#which. yeah! genuinely that would also be interesting

[ropebunnykant]

Apologies for the incoming essay... Re. Kant and choices and him choosing to involve Style - look, nobody's out here trying to say Kant's eligible for best friend of the year! But there does seem to be a lot of retroactive woobifying of Style, attempts to exempt him from the current tangled web, etc., when, lest we forget, he agreed to try and seduce a man FOR A CAR. He then proceeded to stalk said man, and to disrupt and exploit a grief counselling session FOR A CAR. Of course Kant shouldn't have involved him (but when your options are limited and you're desperate, you're not always thinking straight), but it was Style's own a) automotive greed and b) bruised ego (after their vehicular run-in) that got him where he is today. It was a bargain that he himself suggested - it wasn't even Kant's idea! Let's be honest, he could've just said nah mate, you're alright, and what could Kant have done about it? Style is not untouched by the taint! And that's okay - let him be messy too (the fact that he'd already had a couple of fraught encounters with Fadel even before Kant introduced them was a deliberate decision on the writers' part)! He had his own agenda going into this which he'd need to apologise for regardless of the added assassin shenanigans, and once he's in the know, he becomes as responsible as Kant for what happens next - they're both faced with the same choice: confess in order to try and keep the brothers out of jail, or stay schtum, despite their misgivings, out of fear for their own lives. And they both chose the same path. All four of them have been lying to each other from the get-go, for multiple complex reasons, some maybe more valid or understandable than others, but point is that none of them are squeaky clean and ALL of them bear at least some responsibility for the colossal shitshow that they now find themselves in! And that's what makes it good TV!

(I'd also like to point out something I find interesting, which is that Kant's rhetoric with Style has always been about looking out for number one - he tells Style he's doing it to clear his record, get those charges off his back, outside the restaurant he talks about having to prioritise saving your own skin over everything else, even though that makes him sound a bit cold...but he's not doing it for himself, is he? He's doing it for Babe. He's doing it because of the repercussions that would fall on his little brother's head if anything were to happen to Kant, whether that be jail time or an early grave (though I'm not saying he'd be a-okay with either regardless!). Babe has been his driving force the entire show (as yours and others' beautiful meta has explored) - Kant does the OPPOSITE of prioritise himself, and has done so since his parents died, and that's why HE'S in this mess in the first place. But, to the best of my recollection, he never invokes Babe when he's trying to win over Style, and I can't decide if that's because it's a line he won't cross (though he did sort of cross it when using Babe as an excuse at karaoke, or does that not count cos it was a lie?), or because he truly doesn't see himself as self-sacrificing so wouldn't even think to frame it in those terms to someone else. Or a combo of both!)

I think part of the reason the Kant slander (by which I absolutely don't mean legit critical analysis or taking the well-earned piss out of him!) bothers me is because I'm conscious that First is, at least to a degree, aware of the negativity (and tagged into some of it because ppl suck), which is why every time I look online he seems to be apologising on his character's behalf. And yes, it is in jest, but, knowing he's an inveterate people pleaser, I also get the sneaking suspicion it's also partly genuine, which makes me sad.

yeah, aaaabsolutely agree with everything you’ve said here. like i think the argument about style has more merit too it, but at the same time im still sat here thinking, what was kant’s other option? because bison gives him this stipulation: if you want us to date, you have to find someone for fadel. and kant cant just cut his losses and say okay, then i guess we won’t date. he has to get close, he has to get this information. so he has to involve someone else, retroactively. and we can argue about if he should have told style the full truth from the beginning, but not only do we see the captain specifically tell him not to do that, but i think kant is well aware it would not have worked if he did. style would have blown the operation out of the water way too soon, if he even agreed in the first place which the odds of him doing without having some investment into fadel would have been very slim! like it sucks, but realistically, what else could kant have done that would have allowed him to do what he needed to? what other choice did he have?

and like you said, style is far from innocent! none of them are innocent in this! thats the whole point! and that’s the big thing, too, because it’s meant to be this complicated messy thing. they subbed in the women from taming in the shrew for assassins because it allows for this intense sort of courtship that was brought on by misogyny in the play, while also allowing us to understand that fadel and bison aren’t innocent, either. that they’re all fucked up and messy in their own ways.

and yeah, i think getting into the babe of it all just isn’t something kant is willing to do for the most part. i think he tries to keep babe out of it as much as possible, but using him as an excuse to get out of there was the most realistic thing he could do, especially when bison has already seen that protective brother side of him. and i also think that kant just doesn’t view himself highly in general. he doesn’t think of himself as selfless or self sacrificing because he knows the awful things hes had to do in order to keep babe safe and in his custody - and while maybe for other people knowing it’s for babe would help his case, he doesn’t feel that way. because obviously he wouldn’t change it, but it doesn’t mean he liked doing any of it, that he likes the lengths he’ll go. especially when i think he thinks if babe knew, he wouldn’t like any of it, either. babe already didn’t like just the lying to bison. can you imagine what he’d think if he knew kant had drugged him once? if he knew all of it was built on a false start? kant probably thinks babe would hate him for it all as much as he hates himself for it.

and as for the first of it all, i do hope despite the media literacy some people lack in it all that he knows he did a fucking incredible job with kant. i say this as someone who has been making detailed posts about first’s acting since the eclipse, but i genuinely think this is his strongest and most nuanced performance. hes made kant so, so clear and easy to understand if you’re paying attention, and i love him so dearly for it.

[princess-of-songs]

Happy 8 months of Challengers!!! Justin Kuritzkes interview with Al Horner

Shout out to Al, for asking great

questions!!! I thought this was a great interview.

Some of my favorite highlights from the interview:

AH: There’s a reading of this film and Tashi’s arc in particular that kind of like explores the idea, I suppose that like Tashi’s sense of injustice at what was taken from her as this tennis starlet who very much anticipated living one type of life is that like she has this kind of obsession with tennis and winning. She’s trying to vicariously live through Art, but it’s never going to fully satisfy her. And it leads to this, particular love triangle in which, well, the read online is “Patrick loves Art, Art loves Tashi, but Tashi is kind of incapable of loving either because she just loves winning so much, to the point it’s such a point of obsession.” I don’t know if I quite agree with it because like, I do think there’s genuine love for both parties there. But I’m curious what your take is or how you thought of the character as you approached her on the page.

JK: Yeah, I don’t think anybody is that simple, and I don’t think anybody ever wants one thing. I think it, it would be very tidy and very neat to say this one really wants -“He really wants her. She really wants him. All of that.” That I think is kind of like that’s just not as interesting to me as what I feel like is the truth about them, which is that they all want conflicting things. And you know, I think what’s frustrating for Tashi about these two guys is that in a way, I always thought of her as somebody who’s really hungry to be seen fully and to be understood fully and met as she is. Patrick and Art both see parts of her and are both in love with different parts of her. But neither one is in love with the whole thing. Neither one can accept the whole thing. And she is in love with parts of each of these guys, but can’t love the whole thing because they’re deficient in some way. And in a way that demand makes is her deficiency. You know, that sort of stubbornness is her deficiency, but also how could she demand less? She has too much respect for herself. So I think that then gets reflected in the way they all play tennis. Patrick plays in this very wild, naturally gifted, sort of explosive, athletic way. Art plays in this well mannered, studied by the book, disciplined way. But Tashi before her injury, had both. And that’s how you become a great tennis player. There’s a great essay by David Foster Wallace about Roger Federer. He talks about how there was a moment when tennis moved from being classical music to Metallica and that there was a sort of trend around the time that Federer became ascendant of power baseliners, like Nadal, for the most part, that his game is a lot of just power from the baseline. And of course, Nadal does a lot of other stuff very well, but that’s the predominant mode of his tennis, right? This overpowering of the opponent. It’s a very muscular sort of tennis. And what David Foster Wallace says about Federer is that he somehow managed to play classical music and Metallica at the same time. To watch that is liking meeting God. To watch that in person is like a religious experience. And so that was very much what I was thinking about when I was thinking about just how good Tashi is.

AH: There’s a crucial moment later on in the movie where Tashi secretly meets up with Patrick to ask him throw the upcoming match he has against Art and she’s doing this out of love for Art. She wants to boost his ego and arguably their marriage is on the line. It’s tied up in this game. She and Patrick have this explosive argument that leads to them having sex inside his car. And again, in terms of the ambiguity in this film, purposeful ambiguity, there is some debate as to how much of that was premeditated, how much of it was transactional almost, and I’m curious on how you approached all this on the page. Were you kind of aware or were you letting the characters dictate you on what they were doing or what was your read on the granular details of what everyone is doing in that scene?

JK: Well, I think, again, sometimes people are doing things for more reasons than they know, and sometimes people are not on top of their own motivations. And that’s a very exciting place for a character to be because there’s a tension between what a character is saying and what their body is doing. A character is revealing themselves in ways they’re not intending. And I was just as surprised by all of that as I was writing it, as I think people watching it probably are. That was really at that point in the movie, I was trusting the characters to go where they wanted to go. So, yeah, I think I like that you said that she is doing it some respect out of love for Art. Because I do think there is a real part of Tashi that is genuinely trying to make this marriage work for her. And she knows herself well enough to know that if he gives up right now, if she has to watch him completely give up on his career and on his potential and resign himself to being done before he’s forced to by time for instance, that she will not be able to love him. She won’t be able to be there for that. So there’s that. There’s also the fact that Art is the person through whom Tashi has been playing tennis for 10 years or however long it’s been. And so she knows that the moment that Art’s tennis career is over, that’s the end of her tennis career, and she’s not ready to give that up. So she needs that. And at the same time, she probably really, there’s a part of her that really wants to see Patrick and really wants to get into that car, and she wants to jolt Patrick out of his slump and out of his self pity and out of his bullshit. So I’m not sure she knows at the moment that what she’s really after is what ends up happening at the end of the movie, where everybody’s cards are out on the table and they’re all pushing each other to in some ways be the best selves and in some ways be their most naked selves. I don’t know if she’s got enough of a handle on the situation to have a fully planned to that’s where she’s trying to lead everything. But I think she’s got a lot of different competing stories that she’s telling herself about why she’s in the car.

And Patrick is the kind of guy that goes, you do want to fuck me, you’re here because you want to fuck me and you’re so full of shit, you won’t admit it to yourself. And that says everything about why she feels the way she does about Patrick, both good and bad.

Tashi has easily become one of my favorite characters and it’s nice to hear when your interpretations are similar to the writer and actress’s interpretations. It feels like I’m not just spitballing lol.

Justin also talked about how the signal was something that was always there and he was writing towards it. Also shoutout to pega on Ao3, Justin said if Art wasn’t playing tennis, he’d be in medical school. You cooked on that one. He also talked Luca mentioning the corners of the love triangle literally touching and how important it was to include a scene where all 3 of them have a moment of togetherness and it being a major thing that the 3 of them are trying to get that feeling back again.

[badasscoffeemug]

i know it's bad form to argue with word of god, but i just- i don't agree with this? did 7x05 not make it clear that, yeah, buck was figuring some stuff out then, but he knew he wanted tommy. and now he's had six months to settle into that - and by all accounts seemed pretty secure as of last episode. even this episode - abby hurdle notwithstanding - he was very clear about what he wanted with tommy. sure, maybe the moving in was a bit of a knee-jerk response to the previous spiral, but he seems very settled with himself and his wants.

from tommy's character's perspective i can understand it. he's probably been burned before. he's protecting himself, and buck, well, both of them really, end up as collateral. i actually think that's an interesting conflict. but to say tommy was accurate in his assessment of buck? the scene very much read to me as tommy being in the wrong here, making a decision for buck. which, again, could've been something really interesting that i'd have liked to see. but, going off all these interviews, this really was it so, i guess not lol.

[lala-blahblah]

I will never make this because it would be for an audience of one (me) but ever since reading "If we Were Villains" (story about serious drama kids in college who perform shakespeare and deal with a murder) I have been entertaining the thought of a crack fic crossover with High School Musical The Musical The Series where the staff decides they will no longer put on shakespeare after the tragic accident that happened at Thanksgiving, because Shakespeare plays would only increase the tension and drama. So they hire Ms. Jen who decides their spring play will actually be High School Musical (which exists in the 90s in this universe) and it ruins the vibe so much that everyone gives up on being dark and mysterious because they're universally pissed at Ms Jen for making them learn choreoraphed basketball dancing.

[bunnyboy-juice]

spent the first hour and change at work deleting some old files and am having a grand ol time laughing at myself for not realizing i was a lesbian sooner

[doctorwhoisadhd]

hmm thinking about the idea of love songs. i think the idea of what a love song is that we have in our culture is inherently a little bit flawed because we have the idea that any song written about romantic feelings is a love song and im thinking thats not exactly true because there is a difference between "romance" and "love". what i'm saying is not that love is a broader category and applies to things that are not romantic in nature. this is in fact true, but it's not what makes the important distinction here. the true distinction between "romance" and "love" is that romance is a societally defined type of interest in another person, whereas love is, essentially, a promise that you make when you build a relationship.

as such, what i call "love" here might be better defined as "care", as that implies more time and effort, but that's a different suitcase to unpack and largely unimportant to my point here, which is more about the societal conventions of what we call love songs. the point is, relationships can be built with other people, yes, but also animals, places, organizations, ideas, so on and so on, whereas romance requires another person, hence the difference between the ideas of "romance" and "love".

with that in mind, there are two types of songs we in western, english speaking, society call "love songs":

1) songs that are about a person's romantic interest in someone that is either definitively known to be unrequited (existing monogamous relationship, sexuality that doesn't align, etc) or simply not requited (aka romantic interest being unknown); and

2) songs about an existing relationship (keeping in mind my points about relationships not just being with people, but also places, things, etcetera) as is.

(some examples of the latter category: mountaintop by relient k, which defines the relationship in question as non-romantic; or i miss my mum by cavetown, which is - as the title implies - a song about the singer missing their mother.)

now, the thing that makes distinguishing these two difficult is the fact that songs about an existing relationship CAN be about wanting certain aspects of that relationship to change. in these cases, determining that a song is one or the other will hinge either on a) authorial intent or b) whether the song is more about what the singer wants (thereby implying #1) or the lack thereof in that relationship (which would imply #2).

to get back to the subject at hand: the term "love song", as we think of it, is an umbrella term that include both of these two categories, and i think that perhaps it is reductive to do so. with that in mind, i think perhaps it would be more appropriate for "love song" to mean only the latter, whereas the former is a category of its own. WHICH is not to say that the two can't overlap — just that if a song is about a person with whom the singer has no relationship, it cannot be considered a love song due to the fact that it is a song about infatuation, not love.

(another interesting wrinkle this provides is the fact that a song might start out in the first category and, as the writer develops a relationship with a person, might move into the second category as they write more.)

[chrisbangs]

hello... (and bye ig 👋)

[infinitelystrangemachinex]

Mel for the unhinged character bingo!

yessss YEEEESSSSSSSSS

[arolesbianism]

Sometimes I just look at Isabeau and just know that if isat came out and I got into it when I was like 16 he would be my favorite character and I would've gone absolutely buck wild over this man and feel like he was laser targeting me. But alas Odile has a grip of steel on me rn due to her virtue of being a middle aged woman

[arcadianico]

i think one of the reasons i dislike qtntduo as a ship is that wilbur hasn’t been on since literally before the brazilians arrived and everything about qq and elq was always made to be about him. and listen, i know qq’s obsession played a role in that but also qq’s thing about wilbur is so much more complicated that it usually gets portrayed. also having them be romantic and actually involved with each other would be boring sorry

[lesbiancharliedalton]

-

[cluescorner]

Some people: Kaeya’s bio father is an abusive monster who abandoned his son in order to achieve his own selfish goals. He is an evil man who deserves everything awful that might happen to him. 

Other people: Kaeya’s bio father did the right thing and leaving Kaeya in Mondstadt was the only way to give him a halfway-decent life. He is a better father than he is given credit for and should not be as hated as he is. 

Me: Kaeya’s bio father is integral to the general ‘war is hell and bad choices can reverberate across time’ thing that Genshin seems to be going for. He made unethical choices, but mostly because the ONLY OPTIONS HE HAD WERE UNETHICAL. If our understanding of the Alberich’s role in Khaenri’ah is accurate, General Alberich (my name for him until stated otherwise) was suddenly in charge of a hopeless and dead kingdom which begged to be saved. Assuming that there was a reason Kaeya specifically was chosen for this mission, General Alberich was forced into a position where he needed to choose between the lives/future of every Khaenri’an vs the life and future of his young son. Abandoning either is an awful thing to do and a horrible decision, but the bad decisions of Celestia and Rhinedottir have led to a scenario where General Alberich can only make bad decisions. In the end, he chose to prioritize his people and made his young son into a spy. We do not know the process for this, but knowing how much Hoyoverse loves to torment people (especially Khaenri’ans) we can assume that this process was horrific for Kaeya and could definitely be considered abuse. General Alberich is effectively making his son into a child soldier for a war that the majority of people never wanted or asked for, and one Kaeya was likely far too young to understand. At least, until he was forced to grow up far too quickly in order to fulfill his duty. General Alberich likely loathed everything about what was happening and even in his last moments with his son he asks for forgiveness. He knows that what he is doing is wrong, but to turn back now is to both abandon his subjects and make everything that happened to Kaeya in order to turn him into a child spy be for nothing. So yeah, General Alberich is a terrible person who made horrible choices. But war and the bad actions of others have created a situation where he has nothing BUT horrible choices and where being a terrible person is the only thing he can be. And that’s without considering how the curse/abyssal corruption could impact the scenario. 

[copia]

GRAPHIC NATURE & CASEY at the heavy music awards 2024 (two of the only photos i've got)

[joshuamj]

yall. im not going to share my follower count cuz i enjoy that aspect of tumblr, but YALL. i keep track of my follower count at the end of each month, and we're barely halfway thru the month and like. there was a jump in followers. like. a big jump.

WHERE DID YALL COME FROM 😭😭😭

[gu6chan]

99% just my autism speaking here but something ive been noticing lately that im sorta kinda 😶 about is when ppl are like "I think you'll like this" but not bc they ACTUALLY think you'll like it, rather they just got into it and want you to also get into it so "I think you'll like this" is a nice personal hook. i love chill stuff as much as any other person ofc but given i don't divulge that EVER, what makes you think my berserk reading, made in abyss watching, drakengard playing ass would like YURU CAMP????

[the-kipsabian]

tomorrow is such an important day, im a mcfucking nervous anxious wreck already gOD