fixers and the makers. I think it’s worth raising a skeptical eyebrow at this trad conservative “back to old ways” expression of the post-apocalypse wherever it comes up, just as it’s important to acknowledge where the movie pushes back on these themes, like when Toji (or possibly Kensuke) is telling Shinji that, despite all the hard work everyone is doing like farming and building, the village is far from self-sufficient and will likely always rely on provisions from the Wunder.

As idyllic as the setting is, it’s not the ideal. As Shinji emerges from his catatonia, Kensuke takes him around the village perimeter. It’s quiet, rural Japan as far as the eye can see, but everywhere there are contingencies; rationing means Kensuke can only catch one fish a week, all the entry points where flowing water comes into the radius of the de-corefication devices have to be checked for blockages because the water supply will run out. There is a looming possibility that the de-corefication machines could break or shut down at some point, and nobody knows what will happen when that happens. On the perimeter, lumbering, pilot-less and headless Eva units shuffle around; it is unknown whether they’re horrors endlessly biding their time or simply ghosts looking to reconnect to the ember of humanity on the other side of the wall. Survival is always an open question, and mutual aid is the expectation. Still: the apocalypse happened, and we’re still here. The question Village 3 answers is “what now?” We move on, we adapt.

Evangelion is still a work that does its level best to defy easy interpretation, but the modern version of the franchise has largely abandoned the nihilism that was at its core in the 90s version. It’s not just that Shinji no longer denies the world until the last possible second – it’s that he frequently actively reaches out and is frustrated by other people’s denials. He wants to connect, he wants to be social, but he’s also burdened with the idea that he’s only good to others if he’s useful, and he’s only useful if he pilots the Eva unit. This last movie separates him and what he is worth to others (and himself) from his agency in being an Eva pilot, finally. In doing so, he’s able to reconcile with nearly everyone in his life who he has harmed or who has hurt him, and create a world in which there is no Evangelion. While this ending is much more wishful thinking than one more grounded in the reality of the franchise – one that, say, focuses on the existence and possible flourishing of Village 3 and other settlements like it while keeping one eye on the precarious balancing act they’re all playing – it feels better than the ending of End of Eva, and even than the last two episodes of the original series.

I’m glad the nihilism in Evangelion is gone, for the most part. I’m glad that I didn’t spend roughly eight hours watching the Evamovies only to be met yet again with a message of “everything is pointless, fuck off and die.” Because I’ve been absorbing that sentiment a lot lately, from a lot of different sources, and it really just fuckin sucks to hear over and over again.

It is a truth we can’t easily ignore that the confluence of pandemic, climate change, authoritarian surge and capitalist decay has made shit miserable recently. But the spike in lamentations over the intractability of this mix of shit – the inevitability of our destruction, to put it in simpler terms – really is pissing me off. No one person is going to fix the world, that much is absolutely true, but if everyone just goes limp and decides to “123 not it” the apocalypse then everyone crying about how the world is fucked on Twitter will simply be adding to the opening bars of a self-fulfilling prophesy.

We can’t get in a mech to save the world but then, neither realistically could Shinji Ikari. What we can do looks a lot more like what’s being done in Village 3: people helping each other with limited resources wherever they can.

Last week, Hurricane Ida slammed into the Gulf Coast and churned there for hours – decimating Bayou communities in Louisiana and disrupting the supply chain extensively – before powering down and moving inland. Last night the powerful remnants of that storm tore through the Northeast, causing intense flooding. Areas not typically affected by hurricanes suddenly found themselves in a similar boat – pun not intended – to folks for whom hurricanes are simply a fact of life. There’s a once-in-a-millennium drought and heatwave ripping through the West Coast and hey – who can forget back in February when Oklahoma and Texas experienced -20 degree temperatures for several days in a row? All of this against the backdrop of a deadly and terrifying pandemic and worsening political climate. It’s genuinely scary! But there are things we can do.

First, if you’re in a weather disaster-prone area, get to know your local mutual aid organizations. Some of these groups might be official non-profits; one such group in the Louisiana area, for example, is Common Ground Relief. Check their social media accounts for updates on what to do and who needs help. If you’re not sure if there’s one in your area, check out groups like Mutual Aid Disaster Relief for that same information. Even if you’re not in a place that expects to see the immediate effects of climate change, you should still consider linking up with organizing groups in your area. Tenant unions, homeless organizations, safe injection sites and needle exchanges, immigrant rights groups, environmental activist orgs, reproductive health groups – all could use some help right now, in whatever capacity you might be able to provide it.

In none of these scenarios are we going to be the heroes of the story, and we shouldn’t view this kind of work in that way. But neither should we give into the nihilistic impulse to insist upon doing nothing, insist that inaction is the best course of action, and get back under the blankets for our final sleep. Kill that impulse in your head, and fuck, if you have to, simply just fucking wish for that better world. Then get out of bed and help make it happen.

[nyerus]

His Royal Highness, the Crown Prince of XianLe -- Xie Lian

I wanted to do a little meta for Xie Lian to celebrate his birthday, about why he’s an incredible and unique character! One of my absolute faves. Happy Birthday Lianlian! ヽ(o´∀`)ﾉ♪♬

(Spoiler Warning!!!) (Also: massive length warning--get snacks!)

Xie Lian and The Hero’s Journey

One of the most interesting things about Xie Lian is that his personal arc starts near the end. Meaning that he is already nearly fully-realized by the time we meet him in book 1. He has only a few steps left in his classical Hero’s Journey, since TGCF starts in media res. A lot of his growth has been completed--which we witness more first-hand in books 2 and 4--so by the time we meet Xie Lian, he is already endured the most painful of his trials. It leaves him with the traits readers first pick up on: calm, confident, humble, and kind.

The main steps he has left to complete in his journey are the quintessential “atonement with the Father” and his “return home.” These stages of the Hero’s Journey are actually played somewhat straight in TGCF, and the former stage is actually the main plot of the novel. The stages are not meant to be literal, but metaphorical tools for literary analysis, as most books we read employ them in one way or another. TGCF does so as well, just out of order. So Xie Lian’s confrontation with Jun Wu (atonement), then getting his happy ending with Hua Cheng (return home) are the respective stages we see play out in the “present” narrative.

(However, he does have a “call to action stage” nestled within the present-time plotline. One can almost think of this as one Hero’s Journey nestled inside another.)

Xie Lian and The Heaven’s Will

The Heavens shook spectacularly when Xie Lian ascended. Each ascension, the Heavens greeted him with grandeur, even on what he considered his “fluke” of a second. And on his third ascension, the Heavens announced his return in a way that no one had ever seen before--by astonishing all its residents; bringing down the gilded palaces of other gods, and having the ancient clock sound off so fervently that it broke free of its hinges.

There is a lot of symbolism in this alone.

While Xie Lian’s narration (and the reactions of the other heavenly officials, including Ling Wen) paints his third ascension as a mix of comedic and tragic, we can interpret this scene differently. Xie Lian is the only one to have ascended thrice. He is the only one for whom the Heavens shook so powerfully. It isn’t because he’s a disgraced laughing stock--it’s because the Heaven know his true character, and his true strength.

(As an aside--see this post of mine about Heaven as an entity, separate from the Heavenly Capital and gods therein.)

It isn’t a big stretch to conclude that the Heavens show Xie Lian a particular amount of favoritism that it doesn’t to anyone else. One of the explanations for this could be that Xie Lian is the closest thing to the physical representation of the Heaven’s Will™.

This isn’t to say that Xie Lian is perfect. He isn’t, by any means. But he doesn’t have to be. Further thinking of the Heavens along the classic Taoist principles that TGCF draws from, the point is that Xie Lian tries. He works hard with what he has, embraces his fate and destiny, and makes the best of it as much as he can. Xie Lian himself doesn’t set out to be perfect. That is not his goal. His goal is to be a good person who is able to help people. He is morally upright, sincere, and humble. He seeks to maintain balance. These are treasured qualities.

Ultimately, he is human. He makes grievous mistakes, he makes bad decisions, and so on. But at the end of the day, Xie Lian lacks no conviction about his ideology. Even though he endured hell, and very nearly succumbed to darkness, there was always a part of him that held onto that notion that people were worth saving. Even at his worst, he still hesitated before causing harm. And when the man with the bamboo hat helped him--just a single gesture--it was enough for Xie Lian to rediscover that part of himself. His beliefs were re-affirmed, and he found the strength he needed to carry them.

The Heavens did not penalize Xie Lian for needing help. In fact, they rewarded him with ascension itself. When Xie Lian accepted his grief, he began to overcome it. He refused to fall into total despair--and while the actual nature of his second ascension are ambiguous, it’s probable that this is why he ascended. Not because he fought against Bai Wuxiang (because he wasn’t even the one to “win” that battle physically), but because he stood against him in the first place. Xie Lian’s grief, subsequent resolve, and decision to ultimately oppose everything Bai Wuxiang represented--THAT was his Heavenly Tribulation. And he passed with flying colors (much to Jun Wu’s intense fury).

[CONTINUED UNDER CUT DUE TO LENGTH.]

What it fundamentally comes down to, is that Xie Lian chooses to be compassionate. He does so even and especially in the face of adversity. Choosing to be kind when it is the hardest path of all is the mark of true courage and strength. It can’t be said it enough: Xie Lian very consciously makes the choice to do good even when it is hard for him. Even when he doesn’t want to. Because being a good and moral person doesn’t mean that you never have negative thoughts, and for sure Xie Lian gets frustrated and upse. It doesn’t mean you never make mistakes or never hurt people, because Xie Lian has done all those things before as well. After all, he is human, god or not. Things are not black-and-white, and never will be. But staying true to one’s ideals is what matters.

When Xie Lian made the decision to help Yong’An during the drought, for example, he knew it may be futile. He knew that he was breaking rules, going against what everyone else was saying. But he knew in his heart that it was the morally responsible thing to do. He is not the type of person to sit by quietly when there are people in need. He cannot see injustice and despair, and turn a blind eye to it. It also isn’t necessary (or even possible) for him to help literally everyone--as he learns the hard way. But doing what he can, where he can--that’s more than enough for Heaven to favor him. Because that’s the sign of someone who is genuinely compassionate and just.

So it’s no wonder that the Heavens favored him more than others. With a pure heart and strong sense of justice, while still being humble and patient--that’s all the Heavens need.

It’s even ironic that Xie Lian spoke out against the very “Heavens” themselves in book 2, at the height of his pride. But he was actually speaking out against the institution of heaven, and the overly-conservative beliefs that the gods (Heavenly Officials) held. Xie Lian has an extremely non-traditional view of looking at things.

His ideas go against the grain of what has been held true to the people of the world for centuries, but are actually in line with many modern philosophies--that one should not give much importance to idol worship, and instead focus on doing good deeds. That gods, being immortal ascended humans, should display the same humility and temperance; that they not hold themselves in higher regard or expect others to be subservient or fearful. This could very much be in line with what the Heaven’s will actually may be. Why the Heavens favor him so--because Xie Lian understands, in every sense, that gods are only human.

Xie Lian’s Character Growth

“I WON’T CHANGE! EVEN IF IT’S PAINFUL, I WON’T CHANGE. EVEN IF I DIE, I WON’T CHANGE. I WILL NEVER CHANGE!” (ch.239)

That’s the big thing about Xie Lian. It’s what sets him apart from many other characters. From the beginning to the end of his journey, his motivations and beliefs do not change. Only the nature of his motivations, and the basis of his beliefs change. That is to say, he believed that helping others was the right thing to do when he was 17 years old. 800 years later, he still feels this way. It’s just that he approaches the concept differently.

As a teenager, he was naive and coming from a place of high privilege. He was unable to understand the true plights of the common man, and his concepts of helping them--while still noble and morally just--were often somewhat patronizing. His heart was in the right place, but he was simply too young and too sheltered. He also fundamentally overestimated his own capability to help others, while underestimating the negative forces at play that would actively work against him. But 800 years later, Xie Lian has gone through hell and back. He knows better than anyone what it means to struggle, to suffer, to hope, to persevere. He still wants to help the common man, but now it comes from a place of understanding and humility. (The tragedy is, if he were allowed to grow up “normally,” he very much may have grown out of his naiveté and youthful arrogance anyway, after gaining more worldly experience. He was robbed of that chance.)

So Xie Lian chooses to be optimistic about life in general. He knows that he will get hurt by doing this. That people will take advantage of him. He knows, and yet, he continues to hold true to his principles. He neither asks nor expects people to thank him for it, or even understand him (as many people simply don’t). He does it because what other people think or even deserve is not his concern. It comes down to what he believes. That’s just the type of character he is--which is to say: fantastic.

TLDR; Xie Lian Best Boi!!!

[lowkeyorloki]

You're generally thought of to have really good characterization of Loki in this fandom (I'd say that's what you're known for???), so I was wondering if you could give some tips on how to write Loki? And maybe some general tips on writing imagines/x readers?

Hi there anon! First, thank you very much for such a high compliment. I think any fanfiction author would agree when I say being told we get our muse’s characterization correct is one of the highest compliments we can be given, so THANK YOU! 

I would be happy to give you some advice, but keep in mind, this is just my interpretation of Loki. You, and any other author, are allowed to take creative control and do with his character what you will. This is just what works for me!

For Imagines/X Reader Fics

This is my third imagines blog, so I have been doing x readers for a long time. If you’re looking to expand your following, I would start out doing preferences. This is when you take a group of people from the same piece of media (in Marvel, a good example would be the whole team of The Avengers) and basically write a little drabble for each of them in one post. This will allow you to use multiple character tags, which means your posts are more likely to circulate. From there, you can totally branch off and have an emphasis on one character, or create a whole new sideblog for one character that people from your already-established following can find. I used this method twice and it worked really well- it also lets people see you can write for different types of characters, which is always a plus.

Tags! Use as many tags as you can, because that’s how people find your work. Make sure to use some with your muse’s first name, and some with their first and last. For imagines specifically, I would always make sure you have “(name) x reader”, “(name) x you”, and “(name) imagine”, because those are what people usually search for.

Avoid physical descriptions. “Reader” is just that: the reader. Not everyone has blue eyes, not everyone has long hair, not everyone is white, etc. etc. If you really want to write a character with specific physical traits, then you should develop an OC. It rips your readers out of your fics when they’re described in a way that doesn’t fit them, and can also really harm their confidence- the only descriptions of someone’s appearance I’ve ever seen in x readers are features that are considered conventionally attractive, so it’s important to be mindful of any implicit biases you may have.

...You also have to keep the reader as a character somewhat neutral, because they are supposed to be whoever is consuming your fic. If you’re going to give them character traits, justify them with your story. You want your reader to be trained in hand-to-hand combat? They took martial arts as a kid. You want your reader to be the smartest in their field? Give them a backstory that made them that way. It’s personality traits you have to look out for, because if someone’s personality doesn’t match with “y/n’s”, that person isn’t going to be able to read your works. 

Speaking of y/n, I would suggest not using it at all. I’ve recently stopped using it due to my own experience and feedback from my followers. Most people don’t see y/n and replace it with their name, it just becomes a reminder they’re reading something. Your goal is to immerse your readers in your fics, and I’ve found this often has the opposite effect. There are a lot of ways to avoid y/n, such as pet names (darling, baby, love) or creative phrasing (”your name passed over his lips, whispered softly like he had never heard it before”). It can be a challenge, but writing always is!

If possible, keep your reader gender neutral. This sounds a lot harder than it is. Especially in the Loki fandom, there are a lot more male readers than you think, and there are people who don’t conform to either gender. Not assigning pronouns makes your reading more accessible (which also means more exposure!!!) and also allows everyone to find a place in fandom. The only times it becomes a problem is when other characters are talking about the reader behind their back, or when writing smut. In my case, I do my best avoid the first option and, until I find a solution, I do use gender and everything associated with it in smut. However, if none of these appeal to you, you can also copy and paste your fics to have different pronouns. 

Strategically place that “keep reading”, it’s a good way to get readers hooked!

For Loki’s Character

In my opinion, Loki is all about a balance of vulnerability. We all love to see him be loving and open and intimately intwined with someone, but it would take a lot of time to get there with him. For that reason, if you’re wanting to write that side of the Trickster, I would make your fic an established relationship or slow burn. If that doesn’t sound like something you want to do, a lot of faults in writing can be forgiven if you call them out yourself. Does something feel too random? Say it was sudden or unexpected. This shifts blame from you and actually becomes a characterization choice: now, instead of you possibly misinterpreting Loki’s character, he and the reader have so much chemistry with each other they’re acting differently than they normally would. 

Loki (and Thor’s) way of speaking is a HUGE factor of any fics with him. Loki has a different colloquial than we do, and thanks to Tom Hiddleston’s really sexy voice, it’s something closely associated with the character. So, we have to walk a line of Loki’s words being formal, but not being out of touch. He was able to assimilate easily (that’s part of the reason he was such a threat in Avengers), and is super clever and picks up on a lot of things. Therefore, Loki is more likely to address Tony as “Stark” rather than “Man of Iron”, and I think it’s fair to say he knows the name “Coulson” doesn’t refer to the SHIELD agent’s lineage (he’s probably not going to call him “Son of Coul”). But phrasing is also a part of this. I try to avoid contractions coming out of his mouth, so “you are” instead of “you’re”, “he is” instead of “he’s”, etc. etc. 

Loki also isn’t going to say things we normally would: As humans, we tend to exclaim “Oh my god!” or something along those lines. But Loki was brought being told he was a god, so that isn’t going to be in his vocabulary. It’s little things like this I keep an eye on when I’m writing for him.

A good way to accomplish Loki’s speech is just... adding words the modern world has deemed unnecessary. A recent example of mine is in one of my fics, Loki is asking the reader what a group of characters want from her. Originally, I had him saying “What do they want?”, and while editing, I changed it to “What is it that they want?.” It’s subtle, but when this is how most of the Loki’s sentences are structured, it calls back to the Loki we saw in earlier Thor films (regardless of your opinion on Ragnarak, the Shakespearean-esque language is gone by the film) and creates a simulation of sorts that makes your reader feel more in tune with your story. Not to keep using this word, but it’s a technique that immerses your reader.

Make sure your style matches Loki! I have a very dramatic and articulate style, lots commas, lots of (carefully placed) repetition, and paragraph breaks. This works for Loki because he’s such an emotional and complex character, and my style compliments and emphasizes that. 

Readers respond well to your style correlating with your character: Compare my fics Aftermath or Wounds to A Mortal Occurance. Aftermath and Wounds are written in the style I described above, and are approaching 500 and 400 notes respectively; whereas I tried a more domestic and conversational style in A Mortal Occurance, which has yet to reach even 150 notes. While there’s definitely something to be said about people subscribing to you for one specific form of writing, it would be impossible for me to deny one style is not only more true to me, but more true and realistic to Loki. Think of if I wrote in my style for Ant-Man or Sam Wilson. It wouldn’t really work because their characters aren’t as high-stakes as Loki.

I hope this all helps! Remember this is just my opinion and is what has worked for me. You’re free to take all this to heart or completely reject it. I’m honored you came to me in the first place <3

[a-sleepy-reader]

The Alchemist by Paulo Coehlo: an Analysis and Review

Foreword

If you want a review free of spoilers, please scroll to the section labelled ‘Conclusion/Review without spoilers.’

Introduction

Few modern novels have been as celebrated in the mainstream media as Paulo Coehlo’s The Alchemist. It has been praised by Publisher’s Weekly, Booklist, and Kenzaburo Oe, winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature. 

“The story has the comic charm, dramatic tension, and psychological intensity of a fairy tale, but it’s full of specific wisdom as well… a sweetly exotic tale for young and old alike.”

-Publisher’s Weekly

The Alchemist has the tone of a children’s book and the genre of a fable taking place centuries ago, with wisdoms claimed to be as old as its setting. So, does The Alchemist deliver on these high hopes?

Plot synopsis

Santiago seems disheartened by his life as a Shepherd boy in Spain before he meets a wise and likely supernatural king. The king tells Santiago that he must follow his personal legend(life purpose), which is to travel to the Egyptian pyramids in search of treasure. Santiago has dreamt of the pyramids and treasure before and takes this as affirmation that traveling to such a place is his life purpose. The shepherd boy sells his sheep and takes to selling crystals for money before he sets out on his journey and encounters The Englishman. He is an alchemist looking for the wisest practicer in his field, promptly titled ‘The Alchemist.’ The two set out on camels and stop at an oasis, where Santiago instantly falls in love with a woman named Fatima. The Englishman also manages to find his coveted alchemist, who shares many wisdoms with the two, for example, that, in this world, the language of the world is the spiritual communication of all beings, such as omens and body language. The Alchemist urges Santiago to follow his personal legend despite his bond to Fatima and, by proxy, the oasis. Though torn between staying with his love and realizing his personal legend, he sets out to the pyramids with The Alchemist. In the midst of their journey, however, Arabian soldiers capture them; Santiago is only spared his life by The Alchemist convincing the soldiers that Santiago will turn into wind. Santiago is able to communicate with the desert and summons a sandstorm that makes the soldiers let him go. At the pyramids, he is informed of a stranger's dream and personal legend, one of treasure waiting in Spain where Santiago began his journey. Realizing his treasure really required an appreciation not of a place but of given circumstances, Santiago plans to obtain his treasure and return to Fatima. 

Analysis

Coehlo says he is a catholic despite the fact that some of his beliefs do not align with traditional Catholicism. Many of his stances resemble that of spiritualism, such as a belief in omens, existentialism, and prophetic dreams. This explains many of The Alchemist’s themes, being as focused on personal legends and omens as it is. The Alchemist has many morals beyond very individualistic beliefs, however, such as faith in true love and soulmates, of a God, the purpose of life laying not in physical progress but in spiritual acceptance, and a disapproval of those too scared to pursue what they want, amongst others. Overall, however, I believe the book’s message can be boiled-down to ‘learn the language of the universe,’ that is, learn to interact with the spiritual world Coehlo believes in through means of personal legends and communicating with the world through omens.

Review

At first glance, The Alchemist looks like a simply-written yet sophisticated book; it has an understandable plot and writing style yet many morals, so who’s to say that it’s incomparable to works like The Little Prince by Antoine De Saint Exupery(I will be using that comparison often in this review)? Well, I think The Alchemist has the bones of an extraordinary fable like Exupery’s, but its meat is lacking. That is, I believe The Alchemist is a chaotic and underdeveloped mess of a book, The Little Prince but if it were written in a day or two. It had potential that was squandered by the lack of thought put into essential parts of storytelling, from its morals to its writing to its characters and tension. Let’s begin respectively. 

The Alchemist has few qualms with throwing an idea at the reader and presenting it as a conclusion rather than a speculation or the beginning of a well-developed theory for the reader to elaborate on themselves. For example, omens are integral to The Alchemist, and since the novel is advertised as a sort of self-help book with a plot, one would expect Coehlo to try and tie this idea in to the real world somehow or at least provide some reasoning for why he believes this aside from omens only obvious in The Alchemist. No such evidence or support is provided; omens are obviously present in The Alchemist but their validity relies on the nature of their being in the book unfounded or more difficult to find in the real world, and Coehlo never even explains why he believes in omens, so it’s a setup for nothing. This is a common theme throughout The Alchemist, from its support of personal legends to prophetic dreams to love at first sight to the language of the universe, Coehlo relies on the sheer obviousness of the world he made to get his points across and loses their potential support in the process. This harm’s the book’s philosophies regardless of whether they are accurate or not. 

Adding to the novel’s problems, the writing itself(that is, the English translation) is not very good. Now, I want to make something clear: a book doesn’t need to be Nabokovian to have good writing. One can use very common words and simple sentence structures and be better writers than the greats if they write wisely and make the most of its simplicity. The Little Prince has a simple writing style, but it flows with believable dialogue, clever metaphors, and good pacing. Compare those qualities to this excerpt from The Alchemist: 

“The first day passed. There was a major battle nearby, and a number of wounded were brought back to the camp. The dead soldiers were replaced by others, and life went on. Death doesn’t change anything, the boy thought.”

This paragraph is clunky. Sentences that could have led from one to the next in a steady, effortless rhythm instead clash and seem to be thrown together to form a mix of disconnected and boring facts. This could have been written so much more interestingly; does Santiago feel bad for the soldiers? Does he feel guilty for not helping with the battle? What did the wounded look like? How does he feel? A running problem in The Alchemist is how emotionally barren it is. True, I still would have grilled Coehlo if he wrote ‘Santiago is sad,’ but that is because the point could have been gotten across more subtly and believably: ‘The metallic stench of blood weighed on Santiago,’ for example. Expanding on this, let’s see what happens when I add my personal interpretation of how this paragraph could have been more fluent and emotionally powerful;

“The soldiers fought through the day and through the night, only that and the growing stench marking the time. A time-marker of blood, of hope, of death, of the many qualities of the people in the oasis, shattered to sand. Once those grains were gone, more rushed to the battlefield, sandstorm after sandstorm, life after life, gone. In the end, though, it changed nothing. Blood, hope, and death never really do.” 

By no means do I think this is perfect, but I think it goes to show a sliver of how much can be accomplished with relatively simple writing styles; they do not have to be clunky, they do not have to be bland, and they can get a point across and convey emotion at the same time. 

Then again, even if Coehlo’s prose was Nabokovian, this would not erase the blandness, homogeneity and monotony of his characters. Now, I found Santiago’s personality to be enjoyable enough; Coehlo represented his longing for something beyond the fields of Andalusia, his metaphorical mind as well as his determination yet uncertainty in life well enough. I have no problem with Santiago, but it would be very nice if every character in the book weren’t Santiago. What character doesn’t believe in the universal language? Who ever challenges Santiago’s certainties? When is Santiago not only mistaken in the way he goes about pursuing his personal legend but in an integral part of his worldview? I will summarize all three with these words; ‘noone,’ ‘never,’ and, ‘never - again!’ Everyone in this book nods along to Santiago’s beliefs; if the universal language is so rare, why does everyone agree on it? The characters feel less like individuals and more like fourth-wall breaks for Coehlo to dump yet another underdeveloped idea on the reader or pat himself on the back about how everyone in a fictional world he made agrees with him. Maybe if one or two characters opposed Santiago’s beliefs, made him question, realign or maybe even change his worldview, The Alchemist would feel more like the philosophical contemplation it was marketed as and less like a spiritualist self-help book with a plot. Instead, however, Santiago accomplishes his personal legend and has each of his beliefs solidified by every single character in the book. Where’s the internal struggle? Where’s the idea that things may not always be as they seem, that humans make mistakes? Such themes are forgotten in the world of The Alchemist.

I give The Alchemist by Paulo Coehlo a 30%. 

Conclusion/Review without spoilers

I had a rough time with this book. The wise, helpful, and insightful self-help it was sold as did not deliver on any of those qualities for me due to its portrayal of very subjective values as universal truths without any evidence or reasoning provided for them outside the universe of the book and poor writing. Despite all this, I understand how this book has helped many, especially those who already had beliefs similar to Coehlo’s. Beyond my relentless criticisms, The Alchemist is a hopeful fable of finding your purpose in the world. It may not have connected to me, but it is no coincidence that celebrities call it a favorite, that it’s a bestseller, and is beloved amongst many. This review evaluated The Alchemist’s objective value, to which I say that it is bad literature. Subjectively, though, it impacted so many people, it motivated, it inspired, and no matter how many bland characters, lazy writings and oversimplified answers it may have, I will forever admire The Alchemist for touching so many people. After all, what is literature but a communication of one’s self, of sharing that self with others for them to internalise and keep a personalised fragment of this person within them?

I recommend The Alchemist to those in need of a meaning in life, who don’t want to wade through dense prose and complex stories or characters. Sometimes, all we really need, all we really should have, is something that keeps us going in life. I’m sure The Alchemist will fulfil that for many, and for that, I am forever grateful.

[glassprism]

1/2: I browse general musical forums sometimes I'm seeing more and more theatregoers viewing the Phantom as a predator, murderer, sociopath; Christine "a wet blanket"and Raoul the same. I know these are surface characterizations (though not untrue for Erik) but not everyone will care to read into the libretto or study Leroux to understand there is much more to it than these labels, as we phans do.

2/2: With each new generation becoming less tolerant of older cultural works using tropes or social/gender norms that don’t match up with modern definitions, and the increasingly haphazard ways cultural providers have removed/modified works for the sake of being relevant to the wider conversation, do you think POTO will fall victim to this cancel culture sooner than expected? With this “love story” getting less and less “timeless” and “classic” to the contemporary eye. 

Hmm, I think there’s a lot to unpack here.

The first thing to say is that the “vibe” on different social media is very different. The kinds of fans and the kinds of ways they talk about Phantom was one way on forums, which is very different from the way it’s talked about here on Tumblr, which is also different from how it is on Instagram, or Facebook.

I bring that up because, in comparison, I see a very different interpretation on Tumblr. After the recent stream of the 25th anniversary production, I did not see too many going on about the Phantom as a sociopath or Christine as a “wet blanket”. The opposite seems to have happened with Christine - many are actually seeing her in a far more positive light or regard her as the true hero of the story. Similarly, while many do not downplay the Phantom’s actions, they also won’t deny that it’s part of the complexity of his character, or ignore that all-important act of redemption at the end. Or if they do, then they at least love him in a “he’s problematic trash, but he’s my problematic trash” sort of way. Many are fully willing to admit the toxicity of the relationship, but they also acknowledge that 1) the book and show generally does not shy away from showing the negative consequences of it and 2) that there’s still something compelling and wonderful in it, and that’s okay. And these were also fairly casual fans who just put their opinions in the tag because the musical happened to be conveniently available to watch.

Now yes, this is only one forum of discussion, and only one recent incident, but I do think this is reflective of how the changes in the cultural conversation have shifted analysis of the musical in a positive way, in a way that, if anything, benefits the show and book because it sifts apart some aspects that have long been overlooked. And this is without the show changing anything at all (except maybe how the actors play the role - I do think more modern Christines play the role a little stronger than the original actresses, but on the other hand, I don’t think one interpretation is necessarily better than the other; it’s just another shift in how people are viewing the story).

And... I think that actually answers your question? Which is that I don’t think Phantom will really fall victim to “cancel culture” (which IMO is more of a fad than anything - many are already turning against it, canceling cancel culture if you will). Certainly new adaptations might modify it, though I don’t mind that; adaptations always reflect whatever is being talked about in that time and that context. But Phantom as a book won’t change, and I can’t really see the show being changed much either. That might partially be because it’s such a long-running behemoth that most would not bother or would just explain it as, “Oh, it’s a musical that’s 30/40/150 years old, it’s a classic and times were different”, which is not a great response.

But at the same time, I think it’s also because people are finding new and valuable insights into the show because norms and gender roles and expectations are changing, and have concluded that this new viewpoint doesn’t make the musical or book worse in their eyes, it makes it better. I mean, I’ve seen feminist analyses that places the story in a positive light, meta about the relationships as something of a female power fantasy, endless discussions about the role of society in creating its own monsters and the power of human compassion to elevate a person... all because of how conversation has shifted.

Again, this is all just my experience from my little corner of the Internet, and I certainly cannot predict how the conversation will change next. Maybe Phantom will be “canceled”, I don’t know. But from someone who’s watched and occasionally participated in a lot of the new talk about Phantom, I have not seen people getting disheartened and realize their “fave is problematic”; they’ve just found new angles to talk about it.

[ronnytherandom]

Media n Stuff

2/1/2021: American Psycho

Excellent, truly. Has a lot to say about those on the top of our social hierarchy, the wealthy and influential and how our modern system facilitates them at the expense of everyone else. A very stylish film, well edited and directed. Rests upon a truly magnificent performance in the case of Christian Bale’s Patrick Bateman, who does a fantastic job of playing something pretending to be human. Soundtrack is a bop.

3/1/2021: Se7en

All right, not my kind of thing ultimately. There are some thoughts about legacy and what doing good means here but I feel its slightly obscure and could be more clearly stated; perhaps I wasn’t paying close enough attention. Directing is top notch. The acting also is good but nothing truly incredible. The suspense is very effective but on occasion can be defeated by pacing, excess time creating boredom. Further it was partially predictable, which harmed the effectiveness of the piece. Though the point of the state of the victims is to inspire disgust this especially did not fit the remit of entertainment for me.

4/1/2021: The Martian

Highly Enjoyable. As usual, weaker than the novel but not to a Golden Compass level. Any work that bends heaven and earth to save a single life is good in my books. Retains the wit and the scientific backbone to good effect to offset the bleakness. Likewise, the back-and-forth structure between Mars and other locations helps to make the survival scenario less overbearing. Star-studded cast, and I think rightfully so here as the performances are generally very good. Matt Damon as Mark Watney has many moments of excellence. Mars is beautiful and I’m glad Ridley Scott captured that well, on top of doing a job that lives up to his reputation.

5/1/2021: Dredd

Good. Though I worry about the implications of a “Not All Cops Bad” message, it could be interpreted elsewise and is decidedly sympathetic to civilians which works in its favour. There is the aspect of portraying Police and Criminals as two sides of the same coin, with Dredd and Anderson existing outside of said dichotomy to some degree, but ultimately implying that the existing system just needs the right people in it without severe reform, though again that’s up for debate. Otherwise, good spectacle and very nice presentation; the film can be beautiful at times and when it isn’t it has excellent action. Something I appreciate is a clear view of the action, rather than the choppy action of modern superhero films, and an unflinching approach to the depiction of gore even if I was flinching at times. Though I’m unfamiliar with the original work I find this an interesting dystopia, even if Dredd himself can be a little cliché. Performances haven’t left much of an impression though.

6/1/2021: The Wolf of Wall Street

Meh? It’s well made don’t get me wrong, everything looks and feels high quality. Of course, Scorsese is a good director. Of course, DiCaprio’s acting is fantastic, as is the rest of the acting to be frank, but it just doesn’t come together for me. I don’t feel like there was a compelling reason to sit through that for three whole hours. I can see meaning in the depiction of excess; of Belfort’s alienation, losing everything that should be dear to him; of the animal nature of people who just want to make money. I can appreciate the powerful performances and the craftwork on display. I just didn’t enjoy it.

7/1/2021: Enola Holmes

Enjoyable. Has a more juvenile tone than I like, that’s to be expected from a coming-of-age story, but it certainly does a far better job with the gifted sister idea than the BBC Sherlock series did. At times this film was truly joyous and inspiring and I would attribute that to a cast of endearing characters and a strong thematic core which is carried throughout the story. However, from a more radical perspective I cannot endorse a seeming admonishment of direct action, as much as I appreciate the idea that getting new blood in politics is a progressive step forward. Performances are good, Millie Bobby Brown does well in the lead, though I am not so keen on her 4th wall asides, and I always appreciate the sight of Henry Cavill. Also, proud to see Burn Gorman portray the most accurate Normal Englishman I’ve ever seen. I also wanted to make note of what id consider good editing, felt very snappy and effective.

8/1/2021: Shaun of the Dead

Very good, but maybe doesn’t quite live up to its reputation. Very put off by the use of F and N slurs even if the prior is in context with English slang at the time. Id say this is the lesser of the Cornetto trilogy films but with such competition it’d be hard to come out on top. Quite dry humour, I don’t think all the jokes land, but there are a few true laugh out loud moments. Similarly, it works emotionally only some of the time but at moments, especially in Philips last words, there’s some genuine power. I do feel like the pace lulls slightly too much at moments but is generally very good and saves itself for a fun final sprint. The Zombies themselves are true to Romero’s style of zombie and though the satire is light in comparison to character-zombie parallels it is still effective. Performances are good, and serve well in demonstrating the range of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost in comparison with the later Cornetto films and Bill Nighy is always a treat. I only ever have praise for Edgar Wright as a fan of all his later works, so I’m glad to see even his first feature demonstrates his ability well, stylish young man is our Edgar.

8/1/2021: Avatar: Legend of Korra: Series 1

Not by any stretch a worthy successor but good by its own merit. Has powerful emotional moments and excellent action, I cannot get enough of any kind of bending in this universe. Some characters are likeable; Korra is a good lead, Tenzin is my personal favourite and I want to hug Naga. Bolin, however, can get shafted. his particular brand of comic relief inspires in me an absolute hatred I cannot fully fathom. I have many little gripes though. I find the love “square” (?) plot annoying and do not understand what purpose it serves. Just be honest with each other goddamn! In universe I wonder at the limits of metal bending, but the police are content simply to launch cables with it. Why are the Chi Fighters such an obstacle in the first half and yet become cannon fodder by the end? I also feel like a lot of the “powerful moments” I feel are dependent on nostalgia for The Last Airbender, such as any moment where the original theme is played, or when General Iroh appears etc. This is particularly egregious with the feature of cabbage corp. Really? It is frustrating to me that Korra spends the entire series past the second episode tell-not-showing us she can’t airbend before having it essentially gifted to her, similarly with the avatar state. As much as she does endure hardship, I feel like the series would be improved even slightly if Korra’s bending is taken away completely and she uses the avatar state to rescue Mako from Amon, when she is actually at her definitive low point. I find with most episodes there are moments which I’m absolutely invested in and really enjoying but then a gripe or two will pop up and marginally ruin the experience for me. But again, these are minor and as much as I fuss over these details the ultimate product is enjoyable and watchable. The setting is certainly interesting but (probably by design) New Republic City clashes too harshly with the magic system, and I think it harms the series. The animators and artists however should be lauded, as the spectacle here is magnificent.

9/1/2021: Ex Machina

Magnificent piece of work. This is what I imagine is actual good cinematography, rather than the usual “pretty stills equals good cinematography” take. Every frame a painting indeed, aided in that way by fantastically beautiful set work. Each actor deserves applause but I feel especially Alicia Vikander. As Ava she does brilliant work and at times uses an alien affectation which is an impressive highlight of attention to detail here. The director knows exactly what they’re doing, the whole thing has a kind of spotless professionalism. Special Effects are minimalist but used so very well, especially the work of making Ava and the other AI look so real. I love that this is a film which doesn’t stoop to explaining every little thing and treats the audience as an equal, and how the tension is reflected in all aspects of the piece and builds to such a mighty crescendo, though I was quite put off by the self-harm scene and would rather that were not a thing. Not only all of that but its deeply meaningful with a lot to say about our own minds (I don’t think Nathan passes Turing test) with a decidedly feminist angle too. It really is a treat.

10/1/2021: Sourcery (unfinished)

Even as a fan of early Pratchett, this ain’t it chief. I don’t like it. The jokes don’t land, the only character I like is The Librarian and the whole thing just kind of bores me, so I’ve stopped somewhere just past halfway as I can’t be fussed for the rest. I don’t care about Coin, or the wizards, or Rincewind, even the Luggage has lost that pariah charisma it usually has. Conina feels weird? I feel like there this constant unnecessary sexualisation of her and Rincewind’s affections seem more than mildly inappropriate. I’ve been reading it a week and I’ve barely been able to drag myself to it these past couple of days so I feel its time for something a little fresher.

10/1/2021: The Two Popes

Very good. There is excellence in all aspects of this films craft. Johnathan Pryce gives an endearing performance; Anthony Hopkins is likewise very good as you’d expect. I think this is a film to listen to through a good sound system, the sound work struck me as exceptional in its attention to detail while the soundtrack is good fun. Direction is dynamic and effective most evidently in the camera work which tends to feel Just Right. Dialogue is very well written and feels very organic. I enjoy the themes of change and reconciliation and feel contrasting the character of the two popes expresses this very effectively, however I would much rather see evidence of genuine change that surely must’ve occurred rather than a simple implication of change as we see. There is the argument to be made that fully reconciling the old and the new without altering material reality, beyond giving speeches encouraging others to do so, represents the will to change being co-opted and perverted by the conservative establishment. But its still a nice sentiment and a well made film regardless.

[sakuhai]

From the recent events of s3 of Castlevania and the extreme reactions of part of the current fandom I assume that most people are either unaware that this particular cartoon series version is rather a almost completely "interpretation as adaptation" case and not an accurate adaptation of the Castlevania series as it has been established in multiple video games,manga and novels since 1986.

Or they simply haven't looked so deep into the previous versions and what the story and the characters originally are about.

Alucard being a quite ambiguous character who has a completely different and very complicated long story and arc of his own in the particular arc Castlevania series is at this point his character was never a main character and his appearance was more like an "easter egg" and so the scriptwriters have taken many liberties on Alucards character making him almost completely different from what he was designed and composed by his original creator.

The original Alucard would probably not seem so appealing and wouldn't had become very sympathetic popular and relatable to the modern audience.Or would he?In my opinion he would but as mentioned before many liberties have been imposed to his character and storyline in the cartoon series which doesn't claim to be an accurate adaptation.

I think it would had been more interesting if they had kept his original traits and explored those more instead of writing his character almost from scratch.But I guess that's how it works with media in order to not have legal issues or sth like that?I'm not sure but the Castlevania adult cartoon series is free adaptation almost like a licensed fan fiction so having said that I will go to the real "purpose" of this post.

Cartoon Castlevania Alucard is not the "canon" one.Is just someone's interpretation and "take" on his character.And it doesn't go much beyond that at this point.

The original Alucard is a very strong assertive individual with extreme intelligence,very strong morals and beliefs,and a very sharp perception of himself,the environment and people.

He is not affected by others,he makes his own decisions,he's well balanced and grounded.He knows what he does and why.

Being so clever with a strong intuition but also he seems to have a square logic.He is aware of himself and that as a supernatural creature with the values of his time,and the fact that he is very mature and noble he feels the responsibility of defending humans as someone who isn't directly affected nor will he ever practically have the same problems as the mortals.

Alucard with his original character is someone who has established everything inside his mind and soul from a very young age and with his mothers love and words always in his heart and mind he goes forward.

He is not vulnerable at least not in the way he is in the cartoon.He doesn't need any guidance or advice by anyone.His judgment and actions are not affected by others.Because he is sharp and can see right through other individuals and situations.He seems to be more into spiritual and intellectual paths and he has complete control of his body and mind.He doesn't get distracted and his self control is adamant.

He doesn't seem to be ever affected by his natural urge of consuming human blood.He has expressed his thoughts and misgivings that if he ever tries it he would probably want more and he understands that with that the power inbalance between him and mortals would only be stronger.He is extremely powerful being a hybrid as it is,so he doesn't seem to want to explore what his abilities would be like if he consumed human blood.And Alucard is aware of everything.He knows what s*x is and he never seems interested in it.In the graphic novel I believe he has even been approached multiple times by a lot of people for that purpose but he was never interested.He knows when he received flirting from others,he knows when humans try to seduce him.Again he never reciprocated any of those.Even in the cartoon version he says "Gross" when he sees Trevor and Sypha kissing.He tells Trevor to f*ck off and he gives him a middle finger.

Alucard knows what's up.I get that,those were probably just for laughs but still it should mean that Alucard knows what it means when people kiss like that etc..So its not like he wasn't aware of what was happening when Taka and Sumi started kissing him...

So based on how Alucards original character was established through the years and people knowing that and accepting that,it should be understandable why some of us wouldn't take his character in the cartoon very seriously and make some rather sarcastic comments and humor about it,instead of being disturbed by it.

I hope that people will understand what I mean despite my probably awkward usage of the English language.

Its just that some fans know the original Alucard and this "alien" Alucard seems borderline a caricature or we would rather the producers had chosen other things from their unlimited choices for Alucard.

It did seem ooc for Alucard to be vulnerable and naive like that.His words towards Taka and Sumi that they shouldn't be like that because the world is not against them and that they still have other options and chances to better themselves and their lives,instead of seducing and killing people and supernatural creatures does sound like something the original Alucard would say but he would say it before the s*x and not afterwards.And the original Alucard would probably even kick them out for being "lewd" if they hadn't previously understood his lecture.Alucard even in his cartoon version had very clearly warned them that they should be careful because he is a vampire after all,so his reactions a few days later seem way too weird...

Alucard is sassy and he would had denied them and tell them off pretty intensely preaching them like an older sibling or even a father figure.

Also original Alucard is someone who knows who he is and what he is.He knows that great power comes with great responsibility.He knows his abilities and that his choices are unlimited compared to humans.Even if he would give in carnal pleasure he still wouldn't chose to slaughter humans for their weak bodies and minds.As a supernatural creature he has high standards for himself and like other cases he would avoid killing humans all the more so young desperate humans.He has many skills and abilities.Subduing them would had been a piece of cake for him.Alucard is someone who can even predict somebody's thoughts and moves before they make them.

Alucard's history of murders is in its majority reported in cases of direct battle and mostly he would kill other supernatural creatures and not humans.Alucard is very responsible and operates with logic but he also has empathy.

Like in the case with his father,he didn't only blame humans for losing their composure getting overwhelmed with terror and therefore taking rashed decisions which result to catastrophic events.Alucard also seems to think that his father also bares a huge responsibility for what happened to his mother.So ofcourse if Alucard ever committed such a mistake he would definitely take the entire blame and responsibility instead of turning evil and choosing to destroy everyone and everything as a copying mechanism.

So overall the character of Alucard originally doesn't have any obvious flaws or vulnerabilities.But still one way or another he would still be interesting and have his audience/fans.Its just that unfortunately or not the producers made that decision for Alucard's character in this version of the series.

As for his very personal life and romance or s*xuality,the original Alucard never engaged into any type of s*xual activity with anyone.And his relationship with Maria seems nice but I would say its up to interpretation.It's easier to say that Maria likes Alucard and sees him as a love interest.He doesn't seem to feel that way.He likes her and respects her and they work nicely together as partners in battle but other than that he never reciprocated her love signals.

But if the story of the cartoon Castlevania continues and catches that arc and since many fans of the revamped Alucard seem to consider him a baby who deserves everything good its quite possible that the creators will hook him up with a nice girl in the end.I predict that he will be considered "morally gray" and "worthy of redemption" in the end,though I'm not sure I would stan him if he turned evil in s4 even though Im pretty sure he will get "redemption" one way or another eventually.Unlike Taka and Sumi who seemed interesting and also could be considered "morally gray and worthy of redemption" but they weren't created for that purpose.That's very unfortunate in my opinion at least.

Despite that Castlevania has always been dark themed based on the most gruesome horror stories and creatures and things such as love and relationships are never truly touched upon.And that has never been the point or focus of the story.

In conclusion please don't get to flustered with people who are not so emotionally connected or invested to the 2020 cartoon version of Alucard.None of the things that happened to him in s3 have ever been in any of the games or visual novels.Some just may prefer his original character and original story line.And since this is only fiction and the situations during the introduction and conclusion of the TakaSumiAlucard fiasco are so ooc and uncalled for many people would approach it with skepticism or even sarcasm (because its way too ooc)and consider it just a move for shocking value and fanservice.It also should be understandable and tolerated that some people do not disregard the 2020 Alucard from his own fault and responsibility.All the skeptical comments and opinions on Alucard in s3 I don't think are more "toxic" or "nasty" and "disrespectful" than the comments and opinions saying that a good way to overcome a supposed trauma from a disastrous 3 way,would be engaging into another 3 way...

Thats my thoughts on the original character of Alucard based from what I gathered from the material I own and have experienced through the years with the series.Mostly video games and a few interviews of Ayami Kojima and Koji Igarashi who approved the "rewrite" of the story as he describes it.

[marysfoxmask]

Have you done The Misselthwaite Archives webseries? It's obviously one of the looser adaptations, but I thought it was really well done. Love to hear your thoughts on it!

my first ask!!! i’m so excited!! thank you, anon! i love asks, btw, and would love for people to continue to send them!

i actually watched the misselthwaite archives as it was coming out! every wednesday, i watched the newest episode after coming home from school. it was the highlight of my week!

i actually rewatched a good chunk of episodes the other night. it dredges up a lot of nostalgia for me in a bittersweet way. i appreciate the series a lot, and i think everyone involved did a great job, but it’s the way the creators approach adapting the source material that i find to be a little off the mark.

this is mainly because i think something is inevitably lost when bringing the secret garden into modern day (which was, back then, good old 2015). i think, if i were trying to adapt the book into a modern setting, i’d minimize the modern day trappings as much as possible; references to modern pop culture like parks and recreation and beyoncé, like misselarch employs, are fleetingly fun, but i think they date the material too much. they also feel too kitschy and cute, in my opinion. that’s my opinion of a lot of the misselthwaite archives’ adaptation choices—they’re cute, but don’t feel like they do justice to the material. 

i feel making mary a snarky, bitter teenager seems like a good idea at first, but i think it’s ultimately a misrepresentation. in the original novel, she’s prickly and prone to insulting others, sure, but she’s also sullen, withdrawn, and socially awkward—her inability to connect with others is derived from the lack of positive social interaction she had since she was born. she’s emotionally stunted, which mary in the misselthwaite archives doesn’t communicate at all in her video diaries to dr. burnett (which is a very nice homage, i will admit). 

on the contrary, teen!mary is charismatic, with a biting wit; she’s had friends in the past, but they only cared for her parents’ money. ironically, her friendship with declan seems almost to benefit him more in terms of social development than it does her. her petty cruelty seems more the product of watching mean girls one too many times than any deep-rooted emotional trauma. though there are gestures made to indicate that she feels badly about her celebrity parents’ deaths, i never found them particularly convincing. i felt her vulnerability as an orphan, as a young woman with no prospects, with no real friends—as she is at the the beginning of the story—never came through properly. it felt like the writers wanted to modernize mary’s contrariness in a way, metamorphosing it into a more palatable 21st-century diagnosis: jaded teenager syndrome. 

which is cute, but not very book-accurate, i feel. it colors the rest of her journey if she hasn’t been socially deprived like she is in the novel. i can’t imagine the mary of the misselthwaite archives having a profound revelation about how much nicer people look when they smile, for instance. as a result, her journey feels a lot less interesting to me.

i personally feel mary should have been prickly, of course, and sometimes aggressively mean, but more unwilling to talk about her feelings than anything—more emotionally numb after years of neglect, more uninterested in nearly everything. she shrugs when spoken to, looks eternally glum, glares at the pitying glances of sarah medlock. it’s only with the influence of the characters in the story that she’s coaxed into opening up and begins to bloom.

i really liked sarah medlock’s characterization, as well as uncle art’s and phoebe’s! i love that aunt sarah is presented as having positive intentions from the get-go, as i’ve always hated her vilification in other adaptations. i also really like the portrayal of declan—i like the idea of him being a bit of a social misfit.

with callie, i really enjoy her actress’s portrayal—she’s properly hysterical and catty! but i feel like turning colin into a girl doesn’t add anything to the story, and removes some of the narrative tension that comes with mary coming into contact with a member of the opposite sex that mirrors her in terms of upbringing and attitude. if anything, i feel it downplays the tension of their budding friendship, as the subconscious assumption that people are more likely to become friends people of the same sex is one that the audience undoubtedly has. 

i don’t particularly like callie being steeped in pop culture, either, though it makes sense in a modern setting, technically. in the source material, though, colin is surrounded by interesting things to engage with, but he’s disinterested in all those things when mary stumbles across him. he’s more interested in thinking about his illness. i think having callie be immersed in pop culture as a way to entertain herself indicates a level of engagement with the world that colin is completely shut off from, which definitely affects his characterization. a version of colin that is invested in things enough to buy merchandise of them, etc. is a version of colin who is already significantly more “alive” than his book counterpart from the beginning. a more accurate idea of communicating colin’s isolation, i feel, would have callie being too cynical and emotionally stunted to be interested in anything, at least for very long; any media about characters going on interesting adventures only reminds her of the lackluster quality of her own life and makes her insecure, so she eschews pop culture in favor of frequent depression naps and bullying aunt sarah and phoebe. sometimes she’ll read if she’s bored, but not often, and she refuses to have lessons with phoebe unless she feels well enough to learn, leaving her education full of gaps despite her intelligence. callie, in my hypothetical adaptation, is determined to live a miserable, barren existence, much like colin. 

 anyway, it also seems that canon callie isn’t dogged by colin’s negative thoughts quite as much, and her feelings surrounding her condition feel too subdued to communicate colin’s utter maladjustment. the episode where callie “explodes” feels too muted by half! this girl should be furious, incoherent with hysteria, raging at the world for her mother’s death, stricken with self-loathing and misery! but, while callie’s actress does an amazing job with what she has, i can’t help but feel that the adaptation of her character was a bit lukewarm.

i also think giving mary and callie a history together undermines the importance of them finding each other for the first time, and gives their friendship too much of an instant leg-up from the minute mary finds her. it makes the work she has to do to befriend/reform callie feel too easy. 

not to mention, the pacing of the second half of the story, where mary finds callie to the point where she and declan plan to take her to the glade, seems way too fast. i feel there was a lot of missed potential there; they could’ve really drawn out the rockiness of mary and callie’s relationship, like mary and colin’s in the book.

i think my big problem with the misselthwaite archives is that the creators, in service of adapting it to modern times, undercuts and downplays a lot of the earnestness of the characters’ relationships that i found so charming in the book. instead of instantly loving dickon and breathlessly calling him beautiful, mary only grudgingly admits that she needs declan’s help, and any affection she has for him she keeps close to the chest. colin’s desperation for mary’s company, his screaming for her to come to him, is rendered as needy over-texting, devoid of any emotional urgency; callie seems more bored, rather than truly lonely and unable to communicate in an emotionally mature manner, like colin is. even declan is subdued in his love for nature, more shy. it makes sense for a modern adaptation not prone to the novel’s 1910s sentimentality, but i can’t help but feel that the adaptation feels dull and repressed as a result. 

i also wish we got a proper video of callie and declan meeting!

like a lot of adaptations, i think the pacing is off; more time should be spent on ironing out mary and callie’s relationship, more time should be spent in the garden, helping callie bloom. the “eye of the tiger” bit was cute, but gah, colin walking took months and months of practice, and to see all that development be reduced to a short little montage feels disheartening. i’d love to see at least 10 episodes of the teens just chilling in the glade, talking about their childhood traumas in more detail, having little conflicts among each other, planting flowers and setting up decorations...for a series with such short installments, that kind of episodic structure would be perfect. maybe they could create a subplot where mary suggests callie go to her high school and she has to work that out with medlock and that becomes a whole character-building thing, or she has a conflict with basil, or callie properly hashes out her negative feelings toward declan, or something. i dunno. i just wanted more.

i think the misselthwaite archives was really cute, but i feel it misses the mark on the melancholy of the original story; the glade itself is perfect, but the interpretation of mary feels too derivative of the “bratty teenager” trope to be honest to her book character, in my opinion. and i dislike pop culture references in timeless classics, even modern-day interpretations of them, lol. but i still appreciate it as an adaptation, though—it’s just so eager to translate the sentimentality into something more modern that it loses the essence of what i find so charming about the book, which is the unabashed intensity of the characters’ friendships, the extreme character development, and the scale of the emotional and social deprivation mary and colin suffered before said character development occurs.

i also wish declan had more animals around him, though obviously that can’t be helped, haha.

please send more asks, anon! i’d be happy to answer them! :)

[bossuary]

Having just finished Tevinter Nights, I have un fucktonne of questions and theories. But, below are a few of the subjects/problems that I can’t stop thinking about.  I’m curious how other people interpret them, or if I’ve missed some critical details, because it seems like there’s some retconning going on.

so, spoiler warnings apply, since i’m about to discuss the Big Doings below the cut.

The most immediately relevant items come from the final story, right? BUT, because of the nature of the characters, I sort of assumed that much of “The Dread Wolf Take You” is a study in unreliable narrators. Can any of the tales be believed after Charter exposes the Bard? Do we move forward assuming the puzzle pieces we’re trying to fit together are the correct ones, or tread carefully on the word of a known liar?

Nothing about the Assassin’s Tale fits the facts we know: 

Meredith’s corpse didn’t actually stay in the middle of the square in uptown Kirkwall. Her remains were taken away to The Black Emporium. (iirc, Varric mentions this in one of the recent comics)

Pieces of her sword (Certainty) were re-forged for Samson to use in service of Corypheus, a sword which eventually passes to the Inquisition.

A shard of the idol continues to exist outside of Meredith’s remains, or her re-forged blade. Depending on worldstates, the shard is either a weapon rune--forged by Sandal and given to Hawke--or it was given to Varric (who then gave it to Bianca to study, I think). 

In the comics, and in a few of the short stories, the fiasco of Fen’Harel’s agent losing the red lyrium “item” is cleverly handled from a lore-continuity perspective. It’s only ever referred to as a “weapon,” which could mean a lot of things, and allows for greater freedom in describing it in later media. Until the Assassin’s Tale, I firmly believed they were talking about Certainty. Now we’re supposed to believe it’s been the magically re-formed Primeval Idol this whole time, freshly revealed (by the equally untrustworthy Mortalitasi) as a go-go-Gadget ritual blade.

So, are the Tales a cheeky narrative lie, or is it all lore retcon? If it’s a retcon... -What ritual could the blade have originally served? -Might it actually be a key, as lots of people have theorized? -Is there really a potion that can melt lyrium? -Does Solas actually have the idol now, or was his entire story a lie to cover the truth that he still hasn’t found it?

Also, uh. . .Can Solas just. . .kill people while they sleep/dream, even dwarves? I mean, he has demonstrated the ability to create a “dreamlike” state for a dwarf Inquisitor. But, this power seems OP, even for him, and narrative reach. Possibly it’s further evidence that nothing in “The Dread Wolf Take You” can be trusted. 1. If the plans for the Fade are already underway, what does this mean for people like Evangeline, Anders, Grandin, and Sigrid, who’re possessed by spirits/demons? It’s possible they’ll be forcibly separated. Those (like Evangeline) who’re only alive because of their spirit, will likely die. Without Justice, Anders might finally succumb to the taint. 

There are probably thousands of people across Rivain and Seheron, and among the Avvar and the Dalish, who’re contentedly hosting spirits. Would these spirits allow their mortal hosts to be harmed by Solas? Or could there be resistance to his plan from the Fade side of things?

Lots of the stories in Tevinter Nights include the theme of outliers breaking ranks from within a seemingly monolithic society: the Ben Hassrath don’t support the Antaam in their campaign, the Venatori and their supporters operate in defiance of Tevinter, the Crows had one of their Talons disrupt a centuries-old pact.

Going forward in the next game, we might see a spirit faction that, for any number of reasons, acts against The Dread Wolf’s plan to sunder the Veil.

2. Why does everyone in this book describe the red lyrium idol as having only two figures, when every depiction of it that we’ve seen clearly shows three? The crowned figure is (if Solas is to be believed) comforting one person, but no mention of the other poor soul, an even more skeletal figure who seems to be missing their left forearm, and is stuck on the other side of the large ring. No love for that dingus, I guess. Very curious.

And no mention of the serpentine shape that surrounds all three of them.

3. The sea is going to be a big part of the next stage of this story. 

-Mythal’s origin has her emerging from the sea. -In “Luck in the Gardens, the 8 Venatori who were tasked with keeping the “formless” monster in its sealed prison each wore a clay amulet depicting a thin four-winged dragon rising above a sea. -“The Horror of Hormak” describes the viscous gray transformation fluid (and the monsters it creates) as stinking of brine. -The Mortalitasi’s Tale includes a reference to The Dread Wolf screaming about the Sea of Dreams. -The Executors appear to be stepping into the action, finally. They are known as ‘those across the sea.’ -Among the murals discovered during Trespasser, there are some that include imagery of flowing water: The Death of a Titan, and  Lifting the Vallaslin -Before ascending to godhood, Ghilain’nain killed all of her creations. . .except the giant monsters in the deepest waters. Lore says “Pride stopped her hand,” which could mean that she spared them because she was too proud of how perfectly-made they were. Or, that an aspect of Pride (as a demon or spirit), convinced her to let them live.

4. I’ve always thought that the painted murals of Trespasser and those completed at Skyhold are actually of a different sort, in a very specific way. Much of the ornamentation, symbology, and iconography that’s used in the various frescoes in Trespasser. . .isn’t found in Skyhold’s frescoes.   My feeling, based on these differences in style, and the uneven quality of the paintings in the Vir’Dirthara, is that the murals in Trespasser have been painted-over. 

-Thanks to Gatsi, we know that the mosaics we worked so hard to complete for the Inquisition were all re-carved by several hands over the ages, making it difficult to get an accurate interpretation from them.

-During “The Horror of Hormak,” Ramesh and Lesha encounter mosaics depicting elven kings and queens, and their subjects. But the mosaics shift and change the longer they stare at them. The scenes transform from a glittering parade of nobility offering succor to their subjects. . .to a death-march of tyrants forcing magical torments on their slaves. 

-In “Genitivi Dies in the End,” our industrious well-traveled Brother is humbled when he discovers an elven tome that depicts the continent of Thedas in superior and, crushingly, more correct detail to anything he’s ever seen. Which means that either the continent has changed dramatically, or all the maps that exist in modernity are based upon a flawed (altered) source.

There’s an established trope of people from all parts of Thedas altering relics in order to change history’s interpretation of them. So, why would the frescoes/murals be any different? I believe that either Solas, or someone loyal to Solas, altered the murals in order to obscure the truth behind them. 

If we believe Philliam, a Bard! (though, again, an unreliable narrator), the Qunari Rasaan disbelieves all of the names attributed to Solas, either by his enemies or himself. As Philliam posits, to know Solas’ true name would be know the best and worst of him, his flaws and weaknesses, and what he’d “failed to be.”

Essentially, I think we’re being misled at every turn. And this leads me to. . .

5. None of the stories in Tevinter Nights expands on the role of dwarves in past and future conflicts. We get lots of new and juicy stuff on Tevinter, Nevarra, mages, elves, the Crows, the Lords of Fortune, even the Qunari. Noticeably and glaringly absent is any mention of dwarves, titans, and how they fit into the unfolding lore.

One of the largest and most influential groups of dwarves in all of Thedas (The Ambassadoria) lives right in the heart of Minrathous. Above ground. Vulnerable to the invading Qunari and Fen’Harel’s agents.

Dwarves are as tellingly absent in this set of stories as dragons were in all the Evanuris revelations.

The one place where those two things intersect. . .is out in the Hissing Wastes, near the Sunstop mountains (which has always sounded to me like the same naming convention as Skyhold).  

Out there, we come across a dwarven thaig, the only thaig to have been built above ground, that pre-dates the first Blight. It’s called Kal Repartha, which means ‘a place where we may meet in peace.’ Paragon Fairel and his sons appear to have built the thaig as a way to escape some huge conflict in the Deep Roads. 

Statues of Mythal’s dragon form are arranged in places of honor outside Fairel’s tomb. As if in protection. 

Fairel was a rune-smith, one of the greatest who ever lived. Mythal might have worked with Fairel toward some common goal, relying on his skills to make devastating weapons, runic keys for hidden places, or repositories of knowledge best kept secret. She might have protected Fairel as a respected friend and ally.

Reaching a little deeper, Mythal may have helped separate the ancient dwarves from the hivemind control of the titans, freeing them to create their own vibrant society, far from the “witless, soulless” existence they lived as drone-like workers. 

(As an interesting aside, Fairel wrote about dragons, proving that dragons, dwarves, and the Evanuris existed at the same time)

It just seems like the root of this unfolding elven lore is the Titans themselves, the life they created in the dwarves and the tangible world, the innate power of their blood, and the knowledge that was stolen from them. Why don’t dwarves feature more heavily in the anthology?

That’s it. That’s my tinfoil haberdashery at the moment. Thoughts? Corrections?

[ajora]

I never played ff5 but ngl I kind of want you to answer ALL the questions on that meme because I like hearing your thoughts about it. (and faris for the character part, because hm. yes. butch lesbian pirate. I can dig this. and your otp for the ship part, obviously.)

Oh boy, settle in because this’ll be looong.

So, for everyone else: warning: this talks about being nb/butch, a taboo ship, and spoilers for FF5.

001 | Send me a fandom and I will tell you my:

Favorite character: Toss-up between Faris and Lenna.

Least Favorite character: I don’t actually hate him because his recurring crossover character status is hilarious and he’s got great theme music, but, Gilgamesh. His final words to Faris ( 恋でもして　ちったあ　女らしくなりな | essentially: go fall in love, then you’ll become more feminine) always rubbed me wrong. The love that defines her is the love she has for Lenna, even if you don’t interpret it as romantic love, and her love should never force her to become what she’s not. 

5 Favorite ships (canon or non-canon): Honestly, just Faris/Lenna. I’m chill with other people shipping other ships, but farilenna is my forever ship.

Character I find most attractive: I overrelate to Faris and Lenna is exactly my type. Gosh, but her squeak in DFFOO is adorable.

Character I would marry: I mean, I have a girlfriend I intend to marry, but Lenna would be a nice second option.

Character I would be best friends with: I’d probably get along with all of them, but realistically Butz is just the kind of no-commitment, independent friend I get along best with

a random thought: After the DFFOO event with Butz giving everything that makes him him to his dark world clone, I unironically want to redraw a SUF screenshot with someone taking Connie’s place to say that the only one who hasn’t had Steven Butz is Steven Butz. Largely because Butz shunts his personal feelings to the side to be the supportive friend and teen girl escort everyone needs.

An unpopular opinion: The GBA localization is great, but it’s not an accurate translation and sacrifices accuracy for the lulz. Which is fine!

My Canon OTP: I’mma reach and say Amano drew my otp holding each other on official art that got plastered everywhere in Japanese GBA-release media, so that totes counts as official, right? It’s the same argument the Butz/Lenna shippers used back in the day. (I even have this art in poster form)

My Non-canon OTP: Because FF5 has no actual endgame ships, obviously my otp. 

Most Badass Character: Look, Faris dove into a dragon-generated whirlpool that could have killed her to save her crew when she was 15. She fell off a cliff and crawled back up for Lenna. Faris, hands down.

Most Epic Villain: tbh the most epic villain was one who wasn’t in the game until he became an optional boss added in the GBA revamp: Enuo. He might not have been in the game’s present, but his shadow loomed large 1000 years after his death/sealing away.

Pairing I am not a fan of: Not personally a fan of shipping Butz with any of the girls, largely because he’s shaped like a friend and has been a fantastic friend to all of them, and FF5 really isn’t a romance. I’m absolutely happy to ship him with Squall in the Dissidias though. Butz/Squall is my otp for him. 

Character I feel the writers screwed up (in one way or another): Eh, I feel like the ending sequence for Faris could have focused less on her being a woman and more on her actual acts of courage. Courage being her whole damn thing and defining trait and all.

Favourite Friendship: Faris and Syldra. Gosh, but all the Japanese texts on them makes me mourn Syldra’s death even harder.

Character I most identify with: Faris bc butch/nonbinary reasons and huge issues with being shoehorned into one gender (male) but not really feeling it (Faris does, in Japanese at least, identify as a woman; direct translation by me: “don’t treat me like a fool because I’m a woman”) and also not wanting to 100% be compliant with femininity.

Character I wish I could be: Look, who doesn’t want to be a pirate.

002 | Send me a ship and I will tell you:

When I started shipping them: 1997 baby. It’s been years and while I flitted out of FF5 fandom in the 2000s up til I returned now, I never stopped loving my ship

My thoughts: Yeah, the sibling incest complicates things, but also? They were separated very young, didn’t grow up together, and didn’t meet again until adulthood. There’s no actual power imbalance there. Even with respect to social status. Like, yes Lenna’s in line to be queen, but does anyone really think she’d abuse her position for anything? She adores Faris. Faris will destroy everyone in this room and then herself if anything happened to Lenna. 

What makes me happy about them: Oh, gosh, they are so good together. Also? I adore how muddled up they are together. Lenna is the Light Warrior of Water, her defining trait being conscientious kindness. Faris is the Light Warrior of Fire, her defining trait being courage. But Lenna will absolutely kill that dragon if she has to. She’ll hare off into the unknown with only a knife to find her father. She’ll trudge through poison to save that dragon she was gonna kill. Her sky dragon turns into a phoenix. She’s the spirit of Water, but everything about her screams Fire. Conversely, Faris is bonded to a sea dragon, nearly drowned twice that we know of, and over the course of the game she does become a kinder person than she was. She’s the spirit of Fire, and yeah she does have courage aplenty, but she’s so inextricably bound to water that her skills in DFFOO are water-related. 

What makes me sad about them: That they could never be together openly. Also? That modern/post-GBA fandom will absolutely shit on the ship’s fans. You’ve seen me talk in Discord about the hate I run across often enough. And it’s absolutely wild to me because I’ve been here since 1997, I’ve heard all the jokes about Faris/Lenna back then, and no one threw a fit about it like they do now. Nevar 4get the off-color FWAKs that were common back in the day. 

Things done in fanfic that annoys me: Mostly just... treating the girls as Butz’s personal harem. And this is a small thing, at least. 

Things I look for in fanfic: Anything with my ship. Alternatively, anything where at least Faris isn’t straight. 

My wishlist: God I just want to talk to fellow Faris/Lenna shippers! And if I have to improve my translating-to-Japanese skills for it, I will. Also, I wanna get involved in a Faris/Lenna doujinshi someday. Or an anthology!

Who I’d be comfortable them ending up with, if not each other: their dragons

My happily ever after for them: A cottage by the sea, all regal responsibilities forgotten, with new dragon companions because theirs died over the course of the game and Highwinds must have dragons.

003 | Give me a character & I will tell you:

How I feel about this character: Superb. Fantastic. When I was a young butch in the closet with only Oscar to look up to, Faris stormed onto the scene with all her flaws and character development and a dragon friend! and yes, I dig this. Still favorite, though Lenna unseats her ever so often. 

Any/all the people I ship romantically with this character: Lenna. That’s it, really. World of Final Fantasy floated the idea of Quistis/Faris, but didn’t provide a lot to go on. 

My favorite non-romantic relationship for this character: Syldra! Although I have been known to ship her with Syldra too, back in the day. 

My unpopular opinion about this character: Faris is a very, very Asian trope character, her roots being in Oscar of Rose of Versailles, Takarazuka, and East Asian legends and histories of crossdressing women. I just feel really uncomfortable when white people, especially white cis people, ignore that, ignore that she herself says that she’s a woman, and insist that she’s a trans man. 

One thing I wish would happen / had happened with this character in canon: I do wish the epilogue slideshow focused more on her deeds than on her feeling uncomfortable complying with traditional femininity.

Favorite friendship for this character: Syldra!

My crossover ship: Faris and Quistis becoming friends in WoFF after Quistis challenged her to a fistfight is just so Faris that I’d love to see fics exploring that. 

[puppyluver256]

Underworld Ultimatum: The Quest for the Hottest Hades

So I mentioned in a previous big text post that I have some Very Strong Opinions on the interpretation of Greek god Hades shown in Disney’s Hercules film, and now I’m gonna talk about those opinions dammit! But let’s make it a little interesting. I always believe that if you can’t say something nice you shouldn’t say anything at all, so I’m also going to use this as an opportunity to talk about a Hades that I do enjoy. It’s a competition, babey! The Underworld Ultimatum! Or, if you’re preferring to reference a property one of these guys is in, the Hades Cup! (though to be fair this is less of a true competition and more of me showing why I like one and not the other)

First off, it’s the guy who inspired this, give it up foooor...

Disney’s Hades!

First of all, the guy’s design might’ve seemed cool back in the day, but looking back on him he’s kinda bland. Grey toga with accents of other greys, blue deathly pallor, nasty teeth... The flame hair is a pretty good concept, but considering the ancient Greek idea of the underworld probably wasn’t fire-themed I don’t know if it was an appropriate choice.  ❌

Speaking of that flame hair, he commits the crime of “blue fire is totally cooler than red fire you guys what is physics?” nonsense. Anyone who puts even the tiniest bit of research in knows that, disregarding chemical compounds that affect flame color, blue flames are hotter than red/orange/yellow flames. Yeah, from an artistic perspective it seems counterintuitive, and blue flames work better with his standard palette, but even with that in consideration they couldn’t’ve made it so his flames turned white when he got angry rather than orange? Lazy... ❌

This is a problem with the Hercules film overall, but this feels like a christianized take on the ancient Grecian pantheon, with a much less horny Zeus in the place of the christian god and Hercules as sort of a Jesus figure. In line with this, Hades is portrayed as an equivalent to Satan and thus is shown to be undeniably evil. This is inaccurate to the actual mythology of Hades, where (and someone with a better scope of Greek mythology can either back me up or refute me on this) he was just a dude who ran the underworld and had no real malicious intent. But of course, a character is themed around death, they have to be a completely irredeemable villain. ❌

AND continuing the villain thing! He ugly, at least according to western society standards and especially compared to the hero and leading lady who are conventionally attractive by those same standards. This is continuing a long Disney tradition that a villain should be ugly. He’s evil, thus he doesn’t get to visit the dentist. ❌

His goals are basically just the same as every other villain, take over the world with some big strong brutes that are locked away by a supposedly benevolent horndog. Well, specifically Olympus, but considering that’s where the gods live and his brief rule subjugates the GODS, if he’d been in the head for longer he’d basically rule the world. Boring, bland, think of something else for once. Or at least have a good reason other than “I’m the villain, world domination for me!” ❌

There’s no real satisfying tension between him as a villain and the hero! His initial direct action against Hercules happens when he’s an infant (speaking of, dude actively tries to kill an infant), and then the next direct interaction between them is like nearly 20 years later and Herc has no knowledge of who this guy is and how big of a threat he’s been this whole time. Call me crazy, but I feel a villain is more effective when the protag is aware of the threat they pose for longer than just “oh he showed up today and apparently he’s been trying to kill me since I was a baby and now he’s got my girl??? guess he’s a bad guy” ❌

Following this point, there’s no satisfying confrontation between Hades and Herc that works to finish off the conflict between them. The major battle that Herc has against him is mainly against the titans, and iirc the only thing that he does to him in the “grabbing Meg’s soul from the soul pool brb” section is punch him in the face. I don’t remember any direct action that Herc does to cause Hades to fall into his soul pool. ❌

He’s voiced by James Woods, who is a major jerk. I’m not going into detail here as this is already long-winded enough, and Google is free. ❌

He’s got Cerberus, as any good interpretation of Hades should. That’s a plus! ✅ Though this Cerberus seems to be based on the “generic mean dog breed” aesthetic, and also I hated fighting this guy in Kingdom Hearts (the original, not the final mix with updated controls, OOF), which leads me toooo...

The guy THEN proceeds to smear his presence all over nearly every Kingdom Hearts game! Like, you’re not needed! Get out! Leave some room for better Disney villains!!! ❌

So nine bads, one good, and that “good” only comes from me liking dogs.

Next up, we have a more recent contender to the Hades mythos in modern media. Showing up outta nowhere in the first entry into a classic series for 21 years, let’s bring our hands together fooooor...

Kid Icarus Uprising’s Hades!

First off...look at this man. Look at this man! Hell yeah that is my aesthetic! Look at all the chaotic colors, the wild anime-esque hair, aaaaa! Amazing design! I would ask someone to get me the name of Uprising’s character designer so I can shake their hand and tell ‘em they did a wonderful job on the Hades look, but they’re probably Japanese and I don’t know a lick of it. Maybe someone at NoA could pass on my compliments... ✅

He does have a flame head form at some point with blue flames, but it doesn’t become red to show his anger so there’s no more of a violation of physics then the rest of his insides are. ✅ And that’s the real problem I have with Disney’s Hades for this particular point, if you’re going to violate physics at least have some damn fun with it instead of just thinking that cooler fire is hotter just because it’s made of warmer colors.

While this Hades is also irredeemably evil, there’s no weird christ-washing of Greek mythology going on here, because the Japanese generally don’t do that sort of thing when throwing a bunch of other culture’s mythologies together. Sure, Kid Icarus includes a lot of Greek mythology elements (Medusa, Thanatos, Pandora, arguably Palutena being based on Athena, among others), but it also incorporates a lot of original elements, such as the Forces of Nature who are not based on any specific Greek gods, the Chaos Kin, the Aurum, freaking space pirates?! And in regards to the Aurum, this Hades is able to put differences aside in order to help the other factions around at the time defeat the Aurum so there’s that! ...though he’s not exactly the best team player, hehehe... ✅

While he does show up out of nowhere after the defeat of the initially perceived villain, Medusa, once he debuts Hades is a constant presence. He’s almost always poking his head into the dialogue to taunt Pit, make some quip or joke, flirt with a female character, give a dastardly threat. Everyone’s always aware of exactly what kind of threat he poses! Good villain writing! ✅

But yeah, speaking of that, he does do the whole “initial villain wasn’t the real villain SURPRISE BITCH” thing that I’m not that fond of. Call it lingering resentment from Twilight Princess where Zant was basically thrown away in favor of bringing Ganondorf back. ❌

This Hades also doesn’t seem to have a Cerberus. Twinbellows is a Thing, yes, but they never show up in the same instance in time. The real Twinbellows is dealt with in the first chapter of Uprising, and the fake version of Twinbellows that shows up in chapter 9 is dealt with LONG before Hades reveals himself. ❌

His goal is to use the souls of everyone and everything that’s died to increase the ranks of his army and in the process throw off the natural order of things, which honestly makes sense as a goal for a malevolent death god. It’s helped by the fact that there’s really no one “good” faction in this game, everyone has their own self interests and Palutena’s just the one that’s most kind to humanity and Pit, who is the protag we experience the game’s events through and thus passes on a little of his bias. ✅

Oh, you want satisfying hero/villain confrontation? The boss battle against him takes up a whole chapter and oooohhhh boy is it a good’un. Do yourself a favor and look up the battle on YouTube, or to avoid a lot of spoilers and gain a lot of context, do yourself an even bigger favor and look up Chuggaconroy’s whole Uprising playthrough. The man goes into detail about everything of this game, not just its characters and basic gameplay. ✅

He eats Pit at one point, and then that whole chapter takes place in his innards. Ew. Gross. ❌

He’s voiced by S. Scott Bollock in the English dub and Hōchū Ōtsuka in the Japanese original. I don’t know whether either of ‘em are jerks, but I doubt they’re as bad as James Woods soooooo... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Setting aside cameos like being a spirit in Smash Ultimate, this Hades has only had a significant appearance in a single piece of media. Even though it’s a tad bittersweet, he doesn’t overstay his welcome, unlike another Hades. ✅

That’s 7 goods, 3 bads, and a shrug. The winner is clear! KI Hades is the victor! Or at least it’s obvious that I prefer him over the Disney version. Rant over, thanks for sticking through my ramblin’ goofballery. It was fun at least, right? I had fun. :D

[elizabethrobertajones]

It’s interesting how we interpret things diff in fandom. For ex, I’ve always felt negatively towards dean’s use of sex as comfort Bc of my own experiences w csa but to some other people this reads as more positive on the whole. Do you think that maybe this is what makes people have such astronomically different takes on a character/plot event ?? Maybe this would also apply to 8x17 being read as conversion therapy while others wouldn’t see it. Not original thoughts but interesting nonetheless

Yeah, this is a whole thing in literature/media interpretation classes… You know what’s wild, it’s a pretty postmodern concept that everyone has their own interpretations and there’s rational reasons why we would see things very differently based on our own experiences. Incredibly this wasn’t always the case, and it used to be that there were definitive interpretations and analysis created by a sage literary critic which were then the be all and end all of the interpretation, even if with modern eyes those might seem inherently flawed. It’s why when we learn about historical texts they teach us both the context that the original audience would have interpreted it in, the stuffy academic opinion, a range of other thinkers, and importantly the modes of interpretation to attack it for ourselves, and a chance to write our own opinions. 

When it comes to fandom, people as a whole seem very set in the original stuffy one true interpretation thing, which is completely wild to me. I don’t see it as contradictory to read and reblog a dozen different metas on a scene and even if there’s one I personally lean towards, I find it fascinating to consider multiple interpretations and how they come across to people. And, often circumstantially, certain things seem to fit better than others. For example there are a few Dean hook ups I’m quite positive towards that he seemed to be in a healthy place and it wasn’t too weird, while others are quite tellingly wrongbad to me where he’s in a very poor place and it makes me very sad to see him trying to apply that comfort to very little effect. If someone writes meta that ALL of them are good or ALL of them are bad then I’m probably going to end up reblogging meta that says both to get both viewpoints to have the meta background to pick and choose to where it seems more suited to me to say either.

But I guess a lot cases people get really invested in their particular theory or analysis and can’t see past it either to how other people could think different things, or to find it interesting that they do, and to see how those ideas can be equally merited either talking about the same instance or how it can’t be applied uniformly. Some people just aren’t very flexible and get very angry about their one idea being challenged, even though something like a very specific read of a scene, like that 8x17 reads as Naomi putting Cas through conversion therapy, could be given a few different readings but it never hurts to say “this scene also can be interpreted as…” even if when you have your overall opinion of what’s going on there it might not mean as much overall. 

I personally read a huge overall narrative of Cas vs Heaven as a queer kid in a conservative family so it makes a lot of sense for me to read it that way. Someone who generally leans towards interpreting him as various other things such as portrayed as a soldier first or a metaphor for him being an immigrant among humanity, or other ways in which this metaphor don’t apply so neatly might have much less use for that interpretation but I find it super weird to think of the ones that apply less to a personal read as therefore wrong. There shouldn’t be a right and wrong in this case, but a collection of interpretations you can understand, respect, see the reasoning for, but at the end of the day are not the ones you fall back on for your overall personal meaning and understanding of the show. 

But then at the end of the day, I think the way we all approach the story differently and that leading to different interpretations also comes down to our need for validation etc. I approach it with a somewhat detached academic curiosity when it comes to the fandom’s meta project, as much as the story and characters mean to me, the analysis can be super fascinating but also not particularly relevant or “useful” in the sense of getting a clear grounding in tools to keep on understanding the ongoing show like abstract literary parallels to old episodes or whatever. Like, I just like reading essays branching off and exploring themes and parallels and such, while a lot of people are more interested just in hashing out a clear picture of what happened in each episode, what influenced it, and how to use those tools to guess what happens next or something, which is a fascinating practical application of analysis which is really a hallmark of fandom for ongoing projects and something I’d never even thought you could use analysis for before I got to fandom… 

But for people who are much more interested in a clear interpretation of validation of their readings of characters an plot, they just want the things which will prove to be the most accurate to canon and give them the clearest answer and vindication with new episodes, and that means a lot less room for theoretical asides, and for clear answers for what things mean so that when that thread of the story continues there’s certain ground on what it’s telling them… It means a lot less room for having multiple points of views on events and knowing clear right and wrong interpretations means that it’s easy to determine how things are going. 

Which I think in some ways can lead to quite aggressive fandom behaviour, not just in the obvious gatekeeping of ideas and fighting over interpretations, or refusing to engage with theories that contradict the one you’re most invested in instead of dabbling in them all, but also that when new content appears, people get upset or argumentative about events in very odd ways about what things meant. Obviously you can see it most with anti-factions which are aggressive about people applying interpretations about ships and stuff, but also with getting so rigid about a reading that if the story changes meaning, people are left in the lurch. 

To not be contentious about any current specific stuff so I’ll just use a large vague example, Carver era had very clearly defined symbolism and themes and tropes, but Dabb era didn’t use these and Dabb’s approach to storytelling is very subtle in some ways and really brash in others, none of which can be read like the carefully weighted symbolism of Carver era. I find a LOT more use in analysing the emotional arcs than the symbolism between showrunner eras, even when there is symbolism, it’s often… topically applied? Presifer sat with flames burning behind him in his staff meeting, but Cas sat in front of a similar open flame pit in 14x01 and I don’t think there was any parallel in their intent or behaviour, and I wouldn’t draw the two together, but to take the symbolism of each. But for some people who had been really hugely into the language of Carver era, Dabb era completely threw them, and was physically enraging by how much Dabb wasn’t writing like Carver used to, and there was a lot of upset about how basic his writing was and how wonderful Carver’s symbolism was, and how the show didn’t MEAN anything any more. Of course it still meant TONS, but it wasn’t being expressed in the same way any more, and by running headlong into Dabb era still trying to read it like Carver era, these people bounced off completely and could never get into it in the same way as when there were very prescriptive symbolic and metaphoric rules to follow which made understanding events so easy you could just take a glance at a single screenshot towards the end and explain everything about the scene and its wider meaning in the mytharc. 

(What’s interesting is that the show wasn’t previously written like this - Kripke era runs on mirrors and flips in a way which is actually more similar to Dabb era but minus, of course, 10 years of show history which makes Dabb have such a meta, kaleidoscope version of this, and it was in a very heightened, dramatic form which is very elegant and sublime and worked well as the tragedy it was set up to be… Gamble era was more like Dabb era in running more off emotions but lacked a clear symbolic language AND didn’t have the back to front structure Kripke did, being caught in the middle of completely overhauling the story, and I honestly don’t blame her showrunning in a sense that it was an almost impossible job to salvage the subtextual telling of the show from itself in the wake of Kripke essentially ending the show in 5x22 with raised middle fingers at anyone who dare continue past the original vision. Leaning into their trauma and the story’s trauma was a sensible bridge, all things considered, but it makes hers the least elegant storytelling >.> Anyway this is a total aside… it’s early in the morning and I’m just sitting here :P)

Anyway. Yeah, you can tell I do find it interesting to think about how everyone has all their own interpretations :P I mean I know it’s my own experiences which make me so annoying about having this uwu all interpretations are valid sort of approach to it as well, which is just another interpretation at the end of the day. Though I will be snobby and say I do think it’s better that people could read each other’s analysis and even if it doesn’t go hand in hand perfectly with their pet interpretations at least acknowledge it’s interesting and has its own merits, rather than dumping on it in a knee jerk reaction. But then, some people come to the show and end up with their interpretations because the emotional meaning they give is so intrinsically personal, another interpretation DOES feel like an attack, and trying to deal with people who CAN’T accept that some of us are just shooting the breeze and aren’t in a death grip to any one meaning can get very sticky. Especially when someone seems rational for a while but then on disagreeing they get very emotionally violent and it takes you completely by surprise when you thought you were just chatting and then it turns out you’ve hurt them in their most deep emotional place by being like, anyway lol whatever I still mostly ascribe to this other idea - OH NO SORRY D: WE WEREN’T ON LOL WHATEVER TERMS OH GOD OH -