#while i feel the tragedy was valuable and valid

[oddlittlestories]

So I love House because it's one of the only shows I've ever seen that acknowledges how hard life can be while also having fun with it all the way down. He makes Wilson a fun video in the c word, like seriously.

And the inherent complex morality of how screwed up the characters are. Like how they deliberately hurt others, or accidentally do, and how all of those motives are not always but often the same motives that drive them to do their kindest acts. How hard it is to show up and how fear and pain make us act out. How showing up and connecting is the key

Something something bad and good are not opposites something something reasons to live & fun in the darkness something something fear of death, fear of being alone & fear of being in pain vs. the euphoria of knowing & loving & experiencing

it's just so human

[i-heart-hxh]

Hello! I hope AX is fun!

I have a question along the lines of some that you probably have already gotten before. If so, sorry. Mine is basically: do you think people who say there's queer/gay subtext in Gon and Killua's relationship are reading too much into it, or are otherwise biased to an extent that it's effecting objectivity?

The reason I ask is: usually people who say these sorts of things are the borderline homophobic sort that insist kids their age can't be gay or make fun of people who like to engage with anime fandoms, but I have come across someone (in private, friend of a friend, lol) with a couple of arguments which I think leave out all that, and I thought it would be valuable to ask, both just to have a discussion and because I don't quite trust my own skills.

One point was that the famous shinjuu line isn't as romantically charged as the English speaking fandom makes it out to be, and that the word contemporarily refers to multi-death tragedy or dedication resulting in death generally, especially in the context with which Killua said it (being that he was about to follow Gon into a fight with Pitou which he knew they'd lose without any prior mutual agreement). The argument was that a romantic reading of the line comes from bias and unfamiliarity, and as a result isn't as paid attention to in Japanese HxH communities as it is in English ones.

The other was that a lot of the moments showcasing the intensity of Gon and Killua's feelings (such as the dodgeball or "you are light" scenes) are very typical/standard of shounen anime, which often have central themes of friendship that are frequently "overestimated" by fandom to be intentional romantic undertones, and that these two characters are not unique in that respect. They said determining romance-establishing purposes to scenes like the ones Killua shares with Palm is projection that interferes with analysis for all the reasons mentioned above. Part of the argument was that a romantic interpretation ignores a subversion of 'the power of friendship' shounen trope, as Gon and Killua have a comparatively tragic "end" (in quotations because obviously the story isn't done), where Gon pushed Killua away, Killua could not stand up for himself, and Gon ended up defeating a powerful enemy without him; adding romance to it obscures and misses the point of this subversion. They also said it was very unlikely for Togashi, should he want to explore queer themes like this, to be so subtle about it, and to not ascribe intent to the author.

The way I see it is that reading romance between Killua and Gon is just one of many interpretations someone may get from a culmination of moments from the text, and that a lot of meta analysis will inevitably be biased by someone's own experiences. For example, a lot of people can relate to the experience of having a baby gay crush, and so see themselves in Killua and read the character with that background in mind. I think the arguments I see here (on tumblr, but also your blog) are well-substantiated and well-explained, which I think are all that's needed for a "valid" interpretation.

Anyway. I apologize for the long ask. Thank you for reading all that!

Hi! AX was fun, thank you!! I caught a cold so I've been slow to recover this week, but I'm starting to feel better.

So, I've answered similar questions with a lot of different reasons why I think the subtext is intentional, and I think it's worth reading that first because it helps when thinking about Togashi's mindset and interests in his works. While of course I can't put words in Togashi's mouth, there is validity in examining things he has actually said and included in prior works and deducing some of his tendencies and patterns based off of that. I do not think it's a stretch or leap at all to read queer themes into the work of someone who has stated an interest in creating queer works, expressed that he enjoys and is influenced by queer works, is married to someone who created a work known for its queer themes, and has previously included queer themes in his works as well. And I mean, KilluGon isn't even the only queer inclusion in HxH by far either.

The thing is, I can understand where this person is coming from...up to a point. If you take any one or even a small handful of these points in isolation, sure, it's not difficult to say that perhaps the romantic reading of those moments is incidental and not intended to be taken that seriously.

I think the real problem with this attitude is that when you start adding up the number of times something with a romantic implication is included between Gon and Killua and look at the picture as a whole, it does reach a point where it gets increasingly ridiculous to claim it isn't intentional or has no real weight. Why would someone like Togashi, who has such an eye for detail in his stories, bother including these implications over and over and over again if he didn't want it to be read this way? Especially when he is someone who has expressed interest in writing queer stories? I struggle to look at the full picture and accept that there isn't a strong degree of intention to the decisions he makes.

I've seen tons of other anime, including lots of shounen, and while I understand that person's perspective with the fever-pitch friendships that the fandom then takes and interprets as more (something I believe Jump intentionally fosters as a marketing tool), personally I do see HxH as being several notches above other shounen series with regards to both how much subtext exists and also how seriously the bond between the characters is portrayed. To me, it does feel distinct from even many other series where male characters are commonly shipped for these reasons, and I'm actually rather skeptical with regards to the majority of these ships being considered canon or even close to it even when there is some basis the fandom is going off of. But I do think HxH leans into this aspect even more than most other shounen do, both in the series itself and in related offshots like the musicals and marketing and even how both versions of the anime were approached.

Also, I will say that I follow the Japanese side of the fandom pretty closely and read tweets frequently, and I do see people bring up the shinjuu line with regards to Killua's feelings and especially what it says about the gravity of how he feels towards Gon. I would actually agree there is less emphasis on it in the Japanese side of the fandom because the word (including the subtext) is already familiar to Japanese audiences and so they just see it upfront and then either take it that way or not, while it has to be explained to a non-Japanese audience due to the lack of cultural familiarity and also the inadequacy of the English translations to capture the meaning.

Regardless of the fact that it technically can be taken either way, I do strongly feel like the word was used by Togashi with intention and knowledge of how it's normally used in a literary sense. I believe Togashi made a choice to use that word on purpose and let his audience take it as they will. It's also worth noting that Gon and Killua directly parallel another lovers' suicide--that of Meruem and Komugi, who do use romantic language towards one another. Komugi says "I may not be much, but please, let me accompany you," which is an old fashioned way for Japanese women to accept a marriage proposal. This echos Killua's "Gon, you are light. Sometimes you shine so brightly, I must look away. But even so, is it still okay if I stay at your side?”

I also think Gon and Killua's friendship can be and is still a subversion of shounen friendship tropes while at the same time being romantically coded. In fact, that it is so close to romantic is a bit of a subversion itself. I don't think the coding gets in the way of the shounen friendship subversion or takes away from it--both can exist at the same time. I still say that the way the Palm subplot is constructed doesn't fully make sense if you remove the intention of the exact nature of Killua's feelings being explored. Otherwise why bother to have so much emphasis on romance as a theme? Why not construct things differently? Why not have Gon make a platonic friend for Killua to get jealous over instead? Why essentially give Killua a romantic "rival"? Why have Killua "stalk" them on their date and point out that's what he's doing? Why have him freaking out at the thought of Gon going on dates and then saying he wants to be with Gon forever literally the next panel? Why make his jealousy come off as romantic in nature because of the way the whole situation is set up? These decisions matter! Togashi could have approached this entire subplot from any angle, and yet he chose to keep repeatedly referencing romantic love when the focus is on Killua's feelings for Gon.

Obviously as someone who ships Gon and Killua, I do have a certain degree of bias, though I like to think I am able to step away from that and look at the series more objectively as well. I do have moments where I go, "I am I being a little delusional here? Do I need to re-assess?" and think over all of what we've been provided again and...honestly I just come to the same conclusion every time no matter what angle I try to look at it from. I do believe that Togashi writes the KilluGon dynamic in such a way that people who would rather ignore the romantic subtext can do so. It's a perfectly beautiful and complex friendship regardless of whether you acknowledge the romantic subtext or not. I think Togashi enjoys playing with the ambiguity of it. But just because it's ambiguous doesn't mean the romantic subtext doesn't exist or have meaning/intent behind it, and to me, adding up all the different choices made in the series, it does reach a tipping point wherein I seriously believe Togashi includes it with full intention and knowledge of what he's doing. And for what it's worth, I don't think it's actually that subtle. A lot of people notice it and wonder about it and connect with it, even including some people who don't actually want to see it (think about all the dudebros who post online going, "Is it just me or does Killua seem kinda gay???").

I hope this response is helpful to you! I wish I could provide more concrete examples in this post, but I feel like it's getting awfully long as it is. I do sincerely believe that the romantic interpretation is a valid and meaningful one that has legitimate merit when looking at the series. If others would rather ignore that aspect, they're allowed to feel that way, and of course no one is obligated to ship Gon and Killua in a romantic way no matter how much subtext exists. But I don't think that perspective erases the existence of the romantic implications, which are fairly heavy in my opinion when you add them all together.

[thegambitgazette]

Existentialism and Idealism in the Obsessed Artist Trope: The Role of Destruction in the Pursuit of Authenticity

A/N: this is long (2,455 words) and I’m sorry

Index

Introduction Existentialism and the Obsessed Artist Idealism and the Obsessed Artist The Search for Authenticity The Comfort in the Familiar Hurt So... What Now? Closing Words

Introduction

There is an odd sense of awe in losing one’s sanity for their passions… at least, that’s what characters like Nina Sayers (Black Swan) or Beth Harmon (The Queen’s Gambit) portray.

The Obsessed Artist trope is a prevalent motif in literature, art, and popular culture, depicting individuals consumed by their creative pursuits to the point of obsession. While this trope often romanticizes the notion of madness linked to genius, it also serves as a cautionary tale. The Obsessed Artist character often pays a heavy personal price for their single-minded pursuit of artistic perfection, sometimes culminating in self-destruction. The trope therefore underscores the potential dangers of obsession, illustrating how the relentless pursuit of an abstract ideal can lead to isolation, mental health issues, and even physical harm. Yet, despite these risks, the Obsessed Artist remains a figure of fascination, embodying the human struggle to create, express, and find meaning in a complex universe. Why is that?

In trying to unpack why I was so obsessed with the Obsessed Artist trope, I had to do a little digging into my own patterns. I realized that watching people deteriorate because of something they're passionate about is probably the epitome of tragedy, in my opinion; and it’s not because I like seeing people suffer. It’s more so because it’s cathartic, in a way.

I can see myself in them. That’s the easiest way to put it. I think of what I am passionate about and feel like it would never be enough for a number of factors. To dig a little deeper: I feel as though my work won’t be valid unless I’m hurt because of it, like there’s a semblance of pain that needs to be paid in order for something to be valuable.

Now, as it’s written, that’s not a healthy outlook; but, I thought, “But that’s normal, isn’t it? I mean, nothing worthwhile is ever easy.”

Existentialism and the Obsessed Artist

Now, I want to pose a scenario for anyone reading: If a golden chalice was on the opposite side of a rose bush, would you go through its thorns? And if you were to discover that there was nothing in that gold chalice, that it was left behind for a reason, what can you say about your pain then?

In one post, I talked about Kierkegaardian Despair and how Kierkegaard was an existentialist that talked about utilizing one’s own despair since despair is inevitable. I thought that answered the question as to why I believed I had to suffer in order to achieve things: existentialists argue that individuals must confront suffering and embrace it as an integral aspect of their journey towards authenticity and meaning. This does not necessarily mean seeking out suffering for its own sake but rather acknowledging its presence and learning from it in order to live more fully and authentically.

The trope of the Obsessed Artist often intersects with existentialist themes, particularly in its exploration of the relationship between passion, suffering, and creative expression. The Obsessed Artist archetype typically depicts individuals who are consumed by their artistic pursuits to the point of obsession, often sacrificing their personal well-being, relationships, and even sanity in the process.

From an existentialist perspective, the Obsessed Artist embodies the existential struggle to find meaning and authenticity through creative expression. The artist’s obsession with their craft can be seen as a manifestation of their quest for purpose and identity in a world devoid of inherent meaning. Suffering, whether self-imposed or external, becomes a central theme in the Artist’s journey, driving them to confront existential questions about the nature of existence, the value of their work, and the significance of their artistic vision. We’ll get to more on authenticity later.

To put it simply, perhaps the Artist chooses destruction, subconsciously or otherwise, in order to feel something about themselves. However, I still felt that something was missing.

Idealism and the Obsessed Artist

For me, the relation to the Obsessed Artist trope wasn’t too much in asserting my own agency and knowing myself as existentialist thinkers would say. There was something more, something that had to explain why I believed that “madness” was worth the goal, or why the goal required despair or pain.

In other words, “Perhaps the ‘why’ is answered in the ‘what.’” As in, what we are trying to create. Perhaps another reasoning behind the Obsessed Artist’s descent to madness and suffering is explained in what they are trying to produce. For example, going back to the Golden Chalice scenario, the Obsessed Artist allowed themselves to be cut by the thorn bushes because they wanted the chalice.

Once again, I looked into my own art. My writing projects and most of my art pieces, such as “Resemblance,” has a theme of connecting the mundane with the metaphysical. Idealism, as a philosophical perspective, posits that reality is fundamentally mental or spiritual in nature. It emphasizes the role of transcendent truths and spiritual insights in shaping human understanding and perception of reality.

From an idealist perspective, creative genius is seen as a manifestation of their ability to tap into higher forms of consciousness or reality. A creative’s heightened sensitivity to the world around them allows them to perceive and communicate truths that are inaccessible to others. This notion of genius is closely intertwined with the idealist belief in the existence of transcendent truths or spiritual insights that lie beyond the material world.

A/N: Even though I can resonate with this notion in a spiritual sense, this does not mean that one has to be religious or anything similar along those lines in order to comprehend it. One can still apply this connection to “transcendent truths or spiritual insights” in the sense of understanding other complex natures such as how human nature works or whatever one’s thoughts are about our connection with the universe and those around us

Idealism offers a nuanced understanding of the link between genius and madness by recognizing the Artist’s struggles as integral to their creative process. The Artist’s experiences of mental illness or psychological instability are not simply signs of pathology but are also seen as expressions of their heightened sensitivity and depth of perception. In this way, idealism provides a framework for appreciating the complexities of the Artist’s psyche and the role of mental health in shaping their artistic vision.

The Search for Authenticity

Now, what does it mean to search for authenticity and how does relate to the role of suffering in pursuit of purpose?

Existentialism

Existentialist thinkers such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Friedrich Nietzsche argue that individuals must confront the reality of their existence and make choices that align with their authentic selves. For the Artist, authenticity plays a crucial role in their creative process and pursuit of their dreams. The Artist seeks to express their unique perspective, emotions, and experiences through their art, striving to create work that is genuine and reflective of their innermost self. This authenticity is not merely about artistic style or technique but extends to the Artist’s willingness to confront their own vulnerabilities, uncertainties, and struggles in their creative endeavors. Suffering, within the context of authenticity, becomes a means through which the Artist asserts their individuality and autonomy. By embracing their experiences of pain, hardship, and adversity, the Artist affirms their authenticity and commitment to their artistic vision. Suffering becomes a testament to the Artist’s willingness to confront the complexities of existence and express themselves truthfully, even in the face of existential uncertainty.

Idealism

At the same time, in idealist philosophy, authenticity is often associated with aligning oneself with transcendent ideals or spiritual principles. The quest for authenticity involves seeking to live in harmony with these higher principles and values, rather than being driven solely by material desires or worldly concerns. Idealist thinkers argue that true authenticity lies in recognizing the ultimate reality of the spiritual realm and striving to live in accordance with its principles. From this perspective, the Obsessed Artist's quest for authenticity may involve seeking to express and embody transcendent beauty, truth, or spiritual insight through their art. The Artist’s dedication to their craft and their willingness to confront their own psyche and emotions may be seen as manifestations of their quest to understand higher forms of consciousness or reality. Moreover, within idealism, authenticity may also involve a recognition of one’s own intrinsic worth and value as a spiritual being. The Artist’s pursuit of authenticity may therefore be intertwined with a deeper understanding of their own identity and purpose within the larger cosmic order. Suffering does not have the same sense of inevitability in idealism as it does in existentialism, but idealist aspects can explain why suffering exists. In this trope, it may be used to channel into the Artist’s creative process as a means of expressing and grappling with existential questions, emotional turmoil, and spiritual insights. Art becomes a vehicle for transcending the limitations of individual suffering and connecting with universal themes of human experience, ultimately contributing to the search for authenticity both for the Artist and the audience. Perhaps I can write another post on literary devices that use idealist methods of transcending suffering; but, as this post deals with trying to understand why one can feel the need to suffer in order to have something valuable, it does not quite fit.

The Comfort in the Familiar Hurt

Alright, so perhaps I feel the need to suffer in order to validate my work because there is something authentic in that validity in comparison to art without pain. Whether it’s because there is a strong sense of self-awareness in recognizing suffering as a necessity or in that suffering is a tool that links the mundane with the metaphysical, I will subconsciously await that despair and pain while in pursuit of my own truths and happiness.

So, if the why behind the Obsessed Artist’s spiral is explained by the Artist’s attempt to physically represent their own psyche or mental health and how they view the world and/or their attempt to understand themselves amidst all of that, what does that say about destruction being a manifestation of those attempts?

For that, the answer seemed simple enough: it’s easier to destroy than to create.

After all, the Obsessed Artist destroys themselves, their relationships, their livelihood all in their attempt to create something. They seem to cause more harm to the point where it becomes second nature for the character for a number of reasons:

Catharsis and Release: Destruction can serve as a form of catharsis for the Artist, allowing them to release pent-up emotions, frustrations, and existential angst. The act of destroying their work or their surroundings may provide a temporary sense of relief from the pressures of creativity and the burdens of self-expression. By relinquishing control and succumbing to the chaotic force of destruction, the Artist may experience a momentary respite from the turmoil of their own psyche.

Escape from Perfectionism: The Obsessed Artist may struggle with perfectionism and an insatiable desire for artistic excellence. Destruction offers a way to escape from the relentless pursuit of perfection and the anxiety of never being able to live up to their own high standards. By destroying their work or sabotaging their efforts, the Artist can temporarily alleviate the pressure to create something flawless and unattainable, embracing imperfection and embracing the inherent chaos of existence.

Expression of Inner Turmoil: Through the act of destruction, the Artist externalizes their internal struggles and confronts the inherent contradictions and complexities of their own psyche. This outward expression of inner turmoil serves as a form of self-validation, allowing the Artist to confront their demons and make sense of their existential predicament through the medium of destruction.

Rebellion Against Conformity: The Obsessed Artist may rebel against societal norms and expectations, seeking to carve out their own path and assert their individuality in a world that often stifles creativity and authenticity. Destruction becomes a rebellious act of defiance, a way for the Artist to break free from the constraints of societal norms and expectations and assert their autonomy and independence. By destroying their own work or rejecting conventional notions of success, the Artist asserts their freedom to create on their own terms, even if it means embracing destruction as a form of creative expression.

The Artist becomes locked in a cycle of creating and destroying, each act serving as a manifestation of their ongoing quest for self-expression and existential understanding. The destruction wrought by the Artist extends beyond their artistic endeavors to encompass their relationships, livelihood, and ultimately, their own sense of self.

The belief that it is easier to destroy than to create reflects the Artist’s profound existential struggle and the overwhelming weight of their creative burden. The act of destruction becomes a coping mechanism, a way for the Artist to release pent-up emotions and navigate the complexities of their own psyche. Yet, paradoxically, this destructive impulse only serves to perpetuate the Artist’s suffering, trapping them in a cycle of despair and existential turmoil.

So… What Now?

Again, the Obsessed Artist is a cautionary tale. Hopefully, it’s not a person’s desire to emulate the behaviors shown in these characters. In fact, by learning from the Obsessed Artist and integrating these philosophical perspectives into our approach to art and self-expression, we can cultivate a healthier and more sustainable creative process.

Embrace Authenticity Without Self-Destruction

Recognize that authenticity in artistic expression does not necessitate self-destructive behavior. While existentialist themes may highlight the importance of confronting inner turmoil and existential angst, it’s crucial to find constructive outlets for these emotions rather than resorting to destructive habits. By channeling existentialist ideals of authenticity and self-awareness into positive and productive avenues, we can create art that is both genuine and nourishing to our well-being

Challenge Perfectionism

Challenge the notion of perfectionism and embrace the imperfections inherent in the creative process. Incorporate elements of idealist philosophy by recognizing the beauty and value of authenticity over flawless execution. Allow yourself the freedom to experiment, make mistakes, and learn from failures without succumbing to self-criticism or destructive habits. Embrace the journey of self-discovery and growth inherent in the creative process, rather than fixating on unattainable standards of perfection.

Closing Words

Ultimately, this engagement with the Obsessed Artist trope can potentially furnish us with a roadmap towards a more enlightened and fulfilling artistic vocation, one predicated upon the transcendence of personal limitations and the cultivation of a more profound artistic ethos. In so doing, we may embark upon a trajectory characterized by a fidelity to authenticity, an attunement to self-awareness, and a fortitude in the face of adversity.

Of course, these thoughts are just that: thoughts. All of this is merely my own attempt in understanding my fascination with aspects of literature, art, and life. You may resonate with it or disagree entirely or feel something in between.

[utilitycaster]

as a reader I feel that both canon-has-disappointed-me-and-i-shall-make-everything-how-i-want-it-to-be and the kind that, as you say, explores canon themes at least somewhat on canon's own terms has value, but it depends on which fandom I'm looking at, how much / whether I'll indulge in the former. I'd never even consider looking for it re: Calamity for instance (haven't seen candela yet), but then there's canons I'll be happy to entirely disregard. I think maybe it changes with just how much I personally value the canon work of fiction as a work of art in and of itself. plus, if the art is shit, if it's valuable to me as a jumping off point only, I don't see why I should respect the integrity of the work like that.

it does suck to think that people think of Calamity the way I think about, like, the call of duty modern warfare reboot tho.

anyway. not disagreeing at all I just. you know, I felt vaguely called out because sometimes I do like that style of fic, but then I realised uuuh it's probably not about me.

Hey anon,

I know you sent a follow up saying I could delete this if I wanted, but I am actually not annoyed and I think this offers an opportunity to elaborate that I'd like to take.

I will note: I am pretty aware that I make posts that are very easy to take personally if you a person who likes the thing I dislike. They are, more often than not, posts about trends rather than any individual person; but that doesn't mean that an individual person participating in that trend won't feel called out. This probably won't help with those feelings, but while I'm ultimately just making posts about my opinions and what I like, I am not opposed to someone feeling called out and rethinking what they do, and if they come to the conclusion of "hey, utilitycaster is an opinionated asshole and I don't need her approval" that is valid (honestly, more valid than strangers feeling they are entitled to my approval) but it's also a not undesired outcome if someone says "oh, huh, this is a good point, what am I doing with my constant fluffy fix-it fics of things that are about grief and loss and tragedy."

Anyway what I actually wanted to cover is respecting the integrity of a work you don't care for. I don't actually care about the integrity of the art in transformative works! It's fic! The writers and authors do not care! But I also have never, ever seen the point of saying "I don't like what this work did so I want to spend more time in this space and make it do what I wanted." At most, I've picked apart what I thought was good about the premise before it went to shit and used it to inform my other writing or my meta but like...I've stripped it down for parts to the point that it's not even a little about that canon anymore. I steal the concepts for a cool magic system or a specific character trait and bring them to other creative endeavors but I do not associate it with that work anymore. I don't write fic for stories that I, at least at the time of initial writing, did not think were pretty good. If it sucks, I do, in fact, hit the bricks and stop spending time on it. The only scenario I can really concoct is like, a Game of Thrones situation in which someone familiar with both the show and the books writes an ending that is true to the themes of the books (and earlier themes of the show) and diverges before the steep decline); but that is a very specific situation. Even shows I enjoyed that I think ended poorly - even those that are widely agreed to have had bad endings (Battlestar Galactica; How I Met Your Mother; Rusty Quill Gaming) do not entice me to write a fix. It's not that I think the writers or creators did a good job that I am obligated to honor; I just don't see the point.

Fundamentally, I do not see fanfiction as wish fulfillment. I simply do not. Nor do I watch/read/listen to fiction with an end goal of writing or reading fanfiction. If it happens, it happens, but just as much as my post was about "hey, if you look at a tragedy that was made with intent, and you cannot exist with it and live with it and embrace it as such, that's perhaps not a great thing," it is also about being able to see fiction as a completed story that does not need you.

This isn't me saying fanfiction can't be good or enjoyable or isn't an art or a worthwhile pursuit. But I left out some tags from my post that I originally had there, which is that almost all the fanfic I've actually enjoyed has been from people who also write meta. It's written by people who are as comfortable following and listening, as they are leading and telling. And again, this isn't about the integrity of canon so much as the fact that I believe that if you (the general you, not you the anon) cannot read (watch, listen) without saying "how can I make this mine" your work will never be good. I think a lot of people write fanfiction in order to mark hypothetical territory, or get a good grade in ao3, or because Fic Writer is a part of their identity, rather than because they have something to say is best communicated through the medium of fanfiction. And that's their right - I cannot and will not stop them - but I don't care to read what they're writing.

[nekropsii]

hello o great sage- er- sylph? (fuck) nekropsii, i have but one humble query… erm. how do the dancestors work (fuck, bro. u gotta be, like. 89% more specific than that) i mean!! like. OK. ok. i understand mituna got brain damage and its super important, and i understand the whole greek tragedy of meulin and kurloz. but. er. well! theyre in the dream bubbles, right?? how is it, like. eternally… consistent at all?? like. theyre in the dream bubbles!! thats where EVERY dead person goes!! how can aranea be like "Yes this is what happened to Mituna and Kurloz and Meulin, 8lah 8lah 8lah character lore" and have it mean anything?? i feel like im not getting my point across but i just. what makes her input more valuable than any other araneas?? did literally every beta sgrub session happen like that?? im rlly sorry if any of this sounds stupid or obvious, ur just kind of. The Homestuck Guy to me, so i was hopin u could all up and help a brother out here. cheers!

Hi there, anon! No need to worry, it's a reasonable question!!

The Alpha Trolls are not unprecedented in their function. What we learn about in canon is the story of that particular iteration of the Alpha Trolls, just like how the Beta Kids/Trolls we learn about are simply that particular iteration of the Beta Kids/Trolls.

You know how Homestuck textually has a limitless canon with infinite possibilities due to the existence of multiple concurrent timelines with equal validity? It's the exact same case with the Dream Bubbles. The only tangible difference is that Dream Bubbles are a death state, while the concurrent timelines aren't. There's multiple concurrent Dream Bubbles, just as there are multiple concurrent timelines. All of equal value, just with different stories. The iteration of the Alpha Trolls that we learn about are as valid as the iteration(s) of the Beta Kids/Trolls that we learn about. They're as valid as Davesprite's existence as a Dave is. Sometimes the Dream Bubbles intersect, and sometimes existences overlap, but the same can be said about the timelines. The Beta Kids/Trolls we start with are not any more or less valid than the Retcon Beta Kids/Trolls.

So, I guess to answer your question more directly... It's technically not any more or less valuable. It's the same level of value, it's just that those Alpha Trolls are the ones we meet and learn about, and therefore, that's the instance of them that we are meant to really care about and focus on. Those are "our" Alpha Trolls, so to speak. This is how it works with the SBURB/SGRUB sessions we learn about. Infinite timelines, infinite possibilities, infinite stories. Infinite Dream Bubbles, infinite possibilities, infinite stories. It's just that the ones we get to look at are our limited scope into a random instance of existence, and we're meant to care about those the most, because those are the ones we can see.

All of these people are valid instances of those characters! Vive la résistance!

[cockneydio]

If everyone in Bucci gang survived the events on Vento Aureo, what is your vision of what their lives would be like afterwards?

Narancia goes back to school and makes up with Fugo. This is non-negotiable. The "I am Trish/she is me" scene runs so much deeper than we really give credit - Trish is an innocent girl the same age as Narancia who just wants to get out of this horrible situation. I think maybe Narancia would see mafia life through her eyes: an abyss, an ordeal. And realise that the threat that Narancia and his team is fighting, for Trish's sake, should be extinguished in his own life as well.

For his part, Fugo just goes back to being a soldier. The central theme of "Purple Haze Feedback" is a person's inability to act, when circumstances make it impossible to move forward or look back. But lacking those circumstances (the deaths of his teammates and the subsequent feelings of abandonment and betrayal), I think he reconciles with the group fairly smoothly. Everyone sees the decision he made as valid, and while there may be a bit of griping early on, he comes back into the fold without issue.

Wouldn't it be fun if Bucciarati decided to challenge Giorno for the throne? Like thanks for the DreamTM kid, now have a seat lol. No but seriously, I want Bucciarati to retire, but that life isn't just gonna let you go, even with a new boss in charge. He's entrenched, with a lot of blood on his hands, and besides it's the life he knows. So he stays with Passione in an elevated position that gets him off the streets, and he becomes a criminal mastermind.

Abbacchio...... Man. Abbacchio stands in his own way so much that I don't think he'd trust or believe in himself enough to do much of anything besides what he's already doing. When Bucciarati gets settled in the inner circle, I think Abbacchio kind of stumbles and bumbles his way to being Bucciarati's man, the guy who does the dirty work and keeps all the secrets. And, ultimately, he realises how valuable information is and his stand becomes an indispensable asset to the organization.

Nothing much would change with Giorno or Mista except absent the weight of tragedy they might actually??be happy? Mista seems all in on Giorno's vision, and without the pile of bodies at their feet he would probably just keep groovin like he always has. Giorno would only be more powerful with the support and institutional knowledge the rest of the team brings.

And they all get tons of therapy.

[seraphtrevs]

The real tragedy is people that while reading these wonderful life lessons "it's a valuable experience to condemn a character's actions but still feel compassion for their human frailties, and maybe even contemplate how easy it is to slide into moral decline and really think about your own choices and what you might be justifying to yourself" decide to reduce it to "just admit you condoning his behavior hue hue hue stay away from my blog hue hue hue".

Fiction is about conflict, drama and mistakes and the reasons and consequences behind human behavior. People make the mistake of conflating enjoying art with agreeing with what it depicts and that’s just not how consuming media works. I like hurt/comfort fanfic, but that doesn’t mean I want to see my partner beaten up. I really enjoy Hannibal, but that doesn’t mean I approve of cannibalism. What we read, watch, write or ship doesn’t reflect our character. If that were true, Stephen King and George R. R. Martin should both be in prison, and every fan of Die Hard would be on a watchlist. We enjoy stories because they take us outside of ourselves, into adventures we could never have and into the minds of people we could never be. That’s art. And while it’s always important to be critical and thoughtful about how and why we enjoy something, that should never keep you from liking what you like. And it certainly doesn’t make you a bad person.

So true anon, and it IS a tragedy that the people who might benefit the most from tragic narratives never will because they're too convinced of their moral superiority.

I think there's sometimes a big divide between people who prefer comfort and reassurance and people who prefer novelty and challenge. I'm most drawn to stories and characters very unlike me because I get bored with myself and like to explore perspectives and situations radically different from mine. I find it challenging and exciting. My husband prefers comfort narratives - he likes to relax and feel good in his downtime and to imagine himself in heroic stories. That's completely valid!

The problem comes when people who prefer comfort narratives assume that people who prefer challenging narratives feel the same way they do about their stories and favorite characters, and so they think a Hannibal fan must want to be a serial killer just like they wish they could be a hero. And naturally they find that horrifying

[rawrda]

“Hot takes” about heartstopper that are like “They’re so awkward”, “It’s so cringy”, “It’s the second hand embarrassment for me” infuriate me, that’s a given, but what really makes me mad is that these “critics” are almost always cis het people. They don’t understand the small but prominent things about growing up queer. They don’t understand what “being out” really means. They don’t understand that added layer of fear to loving someone. That very niche fear that can easily turn into panic attacks because you literally risk getting killed for loving someone or just standing there being yourself. So of course we are extra cautious when flirting with someone, of course we are less experienced, of course we have to warn our friends twice when they start liking someone. When a heterosexual person confesses their love they only convey their feelings. When a queer person does that they say “I love you and this love is worth my life and everything I have in this life”. They say “I love you and I realize that by saying this I’m giving you a weapon that can destroy me”. This story isn’t just about some teenage boys having a high school romance. It’s not just them dealing with bullies. We see a character literally cry 5 minutes into googling what bisexuality means because he is faced with the reality of being queer. He understands what Charlie feels through his own journey of figuring out his sexuality. And mind you this story depicts an almost ideal reality. This is the best we can hope for in our wildest dreams. They have an openly queer teacher, they have supportive families, they have friends, they are alive. We don’t see them get denied jobs and healthcare. What you see on screen is less than one percent of what queer people go through. We don’t see someone cry under their blanket at 3 am because they know if someone learns it they’ll die in the hands of their own parents. We don’t see someone running away because it’s out and it’s life or death. I love that those things don’t happen in this series, don’t get me wrong. I’m so happy that today’s teenagers have a positive story that isn’t all tears and tragedy. It’s refreshing, it’s a great escape from reality. It’s good to set a standard. But this doesn’t mean that we can forget the realities of being queer especially in eastern countries. The world isn’t just USA and Western Europe (not saying they’re perfect) Middle East is very much real. Hate crimes are very much real. Dead queer people are very much real. I’m not saying someone should’ve died in the series to prove a point. I’m saying how important it is to us that no one did. I’m saying that this is a valuable piece of media for us to escape to when things get tough and it’s important that it exists and it’s done right. This show is a valid description of queer culture and it’s every connotation. It shows how we text, how we dress, how we talk, how we love. It’s beautiful. While a cis het person is cringing at a scene we go “Yeah it do be like that”. Because it is like that. We recognize those faces and those looks and those people and those experiences. We went through that and probably more. This is why a cis het person isn’t allowed to have a hot take about it. If you’re cis het know that any opinion you have about any queer story is invalid. It doesn’t count. You’re always welcome to consume any media to educate yourself or to just have a good time. You’re also allowed to not understand said media or dislike it. But you aren’t allowed to make a 1000 word thread about how the show sucked especially if all of your points link back to the show or it’s characters being queer. You’re not allowed to go “It’s so weird ew no one does X like that”. When you do that you drown our voices. You invalidate our feelings and experiences. You probably cost us more than you realize.

Sharing a hot take that’ll get 3 reblogs from some bigots and 1 comment from a porn bot isn’t worth it. Don’t do it. Stay in your lane. Make hot take threads about other things. There are so many shows with shitty acting and awkward pauses. There is so much problematic content that needs to be addressed. As an internet user you have a powerful voice, use it for good. Cancel a pedophile, an abuser, a criminal… you’d be surprised how many of these people’s crimes are swept under the rug and forgotten about. Dig them out, be a sleuth. Believe me it’s both more fun and beneficial than hating on a show about teenagers for being “cringy”.

[practicalmagicintuitions]

“The fates lead the willing and drag the unwilling”

I was thinking about that last MT podcast HC had when he mentioned stoicism and a book I have but I haven’t read yet. So I decided to deep dive in a little bit because I studied philosophy at the university at a very basic level but I always wanted to know more, so this seems a good occasion. I am also interested in what HC could see in this philosophy school. I think we all know at this point he is interested in things that interest his people, not necessarily him or he is dropping ideas, new things fast. So one part of this will be a summary of stoicism because I feel many people have misconceptions or don’t know what is this just saying this is sh*t even don’t have the slightest idea about it. The other part will be a little HC armchair analysis by me throughout this topic. And I also decided to read the book he mentioned - Viktor E. Frankl Man's Search for Meaning - and maybe I will walk through it or give you a summary if you interested. 

Bare with me, because this turned out to be long, but I had to get out his from my system.

Not soon after the pandemic and the lockdown started in 2020 Penguin Random House said the print sales of Marcus Antonius’s Meditations are up 28% for the first quarter of 2020 vs 2019, while print sales of Letters from a Stoic are up 42% for the same period. The ebook sales rose by 356% . This boom was because of the pandemic but the popularity of modern stoicism has been an upcoming thing for a while especially since people like Bill Gates or Warren Buffet allegedly used stoicism in their business and Thomas Kaplan is supporting a Stoicism Course at Brown University. But unfortunately, modern stoicism has become kind of a ready-made lifehack, a self-helping method, that’s why books like Ryan Holiday’s one could be published and becomes a success. This is where I see modern stoicism’s faults. 

Stoicism seems a good school to support or to follow in the pandemic because this is about we have to accept the things we have no control over. Probably that’s why the sales went up. This is about don’t letting uncontrollable things or events messing with your judgment and clarity. Fear, screams, panic, rages don’t help. And I think we can agree this is true. Aurelius wrote his Meditations in the middle of a battle when his men were dying not just because of the fights but because of a pox epidemic and top of that he was an Emperor. So to maintain his sanity he had become a stoic. He didn’t have an influence on the epidemic so he just accept it and didn’t spend his energy raging about it. 

Stoicism was founded by Zenon around 300 BC. And it was a thriving and popular school without huge wars or pandemics or anything. Back then it was not a reaction to something but a preparation for something. More directly prepare yourself the thing you cannot be prepared for. And probably this is the OG stoicism most valuable teaching that there are events in this world we simply cannot control. What we can control however how we react to those events. Are we remain calm or think this is a catastrophe. Let see a very basic example. We are mortals, we will die no matter what. This is a sure event we have no control over. What we can control that our view on this. Will we panic? Refuse to even talk about death or refuse to make a will because “OMG I will die then!!” Like spoiler alert, it will happen, will or no will. Or we understand our time is limited and try to enjoy it and not see smaller inconveniences are tragedies. I am sure we all know people who think if they spill themselves over with coffee or the handle of the grocery’s bag comes off it’s a pure tragedy and they are capable of thinking about this all day as something it is happening with them always an exclusively. 

Until this, I think it’s all good we can use this in our daily life. What is dangerous in the OG stoicism is that the stricter wing of it thought emotions as a whole or almost all of it cause confusion so you basically should eliminate emotions to have that clarity on life. That’s why Diogenes wrote that the wise is emotionless. And this is the main and very valid criticism again stoics, that with taking away the emotions they basically ripping of humans from something very unique valuable, important, because our emotions make us humans. And because living totally emotionless is kinda impossible this goal is not realistic, so it causes many frustrations ( oh my... even more emotions!) Because think about it, who are described as emotionless? Psychopaths. 

You have cases, events, when your emotions, even overflowing ones are right and acceptable and suppressing them, could be dangerous. Because realistic or not Marcus Aurelius and Seneca and the other stoics idea was not just watching the world and letting things happen, shrugging a shoulder and say nothing, no! Their philosophy and aim were to eliminate the bothering things which not let you think calmly. And since we are talking about philosophy the reality of this in practice is secondary. Critics also think ( and maybe the modern stoicism is going in this direction) that a hardcore stoics care only about themself and their egos while Seneca says friendships are important and in general most stoics accepted positive feelings (to a certain extent).

Stoicism comes back to life mostly in psychotherapy around 1900 by Paul Dubois ( before him there was another new wave of stoicism in the 16th century) and that’s where Victor E Frankle is connected to this topic. I haven’t read his book yet but I know his method is called logotherapy (logos= meaning) and this was born in the deepest existential crisis when his whole family was killed in a concentration camp and he felt he had remained only one personal freedom, the way how he reacts to the circumstances. Frankle invented his own method so he is not just planted some ancient in the modern world but he in fact thought Socrates and his philosophy is his inspiration. I won’t talk about this more until I read his book. 

* I wanted to listen to the whole podcast again, but I couldn’t so I just went to the part we care about now.

So they are talking about morning routines and he mention that one of his teachers in primary school said to him “Always expect the unexpected” This is pure stoicism and while I am not suggesting he is lying I noticed he likes to blend his current interest with his childhood memories like when he said at the WitcherCon how they had to build a fantasy castle in the school (or something) and this was such good preparation for him because he has a fantasy series now. Convenient right?

So he mentioned the teacher and a little later hinting that he is into stoicism lately. Question is, which comes first? The teacher with the stoic idea or the stoicism as a new interest somehow repainted his childhood memories? 

Then he again is talking about the stoic’s way of control. Or does he? 

“ focusing on the thing you can control and make yourself better to control them” 

This was never part of the OG philosophy because that is not about being a control freak. It is actually the opposite. If you cannot control something let it go, not force things to go on your way and if you failed then you let go. 

The next part it’s not about this topic but I have to mention it because I kinda overlooked it when I listed this at the first time.

He is asked about the fitness industry’s mistakes and he said

“I wouldn’t be the kinda person to point my finger at anyone and say there is a big mistake there…. I wouldn’t ever want to point to finger at anyone saying there is a mistake “

So… should I insert the FO post here? And I know the question and the answer was about fitness but he clearly has no problem pointing fingers at people. 

This leads to us again to the control topic. His FO post is creaming about controlling. “ You don’t like the way I am dating? You don’t like I have a covid romance? Then I will tell you what to do and how to behave because I need to have control over my fandom”

When the host asked him about overcoming obstacles he mention the book - Victor E. Frankl Man's Search for Meaning. (he also said it’s difficult to give advice…)

While he is talking about the book (and for me, it’s clear that the host doesn’t give a damn about this) so HC’s whole tone is changed. Just compare when he is talking about MT and training and so on, he is so irritating and unlistenable but here he is calmer, doesn’t use his voice so expressively, doesn’t emphasise that much in a sentence etc. This to me shows he is actually craving after something more, something deeper, something serious. Not just talking about his ties and blueberry smoothies. I don’t think is dumb (I think he has dumb choices thought) I think he could be more both as an actor both as an individual because when he was talking about the book I felt he has a true, genuine interest and it was a one-second opportunity to talk about something interesting not just fart powder.  

I feel his interest in stoicism is an attempt to validate why he is oppressing his feelings. I am sure he does this because he is uncomfortable with his feelings, past and present. For example, I think instead of the bullying his main trauma is being sent away from home to a boarding school and experiencing cold treatment from his mom (the infamous stop calling story). But he oppressing this because I guess all of his brothers he is looking up to loves their mom and he feels he needs to be a good son but questioning his mom means he is a bad one. So instead of admitting that he is hurt and damaged by it he is saying the bullying was his worst experience. 

This means to me he doesn’t understand stoicism, ancient or modern he just wants and moreover, he needs something he can hold and cling to, something that gave himself meaning. As a book’s title says: Man’s search for meaning. And I feel HC does this maybe a little bit desperately. Searching for the answers and this moment he thinks stoicism is the key to finding what he is looking for while in reality, the main problem is he doesn’t ask the right questions. And without them, he won’t find any answer. Or meaning. 

Title quote from Seneca

[agent-cupcake]

i’m interested to know your take on non-AM felix. ever since i read “epitaph,” it’s kind of made me fall down a rabbit hole of reading his character analyses from different routes, and i find it quite scary that i didn’t really consider how much of his characterization changes in such a negative way (to quote something i saw on reddit, he “failed to become a better person,” “was swallowed up by his own demons,” and “literally becomes a boar, mirroring dimitri” THAT AND i haven’t played anything besides azure moon LOL). also? it’s kind of even inspired me to possibly brainstorm something for a CF!felix/reader where the reader is with him every step of the way when byleth recruits both felix and you, and it turns into some “i can save him” type shit as you watch him spiral downwards because i’m still a sucker for cliche stuff like that!!!! thx

Non-Azure Moon Felix is a tragedy. The comment, “literally becomes a boar, mirroring Dimitri” is absolutely the sum of my opinion on what happens to him.

Hot take: Felix has a primary character personality and arc and should be integrated into the Azure Moon story but cannot be by the nature of the game which is a huge and tragic missed opportunity. Felix’s character and story importance to Azure Moon is not insignificant. He is the one who sets the tension about Dimitri initially and acts as the constant “moral” rebuff to Dimitri’s actions, the only one willing to call Dimitri out for his behavior. I’d say that his story role is far more worthwhile than Gustave’s in many ways. It’s a shame that he and Dimitri didn’t interact more after Rodrigue’s death. In general, I feel the story dropped off significantly at that point, and Felix clearly suffers for it. However, what is clear is that Dimitri’s recovery is similarly a turning point for Felix getting closure. Not because of Dimitri himself, not exclusively, but what his recovery represents for the team, for Faerghus, and the ideals that Felix has violently rejected for so long. Dimitri shaking off the ghosts, reclaiming the throne, and leading the team to victory is the validation of Felix’s actions and the patriotism he’s doubted so much. It allows him to come to terms with the dead himself. Not through rejection, but by accepting Glenn and Rodrigue’s legacy as his own. When he does that, he’s able to forge a path to a brighter future, find his own family, and, more importantly, something to live for other than the pursuit of strength. He accepts that people are more important than strength and that it’s okay to care. In Azure Moon, all of Felix’s endings have him staying with his paired partner and keeping a close and loving relationship with them.

In Azure Moon, we see the Felix who overcame his internal demons and accepted himself as he is, a caring and emotional person with an awful lot of baggage. This is a Felix who decided it was okay to love and be loved, who respects the sacrifices of the dead rather than scorning them for their foolishness. This is a Felix who is shown that he matters as an individual in his entirety. This is the Felix who no longer views ideals as inherently wrong, but is able to form a middle ground in order to understand the people he loves. He even accepts some of them, notably seen in how he stays and serves Dimitri while repairing Fraldarius territory in most of his endings, proving his loyalty. Not empty loyalty to the crown, but to a man he’s worked to understand. In summation, this is a Felix who overcame his trauma.  

If Felix chooses to leave the Kingdom, he is submitting himself to the painful path he put himself on after Glenn’s death. A path of rejecting his family, friends, and country. In short, rejecting himself as he is in favor of the man he believes he should be, a man who is strong and unyielding and does not compromise for the sake of ideals or allow himself to be unnecessarily sentimental. Felix abandoning the Kingdom is the ultimate showcase of his destructive dogma: strength above all. By taking part in the war against the Kingdom, Felix is proving to himself that unwavering and absolute might is more valuable than relationships, loyalty, and family. Not only is it more valuable, but it is also the only thing that is actually effective. By switching sides and figuratively killing the sensitive, childish side of himself, Felix is brought to understand that it’s all meaningless. Hopes and dreams and ideals and everything else is impotent in the face of military might, to feel those things in the first place was a display of weakness. Glenn truly died for nothing, there is no such thing as a true knight, no reason to waste your life for a cause which surely won’t reward you. Rodrigue believed in such foolish values, chivalry and loyalty, and he dies like the old fool Felix accused him of being. Everything Dimitri felt and thought and believed meant nothing because he died, too. As a beast, no less, validating everything Felix ever hated and was terrified of about a person he once adored. He never gets closure with Dimitri, never is able to come to terms with what happened to him.

And through all of this rejection of self, Felix proves to himself that he is not valuable as an individual. The only aspect of himself that is worth anything is his strength, that is his singular point of individuality. There is no reason to form strong emotional relationships, no reason to serve anybody or anything. He roams around without purpose, killing because that’s all he really knows. Some of his endings seem to portray him as happier, or at least give a more hopeful outlook about his life, but I think that’s more of a broken man making the most out of his life. Not because he’s actually moved on or dealt with his trauma, but because he’s got nothing else. Although, I have to point out that it’s also obviously because we have to have nice ship bait in the endings because God forbid a mostly serious game about war forgets to pander and not give the drooling masses a happy ending. Not to say that I’d prefer he suffer his entire life, but it definitely cheapens the experience when his potential happiness has no context other than a single line. That said, his non-Azure Moon solo ending as well as the ones with Dorothea and Sylvain are the ones I feel work the best.

To tie this all up, let’s jump back to something I mentioned above as well as an aspect of “Epitaph” I really tried to highlight, Felix’s lack of closure with Dimitri is what ultimately ruins him. Dimitri is the most important turning point of his recovery in Azure Moon, so it makes sense that his death would have the opposite effect by changing him into an isolated, bitter person who kills without remorse and represses his emotions, even running from them. Felix becomes haunted by his actions and betrayal and by the constant question of why it wound up like this, all the while hating himself for feeling this way because he knows such questions are pointless. It’s a feedback loop of self hatred and violence because he knows nothing else, because he has nothing else. No place to go, nowhere to belong. The fear he expressed about what would become of him when there were no longer any battles to be fought is validated and he’s left hollow.

So, those are my thoughts on Felix. With that fic… Are you proposing an angst-ridden tragedy of trying to save Felix from himself only to realize it’s like blowing into a hurricane and falling further and further into the despair of watching sweet, beloved Felix succumb to his worst self? Because… yum…. I’m on board.

[bootlegsymphony]

Being Hopeful [a *personal* Komahina writeup]

*major Danganronpa 2/2.5/3 spoilers ahead*

Someone told me to gather my thoughts into a post so here it is.

Note: Unless you’re up for a challenge to potentially reshape your opinions towards certain ships, if you think Komahina is by default a toxic ship in anyway shape or form, or if you firmly believe that Hinanami is “bestest Hinata ship OTP owo”, it’s not in your best interest to read this post. I’m not suggesting you are invalid or wrong, but you’re likely not the group of people I’m looking forward to having a constructive and evoking conversation with.

First off, I might have been recognized as an avid Komahina shipper, and my opinions towards Hinanami could be generally summarized as ambivalent/mixed/minorly favourable. I was able to acknowledge Hina/Nami’s relationship as of roughly equivalent significance in regard to DR2’s theme.

But it was impossible for me to consider the two relationships narratively equal, I was able to notice that Koma/Hina was a “meant to be” endgame relationship right of the bat, yet Hina/Nami reads as this transitory experience of an obscure puppy love, or “yeah that happened” that’s melancholic and beautiful. Evidently, the narrative strongly favoured Koma/Hina in terms of screentime, development, complexity, compatibility, and endgame potentials.

I wasn’t too confident about why Komahina screams an ultimate destination of a Hinata relationship to me, yet Hina/Nami never convey a remotely similar message. In many aspects, I didn’t ship Komahina in the past for the sake of “I want Komaeda to savour happiness” but placed more emphasis on “it would be wise for Hinata if he could ascertain that his future is with Komaeda”. However I couldn’t elucidate why I thought so.

But due to some unexpected changes in my personal life, it was so effortless for me to reach an epiphany why Hinanami couldn’t quite be the same Hinata-OTP as Komahina. And now I’m kicking myself for not being able to be more adamant about it earlier.

In short, I had a brief taste of how “true bond” or “true connection” functions. It was an estranged, uncharted experience to me prior to that “sudden change”. And in retrospect it’s unimaginable how I survived that bitter life of pure bleakness without it. But since I was able to discern the characteristics of a “true bond”, Koma/Hina, while being excruciatingly complicated and bitter in canon timeline, had a great foundation for that nonetheless, while Hina/Nami was, fundamentally “deficient” in this specific department.

Hina/Nami, either the DR2 or DR3 iteration, doesn’t go beyond being a fine relationship. It’s not bad, as adolescent crushes are typically not bad. It’s functional and somewhat sweet if Hinata was just some normal shy boy who at some point met a nice caring pretty girl. But a great, monumental relationship doesn’t come from being just fine, and Hinata is much more messy than a such-and-such average joe as what a part of the fandom preferred to project him as.

But Hinata wasn’t an adequate rival and foil for Komaeda, that ridiculously multilayered character likely in all fictions for nothing.

For starter, Hinata committed Izuru Kamakura and countless war crimes, for fuck’s sake.

I had this pessimistic outlook that humans aren’t truly designated at birth to understand each other unless they are. Real life Nanami being the talented, worthy Ultimate Gamer she was, even if she could acknowledge and validate Hinata’s struggles as a talentless person, and brought him some temporary comfort and solace, she could not understand the full spectrum of complications the struggle itself entails. Being the kind and somewhat compassionate person she was, she’d try to understand Hinata if he ever decided to open up, but she’d likely just go “yeah talent doesn’t really matter you should just be confident in yourself” as long as she’s not some Ultimate Empath like Makoto (or Junko) all at the same time. To her, Hinata’s decision to Izuru-fy is unfavorable, but not particularly tangible.

It’s somewhat similar to a moderately affluent person not knowing what an impoverished/economically-challenged life entails, they could never understand why it’s necessary for anyone to opt for crimes and prostitution and shit, if you could just “yeah money doesn’t matter you should be happy” your way out of it. Why is it necessary to choose a life path of crimes and prostitution? Why is it necessary to Izuru-fy oneself? It’s the perpetual predicament of mutual understanding in humankind. No matter how sweet and wholesome on the surface that ship appeared, Nanami would hardly ever reach Hinata’s soul beyond skin-deep, if the talent/worth debate, the rigorous societal expectations, the everlasting emotional quagmire of being under-loved and under-appreciated...everything which gradually carved out Hinata’s pivotal character (that we know of) from his embryo, was a non-issue to Nanami at core.

If there was a portion of Hinata yearning for true connection in an intimate relationship (which I doubt he didn’t), his relationship with Nanami would eventually turn insufficient or dissatisfactory, despite feeling nice on the exterior.

Normally, people don’t realize they’re empty until they’re fulfilled.

But who else struggled immensely with the entanglement between talent and worth throughout their life? Who else once resolved to obliterate their own precious being in pursuit of an almost delusional ideal of hope as Hinata did, so that they could potentially speak to Hinata on the deepest, hidden stratum of his soul?

Komaeda.

It always pains me to read Komaeda’s first FTE where he suggested Hinata’s ultimate talent could be “Ultimate Serenity” because Hinata granted him some inner peace “just by being there”. Knowing Komaeda’s mind it’s a nearly impossible feat to make him feel peaceful. Komaeda likely didn’t even consider that a legitimate talent, he inwardly viewed Hinata “being there” as inherently valuable but he couldn’t even tell. Yet Hinata failed to just, be there, be existent.

And, I always considered Komaeda sustaining himself being alive to be a monument on its own, yet 2-5 happened, for Hope, I believed.

I once had a mentally stimulating talk about how emotional and intellectual transparency lead to a solid foundation of “true love” among people with someone before. They even expressed, months ago, that if Hinata could just speak up about his problems with Nanami he wouldn’t have necessarily Izuru-fied himself.

Yet even being the aloof and reserved fucker he was, Hinata wouldn’t camouflage himself in front of Komaeda. Komaeda saw through him even if he was having a hard time deciding on how he should have felt himself. He voiced, various times throughout DR2, that “we have similar scents” “I thought you would understand me” “we’re both miserable bystanders” “I couldn’t see you as completely separate from me”. On the surface it seemed like Komaeda was being cryptic and dragging Hinata to his level, but given how we knew Hinata took even more drastic measures as escapism, were they even that different?

It was why exactly Komahina dynamic was so embittered and resentful in the canon timeline. It was not hatred, but involuntary intimacy. Hinata was emotionally stripped naked (sorry, not to evoke any erotic visualizations, just a convenient metaphor) when it’s not even Komaeda’s intention, and Komaeda’s always emotionally naked. It didn’t turn out well not because it was a fundamentally dysfunctional dynamic, but they simply met each other in the worst, most despairful and unluckiest timeline possible. With continuous manslaughters ongoing, it’s only palpable that baring your soul to someone as dangerous as Komaeda would be intimidating, but it still had that mesmerizingly entrancing aura, especially in Komaeda’s last FTE.

They had no choice of not knowing each other well.

Unless either of them died, which they both did. But an ultimate future was born and they were granted a second chance to finally reach the destination they deserved.

In a post-HPA scenario, Komahina was not only somewhat contextually implied as Hinata’s endgame, but it was deliberately set up as a generally hopeful relationship as well. Kodaka once suggested in an interview that post-HPA Hajizuru inherited Hinata’s emotions, so that he was able to sort out his considerably complex feelings for Komaeda as it left off; meanwhile with Izuru’s analytical skills and insights into human psychology, it would likely become not as cumbersome. With Hinata’s determination and persistence it would hopefully not only cure Komaeda’s terminal illnesses, but also “heal” Komaeda from his hope fetish and other cruddy coping mechanisms, with all the support and dedication Hinata could provide. Hinata, being emotionally identical to his past self, would likely occasionally experience insecurity and low self-esteem as well, and it could require Komaeda’s weird little method of presenting challenges/creating minor inconveniences for Hinata in order to help him build up self-agency and develop infallible self-assurance.

It’s kind of the Ultimate Love that survived all the trials and tribulations, and to think of that the Ultimate Tragedy gave birth to the Ultimate Love, huh, seems about right for our two Ultimate Lucks.

[jostenneil]

I think something so fundamental to Naruto as a story is the fact that Naruto and Sasuke’s individual journeys in relation to Konoha—as a system and as a collective of people—are always going to send them in opposite directions. Like I realize that a lot of fans (including me, at times) wanted anything but angst for them as a conclusion, after all that they went through, but in doing so I think people ignore something undeniable about the story itself. As the story progresses, Konoha becomes a home to Naruto, and a source of exile to Sasuke. More under the cut!

The problems I have with Naruto’s post-canon—Chapter 700 and onward—lie mostly in the idea that Sasuke is willing to bend and cater to this system that: 

manipulated his brother into massacring his whole family,

isolated him as a result of that massacre, fixing his hatred on a singular point with no thought to how that situation could easily spiral, which it did, 

provided him with no knowledge as to why that massacre actually occurred,

and when he did find out the reason, lead him to realize that Konoha was a village that had never wanted him to begin with, that he had been spared solely because his brother loved him that much (but even then, that love wasn’t without consequence, and it was manipulated by the background intentions of Konoha’s elite), 

and, regardless of all these facts, continued to alienate and criminalize him rather than help or address his trauma and his very valid reasons for rage aimed at the village. 

Do I agree that there were better ways for Sasuke to go about his intentions once he recognized Konoha’s elite for the scum of the earth that they were? Sure. But I also think it’s important to recognize that he was incredibly destabilized as a child, and it’s amazing, because for some people this is a very hard thing to understand? I think fandom doesn’t realize the difference in the words ‘justified’ and ‘explained’. Were all of Sasuke’s actions in canon justified? Maybe not (although a lot were). Were all of his actions well explained by his trauma? Honestly, yeah. 

So to circle back to the point that I am trying to make—it’s true that during Part I, he grew very close to Team 7, and for a brief moment in time, these relationships were like a lifeline for him. But think about it—is a connection that you hold to three people enough to keep you in a village where you hardly feel connected to the rest? This is only a mild issue for Sasuke at the end of Part I; he doesn’t feel very connected to most people in Konoha, but at best, they’re just annoying background noise, trivial obstacles in the face of his goal to hunt down and murder Itachi. 

By the end of Part II, however, it’s overwhelmingly integral to his situation. Over the course of his journey, he’s come to learn that Konoha as a system always viewed him—his family—as a potential threat. His life was spared by his brother, but even that came with consequences and orders orchestrated by Danzo and co.; add onto that the chaos that he wrecked once he was free of Orochimaru’s tutelage, and you have a person who didn’t just alienate himself from his village, but who was alienated by that village in turn. 

It just makes so much sense to me that he leaves at the end of Chapter 699, because while he obviously cares deeply for Naruto and Sakura, is it really realistic to imagine him staying there just for them? What would he do, and what purpose would staying there serve him? This village rendered his entire life a lie, trivialized his existence, and traumatized him as a result. Aside from his connection to Naruto, by the end of the manga, Sasuke is purposeless. For someone whose entire arc is propelled by hate and sadness that stems from a very specific purpose, he ends up in this strange, sort of in-limbo space. . .

. . . which is why I actually like the idea that he decided to go on a journey for himself. It’s why I like the Blank Period notion of him being this forever traveler who drops in on occasion to help when circumstances are dire. It’s a good balance for him. In the fast-forwarded post-canon, however, we see that he’s essentially become a more child-friendly Itachi equivalent—he’s signed his life away to forever protect Konoha from behind the scenes, despite the fact that it comes at the cost of him neglecting his own family, and for the sake of a populace that for the most part does not care for him. It just feels like such a cruel way for his story to come full circle, after everything that he went through, because as much as he loves Naruto, Sasuke admitting to loss is more an acceptance to let love in, in full, and to let it guide him over the hatred he’d harbored in his heart for so long. That doesn’t have to be equivalent to submitting himself to Konoha—it just means that he should allow himself to prioritize his own needs and desires, rather than let anyone else’s evil or trauma guide him, as it has for the whole story.

And actually, that notion, to me, is what made Naruto’s character progression and ending make a lot of sense in comparison. He is someone who constantly strove for heartfelt connection to others, despite the pain and rejection that it could very often inflict on himself. In many ways, it was a dangerous way to think, and he often came off as naive(, which Naruto as a story is plenty criticized for, because it easily runs counter-intuitive to any sort of worthy political commentary on the series), but it also made him a very hopeful and independent person. He didn’t allow what others thought of him or inflicted upon him to guide his thinking, and he was very much someone who prioritized his own heart over the malice of others. 

So naturally, Naruto always ran in a direction opposed to Sasuke as a result of this thinking—and we know this. Befriending and changing the people around him for the better was what propelled Naruto more than anything, and it’s why Konoha ended up as a home for him despite everything it and its people did to discourage and put him down. He had to go to ridiculous lengths to prove himself, and in many ways it was cruel to realize, but he also formed so many valuable relationships along the way. Like, his relationship with Sasuke obviously takes precedence, because it is the foundation and catalyst for everything, but I don’t really agree with people who view Naruto’s dream of becoming Hokage as an obstacle to that bond. I actually feel like those were goals that ran in parallel for him. And I mean, he even says it, doesn’t he? How is he supposed to become Hokage if he can’t even bring back this one friend from darkness. It just resonates so much to me that by the end of the story, Naruto is someone actually prepared to take on the mantle of Hokage—because he understands other people’s pain, and he runs with it, and he is insistent upon making the people around him love themselves because he knows how miserable he was as a child hardly able to love himself. 

In that sense, Chapter 699 is, to me, a really great chapter. I think it captures that forever diverging dichotomy between him and Sasuke perfectly. Naruto is a story equally about Naruto making a home for himself in Konoha as it is about Sasuke freeing himself from the same village’s shackles. True, there is this intense, deeply rooted love that they are always going to have for each other, but that love is something that runs alongside their own personal feelings and ambitions, rather than against it. I think people get caught up in the idea that a happy ending for them has to mean that they’re together together, but to me there’s a certain poetry in them going their own separate ways. Konoha is no longer a home for Sasuke (if it ever was, even a little), but that relationship to Naruto and Team 7 will forever be important to him and influence him wherever he goes; and Konoha has become a home for Naruto, but it’s also with the peace of knowing that Sasuke won’t ever succumb to the darkness of others again, and will love himself first. 

So, tldr; I think the notion of Naruto ending with Naruto and Sasuke going their separate ways is kind of ingenious, because it ties deeply into what Konoha means to each of them by the end of it. This isn’t me saying that I think they’re never going to see each other again—I just don’t think the conclusion to their individual arcs has to be in opposition to what their relationship means to them. They can continue to be intensely important to each other, while prioritizing their own hopes and dreams. That’s the beauty and tragedy of their relationship to me. (Chapter 700, who?)

[tswiftdaily]

TAYLOR SWIFT: 30 THINGS I LEARNED BEFORE TURNING 30

According to my birth certificate, I turn 30 this year. It's weird because part of me still feels 18 and part of me feels 283, but the actual age I currently am is 29. I've heard people say that your thirties are "the most fun!" So I'll definitely keep you posted on my findings on that when I know. But until then, I thought I'd share some lessons I've learned before reaching 30, because it's 2019 and sharing is caring.

ONE: I learned to block some of the noise. Social media can be great, but it can also inundate your brain with images of what you aren’t, how you’re failing, or who is in a cooler locale than you at any given moment. One thing I do to lessen this weird insecurity laser beam is to turn off comments. Yes, I keep comments off on my posts. That way, I’m showing my friends and fans updates on my life, but I’m training my brain to not need the validation of someone telling me I look . I’m also blocking out anyone who might feel the need to tell me to “go die in a hole ho” while I’m having my coffee at nine in the morning. I think it’s healthy for your self-esteem to need less internet praise to appease it, especially when three comments down you could unwittingly see someone telling you that you look like a weasel that got hit by a truck and stitched back together by a drunk taxidermist. An actual comment I received once.

TWO: Being sweet to everyone all the time can get you into a lot of trouble. While it may be born from having been raised to be a polite young lady, this can contribute to some of your life’s worst regrets if someone takes advantage of this trait in you. Grow a backbone, trust your gut, and know when to strike back. Be like a snake—only bite if someone steps on you.

THREE: Trying and failing and trying again and failing again is normal. It may not feel normal to me because all of my trials and failures are blown out of proportion and turned into a spectator sport by tabloid takedown culture (you had to give me one moment of bitterness, come on). BUT THAT SAID, it’s good to mess up and learn from it and take risks. It’s especially good to do this in your twenties because we are searching. That’s GOOD. We’ll always be searching but never as intensely as when our brains are still developing at such a rapid pace. No, this is not an excuse to text your ex right now. That’s not what I said. Or do it, whatever, maybe you’ll learn from it. Then you’ll probably forget what you learned and do it again.... But it’s fine; do you, you’re searching. 

FOUR: I learned to stop hating every ounce of fat on my body. I worked hard to retrain my brain that a little extra weight means curves, shinier hair, and more energy. I think a lot of us push the boundaries of dieting, but taking it too far can be really dangerous. There is no quick fix. I work on accepting my body every day.

FIVE: Banish the drama. You only have so much room in your life and so much energy to give to those in it. Be discerning. If someone in your life is hurting you, draining you, or causing you pain in a way that feels unresolvable, blocking their number isn’t cruel. It’s just a simple setting on your phone that will eliminate drama if you so choose to use it.

SIX: I’ve learned that society is constantly sending very loud messages to women that exhibiting the physical signs of aging is the worst thing that can happen to us. These messages tell women that we aren’t allowed to age. It’s an impossible standard to meet, and I’ve been loving how outspoken Jameela Jamil has been on this subject. Reading her words feels like hearing a voice of reason amongst all these loud messages out there telling women we’re supposed to defy gravity, time, and everything natural in order to achieve this bizarre goal of everlasting youth that isn’t even remotely required of men.

SEVEN: My biggest fear. After the Manchester Arena bombing and the Vegas concert shooting, I was completely terrified to go on tour this time because I didn’t know how we were going to keep 3 million fans safe over seven months. There was a tremendous amount of planning, expense, and effort put into keeping my fans safe. My fear of violence has continued into my personal life. I carry QuikClot army grade bandage dressing, which is for gunshot or stab wounds. Websites and tabloids have taken it upon themselves to post every home address I’ve ever had online. You get enough stalkers trying to break into your house and you kind of start prepping for bad things. Every day I try to remind myself of the good in the world, the love I’ve witnessed and the faith I have in humanity. We have to live bravely in order to truly feel alive, and that means not being ruled by our greatest fears.

EIGHT: I learned not to let outside opinions establish the value I place on my own life choices. For too long, the projected opinions of strangers affected how I viewed my relationships. Whether it was the general internet consensus of who would be right for me, or what they thought was “couples goals” based on a picture I posted on Instagram. That stuff isn’t real. For an approval seeker like me, it was an important lesson for me to learn to have my OWN value system of what I actually want.

NINE: I learned how to make some easy cocktails like Pimm’s cups, Aperol spritzes, Old-Fashioneds, and Mojitos because…2016.

TEN: I’ve always cooked a LOT, but I found three recipes I know I’ll be making at dinner parties for life: Ina Garten’s Real Meatballs and Spaghetti (I just use packaged bread crumbs and only ground beef for meat), Nigella Lawson’s Mughlai Chicken, and Jamie Oliver’s Chicken Fajitas with Molé Sauce. Getting a garlic crusher is a whole game changer. I also learned how to immediately calculate Celsius to Fahrenheit in my head. (Which is what I’m pretty sure the internet would call a “weird flex.”)

ELEVEN: Recently I discovered Command tape, and I definitely would have fewer holes in my walls if I’d hung things that way all along. This is not an ad. I just really love Command tape.

TWELVE: Apologizing when you have hurt someone who really matters to you takes nothing away from you. Even if it was unintentional, it’s so easy to just apologize and move on. Try not to say “I’m sorry, but...” and make excuses for yourself. Learn how to make a sincere apology, and you can avoid breaking down the trust in your friendships and relationships.

THIRTEEN: It’s my opinion that in cases of sexual assault, I believe the victim. Coming forward is an agonizing thing to go through. I know because my sexual assault trial was a demoralizing, awful experience. I believe victims because I know firsthand about the shame and stigma that comes with raising your hand and saying “This happened to me.” It’s something no one would choose for themselves. We speak up because we have to, and out of fear that it could happen to someone else if we don’t.

FOURTEEN: When tragedy strikes someone you know in a way you’ve never dealt with before, it’s okay to say that you don’t know what to say. Sometimes just saying you’re so sorry is all someone wants to hear. It’s okay to not have any helpful advice to give them; you don’t have all the answers. However, it’s not okay to disappear from their life in their darkest hour. Your support is all someone needs when they’re at their lowest point. Even if you can’t really help the situation, it’s nice for them to know that you would if you could.

FIFTEEN: Vitamins make me feel so much better! I take L-theanine, which is a natural supplement to help with stress and anxiety. I also take magnesium for muscle health and energy.

SIXTEEN: Before you jump in headfirst, maybe, I don’t know...get to know someone! All that glitters isn’t gold, and first impressions actually aren’t everything. It’s impressive when someone can charm people instantly and own the room, but what I know now to be more valuable about a person is not their charming routine upon meeting them (I call it a “solid first 15”), but the layers of a person you discover in time. Are they honest, self-aware, and slyly funny at the moments you least expect it? Do they show up for you when you need them? Do they still love you after they’ve seen you broken? Or after they’ve walked in on you having a full conversation with your cats as if they’re people? These are things a first impression could never convey. 

SEVENTEEN: After my teen years and early twenties of sleeping in my makeup and occasionally using a Sharpie as eyeliner (DO NOT DO IT), I felt like I needed to start being nicer to my skin. I now moisturize my face every night and put on body lotion after I shower, not just in the winter, but all year round, because, why can’t I be soft during all the seasons?!

EIGHTEEN: Realizing childhood scars and working on rectifying them. For example, never being popular as a kid was always an insecurity for me. Even as an adult, I still have recurring flashbacks of sitting at lunch tables alone or hiding in a bathroom stall, or trying to make a new friend and being laughed at. In my twenties I found myself surrounded by girls who wanted to be my friend. So I shouted it from the rooftops, posted pictures, and celebrated my newfound acceptance into a sisterhood, without realizing that other people might still feel the way I did when I felt so alone. It’s important to address our long-standing issues before we turn into the living embodiment of them.

NINETEEN: Playing mind games is for the chase. In a real relationship or friendship, you’re shooting yourself in the foot if you don’t tell the other person how you feel, and what could be done to fix it. No one is a mind reader. If someone really loves you, they want you to verbalize how you feel. This is real life, not chess.

TWENTY: Learning the difference between lifelong friendships and situationships. Something about “we’re in our young twenties!” hurls people together into groups that can feel like your chosen family. And maybe they will be for the rest of your life. Or maybe they’ll just be your comrades for an important phase, but not forever. It’s sad but sometimes when you grow, you outgrow relationships. You may leave behind friendships along the way, but you’ll always keep the memories.

TWENTY-ONE: Fashion is all about playful experimentation. If you don’t look back at pictures of some of your old looks and cringe, you’re doing it wrong. See: Bleachella.

TWENTY-TWO: How to fight fair with the ones you love. Chances are you’re not trying to hurt the person you love and they aren’t trying to hurt you. If you can wind the tension of an argument down to a conversation about where the other person is coming from, there’s a greater chance you can remove the shame of losing a fight for one of you and the ego boost of the one who “won” the fight. I know a couple who, in the thick of a fight, say “Hey, same team.” Find a way to defuse the anger that can spiral out of control and make you lose sight of the good things you two have built. They don’t give out awards for winning the most fights in your relationship. They just give out divorce papers.

TWENTY-THREE: I learned that I have friends and fans in my life who don’t care if I’m #canceled. They were there in the worst times and they’re here now. The fans and their care for me, my well-being, and my music were the ones who pulled me through. The most emotional part of the Reputation Stadium Tour for me was knowing I was looking out at the faces of the people who helped me get back up. I’ll never forget the ones who stuck around.

TWENTY-FOUR: I’ve had to learn how to handle serious illness in my family. Both of my parents have had cancer, and my mom is now fighting her battle with it again. It’s taught me that there are real problems and then there’s everything else. My mom’s cancer is a real problem. I used to be so anxious about daily ups and downs. I give all of my worry, stress, and prayers to real problems now.

TWENTY-FIVE: I remember people asking me, “What are you gonna write about if you ever get happy?” There’s a common misconception that artists have to be miserable in order to make good art, that art and suffering go hand in hand. I’m really grateful to have learned this isn’t true. Finding happiness and inspiration at the same time has been really cool.

TWENTY-SIX: I make countdowns for things I’m excited about. When I’ve gone through dark, low times, I’ve always found a tiny bit of relief and hope in getting a countdown app (they’re free) and adding things I’m looking forward to. Even if they’re not big holidays or anything, it’s good to look toward the future. Sometimes we can get overwhelmed in the now, and it’s good to get some perspective that life will always go on, to better things.

TWENTY-SEVEN: I learned that disarming someone’s petty bullying can be as simple as learning to laugh. In my experience, I’ve come to see that bullies want to be feared and taken seriously. A few years ago, someone started an online hate campaign by calling me a snake on the internet. The fact that so many people jumped on board with it led me to feeling lower than I’ve ever felt in my life, but I can’t tell you how hard I had to keep from laughing every time my 63-foot inflatable cobra named Karyn appeared onstage in front of 60,000 screaming fans. It’s the Stadium Tour equivalent of responding to a troll’s hateful Instagram comment with “lol.” It would be nice if we could get an apology from people who bully us, but maybe all I’ll ever get is the satisfaction of knowing I could survive it, and thrive in spite of it.

TWENTY-EIGHT: I’m finding my voice in terms of politics. I took a lot of time educating myself on the political system and the branches of government that are signing off on bills that affect our day-to-day life. I saw so many issues that put our most vulnerable citizens at risk, and felt like I had to speak up to try and help make a change. Only as someone approaching 30 did I feel informed enough to speak about it to my 114 million followers. Invoking racism and provoking fear through thinly veiled messaging is not what I want from our leaders, and I realized that it actually is my responsibility to use my influence against that disgusting rhetoric. I’m going to do more to help. We have a big race coming up next year.

TWENTY-NINE: I learned that your hair can completely change texture. From birth, I had the curliest hair and now it is STRAIGHT. It’s the straight hair I wished for every day in junior high. But just as I was coming to terms with loving my curls, they’ve left me. Please pray for their safe return.

THIRTY: My mom always tells me that when I was a little kid, she never had to punish me for misbehaving because I would punish myself even worse. I’d lock myself in my room and couldn’t forgive myself, as a five-year-old. I realized that I do the same thing now when I feel I’ve made a mistake, whether it’s self-imposed exile or silencing myself and isolating. I’ve come to a realization that I need to be able to forgive myself for making the wrong choice, trusting the wrong person, or figuratively falling on my face in front of everyone. Step into the daylight and let it go.

ELLE

[otsukare-katsukare]

How not to feel like there are ants under your skin when you realise you’re in the presence of someone more talented than you will ever be: a beginner’s guide

I know I’m very late to the party but I just played (watched?) The Beginner’s Guide and I need to set this down.

I went into the game with no idea that it was a mockumentary, and really only twigged that Coda wasn’t real in the final act, which might make me incredibly thick or it might make Wreden a very talented storyteller, I don’t know, but either way the effect was that this story-thing got in me in a personal way that I haven’t really felt from media in a while. I felt, oh, what’s the word, seen by it, or something, I guess. 

this is long. I don’t want to waste people’s valuable scrolling time, so

Davey in the Beginner’s Guide cannot imagine living his life unmotivated by validation, which is why he doesn't understand Cody and why he makes the narrative in the first place. He sees a friend creating fantastic, inventive and - to his mind - meaningful art, none of which is shown to the public, and this drives him insane. He never says as much in the narration, and seeing as this is the guy who made the Stanley Parable I don’t know if it’s quite the emotion he’s reaching for, but at least for me, I completely associate this feeling with my intense competitiveness and insecurity about writing. Specifically how that translates into a feeling of agonising pins and needles all over me, the moment I’m confronted by something good written by someone young, especially when that person is creating for themselves only. When they say something like, I never show my writing to anyone, or, I’ve filled hundreds of notebooks with words no one will ever see, it’s like a stake being driven slowly through my chest. Something about it, though it has nothing to do with me, makes me feel like a complete fraud, like I’ve missed the boat somewhere, and that’s the whole emotion behind this game. It changes into a need to make Coda into a project, a problem for Davey to solve, so that Davey can be the one in control, so that he can have something to be proud of: I figured out my friend. I fixed my friend. And of course, that makes it so much worse. 

The way I see it, Davey has two essential beliefs, which are challenged by Coda at the end of the story, the first of which takes precedence in the narrative, but the second of which is just as important, I think. 1. Coda is broken, and it’s Davey’s job to fix him. 2. Coda’s art, despite (or probably because of) its incomprehensibility, is better than Davey’s. 

The latter of these beliefs is not stated directly in the game, but it makes sense of everything to me. These two beliefs get tangled together so that a familiar fallacy is reached, that of the suffering artist - Coda’s art is great because he is depressive, and the fact that he never shows his art to anyone is a mind-boggling tragedy. But such a beautiful tragedy. Davey can be the deus ex machina. That’s how Davey can reconcile his own inadequacy, by inserting himself into the story, because once he faces himself, once Coda cuts himself off and removes his source of Davey’s validation, he finds nothing, no creativity, nothing to give. And he now has the additional terrible guilt of taking Coda away from the world too, leaving them both in the dark. It’s like Amadeus, if Salieri only intended to help Mozart, instead of destroying him. (Salieri being another figure I’ve expressed an uncomfortable affinity for, if only for the fact that he describes the sensation of hearing Mozart for the first time, without a trace of metaphor as pure bodily pain. Looking at his hands and seeing how useless they are, how incapable, dull blocks of flesh too blunt to produce the aural poetry that comes so effortlessly from his rival. We’ve all been there, pal.)

So the Beginner’s Guide called me out for my obsessive competitive streak, but it went further than that, and called me out for the thing I’ve always kind of used as a justification for all that bitterness, for the privileged life I never earned, for my own inadequacy as a creator, which is my need to help others.

I used to do the stupidest things sometimes. I think I was eight, this one time. I don’t remember what the context was, not even the country it happened in, but I remember that when I did it, I thought - or I was told - that this was a recurring pattern of behaviour I needed to stop. And I thought, why do I always do this? The thing was this: there was some kind of party, and there was a girl, younger than me. I must have taken a liking to her. I have zero memory of what she looked like, what we talked about, and why she meant so much to me, but I do remember that at some point in the evening she lost a plush bunny. We were outside for most of the function, a large garden wreathed with shrubbery and trees. And for at least half an hour, I circled this garden, frantically searching for this god damned bunny. The sense memories stay with you the most, and more than anything visual or factual I remember being out of breath from running round the place so many times, the wet leaves crunching underfoot and in my hands as I scoured every crevice. I was certain that it was for some reason up to me to find this toy, and feeling both indignant at the world that no one else seemed to care, and perversely gleeful that I cared enough to do it. 

I never found the toy, because it turned out to be in her father’s pocket. She’d given it to him and forgotten. I was so wrapped up in my idea of this person’s problem, the idea that I could solve their problem, the idea that only I could do it, that I wasted everyone’s time, not least my own. I don’t run round gardens anymore, but I think this drive is still in me. I’ve shaped it into simply being a good friend and listener and giver of pep talks or whatever, and I have pretty much made peace with the idea that I’m doing it for the validation, but this game threw me in for a loop, getting me scared of what it all means, making me second guess my actions and my tendency to do what the narrator does, to make people projects when I cannot finish my own. To know that I fixed someone, and to feel like I can carry the mantle of the therapist friend. 

When it got to the final level and Coda’s message, I was still under the impression that the whole thing was real and seeing it knocked the wind out of me. The idea of trying something like this, realising how utterly and devastatingly wrong you got it, and having to live with a broken friendship as a result, though it’s something I haven’t specifically had to go through, felt so viscerally plausible and close to home. All this selfishness bites you in the rear some day. And for it not only to be the consequence of selfishness, but the consequence of selfishness believed to be selflessness, that’s even more terrifying. Because lord knows I second guess myself enough as it is, whatever I’m doing. 

We all do, right? This story is going to be really good. Oh, wait, what if it’s terrible. I just had a good and productive conversation with someone I care about. Except, hang on, what if what I said was actually extremely insensitive and they’re just trying to forget it now? I’m sure Catbells isn’t anywhere near Coniston, but that person just said it was, and actually, you know what, they’re probably right. That vertigo, that swooping stomach-turned over sensation when you can just feel the foundations of something you believed in shudder beneath your feet, I’m sick of it. I’d like to be certain of what I’m doing for once. If I had any certainty at all, I could get on with my work. I could write and write until I was finally good enough to feel happy with myself, instead of sitting in fear of my documents. I would probably do a better job of being the therapist friend too, not having this overhanging fear that I’m somehow doing the wrong thing.

I don’t even know what I wrote this for, to be honest. Most of it doesn’t make sense, and I was hoping it would add up to something, that these disjointed thoughts would come together. As I have so often done, I leapt in with great vague ideas, and have ground to a halt as the picture became clearer. And if I were forced to admit the true reason for writing it, it would be that I thought it made for a good written piece, something that someone could read and think “wow. this person just wrote something good.” because god forbid, right? god forbid I ever do anything in life and have it not be for the validation

[lamiralami]

TMA Retro 4: Page Turner

I was touched to see some tag commentary on yesterday’s post! Honestly, it gave me an emotion - I am traditionally very anxious about engaging online, it speaks to my immense love of TMA that it brought me to Make A Post At Last. It’s very affirming and reassuring to get some response to my lunatic treatises. Y’all are all right. 💜

Anyway, grab some lighter fluid and a sturdy wastepaper basket, time to torch your haunted novel in MAG 4: Page Turner

It’s ironic that this statement is about the Vast when it is one dense motherfucker. so many dangling plot threads are introduced here, each ready to hook you and start reeling. we’ve been into the meta plot since episode one but this episode is the first time the audience is made aware of such.

seriously: Jurgen Leitner and his library, Gerard Keay and Mary Keay, Michael Crew. the figures introduced in this one thirty-minute installment loom large over the rest of the entire run

you could, your first time through, even file this away as a one-off scary story if not for the fact that Jon knows what’s going on (enjoy it while it lasts, my son). He’s heard of Jurgen Leitner. He alludes to an incident with his library in 1994. Deeper than that, he immediately takes the statement at face value and treats the claims within it as authentic, which is a complete 180° on the first three episodes

and this is such a smart story choice? Jon shapes our perspective into this universe and up until now he’s been utterly dismissive of the validity of the stories he’s telling. To go from practically rolling his eyes to scheduling a meeting with his boss about tracking down more haunted books - that tells us that Jon takes this seriously as a threat. And that makes us take it seriously too, makes us take note that strange books are dangerous things in this world. Any offhand mention of books in future statements will be enough to make us sweat

And! It starts winding the narrative tension on a character level. Why and what does Jon know about Jurgen Leitner and his library? Why does he say his name with such venom? And if he’s so sure about the supernatural nature of these books, why is he so loath to believe the other statements?

(and then it takes 80 + episodes to fully answer these initial questions. Jonny enjoys a slow roasted torment)

love that the statement giver presents, as proof of his iron-clad sanity, the fact that he works as a theatre technician. speaking as someone with an unfinished theatre degree: theatre people are feral my good buddy, try again. I mean, we refuse to say the name of one of the most famous plays in the English language because we think a ghost will trip us for the indiscretion. this is not the trump card you think it is.

a quick sidebar for the Red String Brigade: The Trojan Women is an ancient Greek tragedy that involves a baby being thrown off a city wall. The Seagull’s first published English translation was done by Marian Fell, and also a seagull is a bird and birds can fly. Much Ado About Nothing is very good and you should all watch the version from 2011 with David Tennant and Catherine Tate.

it’s interesting that these early episodes seem to take a cue from urban legends in some respects. Nathan Watts gets extremely drunk at a party and then is almost skinned by a monster while having a smoke. Joshua Gillespie is approached while engaging in a whirlwind of debauchery and has to take care of a cursed coffin after accepting money for what he thinks is a drug trafficking gig. Amy Patel regularly spies on her neighbour for her own entertainment and then has to watch him be replaced by a malevolent entity only she can perceive. and now Dominic Swain pushes past his guilty conscience to score a valuable book off an unknowing charity shop and...gets a bit dizzy and haunted by a phantom stink for a few days then gets ‎£5,000, well anyway, the point is he got spooked! spooked after doing something kind of iffy! that is pure urban legend procedure; modern day fairy tales imparting dire  consequences onto societal transgressions. in a horror story this structure offers a false sense of safety - if you’re a good person, the monster won’t come for you. I can’t recall which upcoming statement yanks the rug out from under us with the first completely random victim.

cannot comprehend how this guy didn’t start plugging the book into google translate the second he got home. that probably saved him from being taken by the book but I am still judging him for not even trying it. yeah you’d be sucked into some sort of sky hell but at least you’d know what’s in the book!! could never be me

(yes I am aware in this universe I would have been eaten years ago. I’ve made my peace with that)

grbookworm1818 slays me. I don’t know which is better, the idea of Gertude carefully curating the most sixty-five-year-old-on-goodreads username she could as a cover for her cursed purchase history, or her actual sixty-five-year-old brain just expressing itself naturally because Gertrude is a very busy woman who doesn’t have time to immerse herself in the ins and outs of internet culture, she just wants to buy the demonic tomes she’s selected for destruction and get on with her day thanks.

did Gertrude know what a meme was? which Archivist could convincingly pose as a millennial best, Gertrude Robinson or Jonathan Sims?

The Key of Solomon and its former keeper, Samuel Liddell MacGregor Mathers, are both real historical figures. the book is basically Renaissance-era magical au fanfic of the Bible, and the man was a 19th century British occultist (and likely drinking buddy of Jonah Magnus) who founded a Very Serious Secret Society. this is a picture of him whiiiiiich rather dispels any sense of menace he’s meant to invoke. what kind of cosplaying nonsense

Mary Keay is such a striking figure. “She was very old and painfully thin, but her head was completely clean shaven, and every square inch of skin I could see was tattooed over with closely-written words in a script I didn’t recognise.” a Look, a vision!

I’m guessing that Our Gerard was blasting heavy metal at 2 am to try to drown out his undead mother while waiting for her manifestation to dissipate. I like to imagine him frequenting Reddit advice posts about dealing with toxic family members, poor lad

oh my gosh Mary refers to Gerard as “her Gerard” is that where Jon got “our Gerard” from?? I feel betrayed??

whatever, I’m reclaiming it. Our Gerard is meant with affection now babey! 

the eye portrait is a bit puzzling. the inscription - ‘“Grant us the sight that we may not know. Grant us the scent that we may not catch. Grant us the sound that we may not call.”’ - could almost be read as an invocation against the Eye? But in general Gerry is fairly Eye-aligned, so...shrug emoji

(honestly my main takeaway from the eye portrait is that it’s finely detailed and near photorealistic so we can add “tortured artist” to our list of Gerard Keay traits and is it any wonder that he’s so Fandom Beloved?)

Mary is Not Good at negotiating sales. her main technique involves terrible tea, bringing up repressed childhood trauma, and getting her magic book to drop animal bones onto customer’s shoes. I’m guessing Pinhole Books was in bad shape even before the police investigation and murder charges.

hahaha, the Vast pushes Dominic down the stairs. classic. you gotta grab what opportunities are available

so did Gerard have to follow Dominic back to his flat and wait awkwardly on the doorstep at like 3 in the morning, hoping none of his neighbours would notice and call the cops

the revelation that Mary’s been dead the whole time! this episode may be more intent on world building and plot set-up but damn if it isn’t still a good little ghost story.

kind of rude of Gerry to just burn a book in this guy’s flat without asking and then steal his wastepaper basket.

Jon may not call the statement giver a liar for once, but never fear, he’s still our petty bastard man. accuses Gertrude of filing statements without reading them, has Sasha double-check Martin’s research, grumps about his general misfortune . he’s stressed from the Archives’ disorder and having flashbacks to a certain picture book but by Jove, that won’t stop him making snide comments on what’s supposed to be an official audio transcription!

[coquelicoq]

Glad to be of help. Talking to you helps me examine things more closely too! To me at least, a strong undercurrent in mdzs/untamed is the concept of 'face' - basically how you are viewed and treated in society. There is a Viet idiom that goes like 'a piece shared to you in the village festival is more valuable than a whole basket of it you receive in the back door' - the fact that you look like you are respected (and hence gets shared food) in public matters more than the quantity

I believe the ‘face’ is part of the conflict between Jiang Cheng and Wei Wuxian. Like, they’re dear to each other, but at the same time, Jiang Cheng is clan leader and Wuxian is son of a servant, and in public, Wuxian is implicitly expected to 'behave his place’, such as, you know, avoiding loudly passing his judgment on the leader of another clan while his clan leader is still there (that banquet scene is all kinds of social violations).

And, like, we have mdzs society, a place where people are obsessed with merits and achievements, but at the same time, bloodlines and being born in the 'right’ place matter, arguably even more than your abilities, and your status decides what you get, and what you can and can’t do. And yeah, it creates all kinds of wrongs in people. You have Jiang Cheng, who loves his family but at the same time feels the pressure to maintain his/his clan’s social position in the face of a genius adoptee

So, like, I think actually Su She and Jiang Cheng have a lot in common i.e. anxious about how people view them, and for Su She, he craves recognition. In the novel, it’s stated that he strikes out from the Lan Clan and forms a clan/sect of his own, so that he can be called a clan leader. And, like, his tragedy, to me, is that for mere, arguably superficial in the end, act of Yao remembering his name in public, he is willing to die for Yao (I disagree with hamliet that there is a connection

between them, because it feels super exploitative on Yao’s end). As a side note, I think fandom hates Su She not just for being mean to Lan Wangji, but, in the novel, besides the inferiority complex, he also hates Wangji for chastising him in the Murder Turtle Cave. When Wen Chao wants to make Mianmian monster’s bait and Wangji tries to protect her and Wen Chao gets frustrated and threatens to murder them all, Su She drags her forward and is basically prepared to let her die. Wangji hits him.

(I just remember that bit haha, because Su She isn’t in the cave scene in Untamed. Basically in the novel, Su She thinks Wangji has humiliated him several times - with good reason or not). But yeah, I’m too lazy to explore it properly, but mdzs is fascinating in the variety of ways people act and react to social status and 'face’.

what a fantastic idiom, thanks for sharing it with me!! face is one of those things where like i know generally what it is but am also aware that it’s a rich concept that i don’t have enough context to fully understand sometimes. so it’s always nice to learn more about it!

it sounds like cql changed a lot of things about su she, with the end result of making him more sympathetic and maybe a bit more impressive, idk. i don’t remember all of this totally but it seems to me that cql!su she’s main motivation for starting his own sect was that the lans showed him that his life meant nothing to them, and not so much that the lans showed him that his status meant nothing to them, which maybe was more of novel!su she’s motivation? (but since status is so important in this universe, maybe these two things aren’t as far apart as they seem to me?)

(as an aside, i find it interesting how cql avoided making him too sympathetic. even though the show gives him a valid reason to betray the lans to the wens, at the same time it really hammers home what a coward he is for doing it. maybe this was cql’s parallel for the murder turtle cave scene - his life is threatened by the wens, so he offers up someone else’s life in exchange for his own. but idk, the cql version is more sympathetic to me, because the lans wronged him first by leaving him to die, and i’m guessing mianmian didn’t do anything similar.)

i wonder. other than for plot reasons, why is there a need for both jin guangyao and su she in the story? do they serve different purposes from a thematic perspective? aren’t they both people who became villains when society ridiculed them and shut out many of their other options, all because of the circumstances of their birth? not that you can’t have more than one character doing the same thing for the story, and i realize su she was necessary to cql’s plot especially with the whole second flute thing (not sure how important he is for the novel’s plot), but cql goes to such pains to make jgy’s tragic origins and completely over-the-top villainy super explicit. so it just seems like su she is kind of redundant thematically, unless i’m missing something.

oooh, i really love this jiang cheng/su she comparison though. you have given me a lot to think about!