#with how I write them; they're narrative foils

[gxldensxldiers]

ANYWAYS now I'm free to spread my Stiletto + Lockpick propaganda. Specifically how SpecGru/KorTac interactions are just a damn soap opera for anyone fluent in a Romance language because Lockpick's just this cocky little shithead of a 'kid' (in Stiletto's eyes at least) doing illegal shit without giving a damn because she knows she has her reasons. And then we have Stiletto who just sees a younger version of herself in Lockpick and fucking hates it so damn much and will always call that shit out cuz hey. Kid's being a fucking dumbass and throwing her life away.

I know I've posted about this on my other blog but just know Stiletto's anything but heartless and did join the Carabinieri out of a genuine need to change her community for the better; it wasn't just about getting revenge. It just so happened she could do both.

[t1erradelfuego]

please do not read the tags i am being insane at 10pm on a sunday night

[anneapocalypse]

On Wuk Lamat's Role in the Back Half of Dawntrail

(Note: You do not have to like Wuk Lamat, you do not have to like any character, that is your business; however this post is not an invitation to expound to me on why you hate her, so if you aren't open to discussing her positively, please move along.)

Wuk Lamat is vital to the back half of Dawntrail. Her presence in the story there is both narratively and thematically important and its lack would render her character arc incomplete.

For context, I have seen some comments that there should have been less Wuk Lamat in the back half of Dawntrail. I truly don't see how that would have been possible or made sense without throwing out most of what was set up in the first half, or simply writing an entirely different story. Regardless of whether you personally vibe with her, Wuk Lamat is the main character of Dawntrail; this is her story, and it's themes and narrative beats are inextricably interwoven with her character arc.

First of all, can you imagine what people (in-universe and out) would say about her if after the attack on her people and the appearance of the dome she just... stayed in Tuliyollal with Koana and let other people do all the work? She's the Vow of Resolve. Of course she's going to be at the forefront of the action. The whole point of her choosing Koana to rule with her in a new interpretation of the tradition of blessed siblings is that they have complementary strengths, and they have a benefit that blessed siblings don't: they can be in two places at once!

Second, a big part of Wuk Lamat's journey is learning about the cultures of Tural so that she can fairly preside over them all, and in Alexandria we get to see her bring that lesson to bear in a big way when she learns about the regulators and the processing of souls. She's rattled by it but pushes past that personal reaction to say, as the Dawnservant, "Please teach me of your history and culture so that I can understand the importance of this practice." In doing so she learns critical information about the situation. This is a culture so far removed from the Turali peoples Wuk Lamat knows, and they're also a separate kingdom not technically under her rule at all, but that doesn't actually change her response. She still reaches out with curiosity and compassion, always seeking to learn and understand.

As she comes to understand Alexandria's history, she also learns the context she'll need to understand Sphene when her true motivations are revealed later. Moreover, Sphene is a very clear foil for Wuk Lamat. The Dawnservant characterized by her love for her people and her desire for their peace and happiness vs. the Endless Queen whose love for her people has been twisted into something destructive and terrible.

And then there's the narrative beats about family, and particularly the loss of parents in different ways: Wuk Lamat earning the trust of her brother's abandoned son and taking him in as family, and her being there for Erenville as he struggles to come to terms with the death of a parent (something Wuk Lamat has also experienced very recently).

And that's to say nothing of how personal Zoraal Ja's betrayal is to Wuk Lamat; of course she has confront him personally. It couldn't be anyone else (except maybe Koana, and they both seem to agree that it should be her).

The Rite of Succession is not Wuk Lamat's whole character arc; it's only the first half. It's after Wuk Lamat comes into her own as Dawnservant alongside her brother that she truly shines. It is in the back half of the story, when the stakes are dramatically raised, that all the lessons she's learned in her journey will be tested, when the peace she seeks to preserve is so brutally disrupted. We get to see her struggle emotionally with the shock of that in Tuliyollal, then rise to the challenge of leadership. How she responds to all of that is her character. It is the culmination of everything the first half of the story has set up. This is still her story.

And personally, I think it's wonderful to see a female character not only featured so prominently in the story but getting so much character development and such a complete character arc.

[moony-2001]

The real-world impact of Lore Olympus

i.e. do your research Rachel

Trigger warning: racism, fetishization, appropriation, mentions of SA

Long post ahead

A while ago, someone told me that Lore Olympus was just a silly little comic written out of boredom. That it was made to be "funny". They told me that "[I] can't hope [for] an extremely [well-written] story when it was just made with the intention to make something goofy" and that if Rachel actually wanted to make something serious like I had, she would write a book and not a comic.

At the time of this exchange, it was past 1 a.m. and I was exhausted. I did not want to argue with this person and it simply wasn't worth my time or energy in the moment.

But looking back at that (mostly one-sided) interaction, I can't help but think that there is so much wrong with that point of view. Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion about Lore Olympus, whether good or bad. But Lore Olympus isn't just some silly little nothing comic about nothing important. It is a comic that actively appropriates and erases Greek Culture. It is a comic that has no respect for the actual stories that have been passed down over thousands of years whether by word of mouth or written text. It is a comic that perpetuates a false narrative and harmful stereotypes about characters or certain groups of people. So, no, it's not just a silly little comic.

Incorrect information

Here’s an example of what I mean:

When I was doing research for my post about the 10 year time skip, I looked up Leuce to reconfirm the little information I knew about her. Wanna guess the first thing that popped up about her?

A Lore Olympus Wiki article.

Okay. How about Minthe? Hundreds of pictures of her from Lore Olympus and a LO Wiki article as one of the top 3 results. Both character are horribly represented in LO and unfortunately there isn’t really any documented stories or records that can refute how LO paints them. Because of this, other characters in Greek Mythology like Leuce and Minthe, whose stories have little to no documentation, stand to suffer the most harm from deliberate misrepresentation on Rachel’s part.

Of course well-known and better documented figures in Greek mythology face slander as well. What about Thetis or Leto? How about Apollo? All of their portrayals in LO are HORRIBLE. I have seen people online absolutely drag them to filth not because they're upset about how the character is portrayed compared to their mythological counterpart, but because they have no knowledge of how they are actually portrayed outside of LO. They just assume that's how the characters are. Similarly, people who have either very little or no prior knowledge of Greek Mythology and Culture would look at the comic and go "Yep, sounds legit. It must be true." and go about thinking that what is portrayed in LO is accurate to what was transcribed thousands of years ago.

Creative interpretations and racism/fetishization within LO

Don’t get me wrong. Creative interpretations and artistic liberties can be great. When they’re done tastefully. I personally think if done correctly, a Greek myth spun in a modern way has the potential be very good. But that's not what we were given.

Characters like Minthe, Leuce, and Thetis (all nymphs btw) are portrayed as trashy tramps who put out and are used as a foil sabotage Persephone and/or her relationship with Hades. Compare that to Greek Mythology where in the Iliad, Thetis is very well-respected by the gods, particularly Hera. Unfortunately, other similar characters like satrys (and basically any character that isn’t a god) are usually portrayed as a low-class POC that can be easily exploited, manipulated, or used as a temporary villain/lover/pawn to “get back” at Persephone, our white-coded protagonist who can do no wrong.

Additionally, there is a clear race/class bias against characters like nymphs in LO. We see many cases scattered throughout the comic of gods like Hera or Aphrodite referring to nymphs as "trash" or "low class" or the idea that nymphs do not belong with gods being heavily implied if not outright said. I cannot tell you how often I've seen Minthe be called some variant of "cheap" by the readers of LO. Even Persephone (who created the flower nymphs) treats them with such disrespect. She frequently calls them some variant of "stupid" or "simple" like saying how they're not the sharpest crayons in the box even though she's the one WHO MADE THEM. However, it's so odd not really to note that nymphs like Echo, Amphitrite, or Psyche (who was previously disguised as a nymph) are not discriminated against. This is because they are liked or trusted by the gods they are around and ergo are often portrayed as the "good ones", which is a disgusting mindset to have.

We also see the fetishization of nymphs in the comic that is disturbingly similar to the fetishization of women who are Black, Asian, or Latina. It is a known fact that Hades has a flower nymph fetish. Not only is this implied in the comic, but Rachel stated it outright in an old Patreon post. Nymphs are also generally treated as sex-symbols, disposable, and as a lesser-than. Zeus frequently displays this behavior by abandoning nymphs he knocked up in the mortal realm.

For example, when Persephone finds out Apollo is dating Daphne, she isn't upset he's dating her friend. She's upset he's dating a flower nymph, beings that are generally considered to be "rare", "dumb", and objects of sexual desire. Ew.

Even on the Lore Olympus website (loreolympians.com) nymphs are regarded as "beautiful", "desirable", and "very exotic". And when they're not described in a sexual manner they're say it with me now regarded as "low class" or "workers" for some kind of god/goddess.

Final thoughts

So not only is the characterization of characters like Minthe or Thetis harmful to Greek culture and the stories that are so ingrained in their society, but it is also perpetuating harmful stereotypes about people of color and women who are confident in their sexuality.

Of course, the characters within Greek Mythology had their own issues. Zeus was a serial rapist, many of the goddesses deemed to be "feminist" by today's standards were actually horribly misogynistic looking at you Athena. But 1. that's just how things were back then (but that does not make it right) and 2. all of the good, the bad, and the ugly is still there in Greek Mythology. They're not denying how fucked up it is, but they're also not changing their history to better fit their own narrative or the narrative of the modern world. It exists, it happened, but now it is studied and called out by historians.

Rachel, on the other hand, is doing exactly that. She is actively changing the Greek's cultural history to better fit her fic's narrative. She is constantly sweeping things under the rug or going "No this is how it ACTUALLY happened". Lore Olympus is marketed as a "feminist retelling" yet somehow, it takes allllll the ugly parts from Greek Mythology (rape, incest, problematic age gaps, dubious consent, etc.), mixes it with a majority of the issues we have in the modern world (white feminism, rape-apologists/rape culture, grooming, fetishization of certain minority groups, etc.) and then amplifies the concoction to 20. Lore Olympus cannot be a "progressive, feminist, retelling" and also have characters that are morally apprehensive/come straight from the ancient myths. It does not work. In fact, IMO it makes all the problems from both eras worse.

News flash: actual cultures that are still thriving today are not your toys. They are not "made up". They matter. Do better.

[bobbile-blog]

Okay so I've finally gotten to Jessicalter's Oprec and now feel qualified to talk about Come Catastrophes or Wakes of Vultures. holy shit. This went straight into my list of top Arknights events. Fantastic event, spoilers will be under the cut so I HIGHLY RECOMMEND reading the event first. It's really good and worth your while.

Anyway, what follows is a scattered mess of thoughts about this event and things that stuck out to me.

First off, plot stuff! I'll probably cover this when I do my next plotline recap post, but what I took away from the end is that Clip Cliff seems to want to make Blacksteel independent, or at least more self-determining than it is now. He seems to be gathering resources and assets like mobile city plates and investing in long-term infrastructure like merc training, so he definitely has a long game he's pushing for. I don't think we know enough go speculate about his goals, but we'll definitely be coming back here again. After all, Tila has an infection monitor in her art, which probably means she's going to be playable at some point in the future.

Next, having looked into this a little on my own, I was interested in some of the previous places Raythean has shown up. Specifically, the ones that stood out were the drones in the Kazimierz Major and arming Silverash's forces in Kjerag, which might be referring to the Tschäggättä. It's not just notable for their apparent level of technology, but also as a faint connecting thread between three separate capitalism plotlines. I don't know if that's going to be meaningful in the future, but I found it interesting enough that I thought I'd bring it up.

Now on to more narrative things. While I love Liskarm and Franka, I do think it was the right choice to give them less screen time in this event. They're both (for the most part) fully-realized characters who understand their own motivations and morals. This is above all else an event about Jessica learning to stand on her own as an adult, so it makes sense that they're more here to support her than they are to play their own roles in the story.

Speaking of said roles, I liked the event's commentary on cops. It pointed out an interesting distinction that I wouldn't really have ever thought of, that between mercenaries and cops. To start: cops exist to protect property, not people. The police exist to protect things and do not have an obligation to err on the side of people over things, and in fact are supposed to do the opposite. This event understands that, and that role os the core of how the bank treats the Blacksteel mercs. CV, however, raises an interesting point that mercenaries are bound by the letter of a contract and not the larger obligation to property cops are, so they can actually raise moral objections and point to their contracts, sort of a Lawful Evil/Lawful Neutral to cops' Neutral Evil. The independence of their position with respect to cops allows for more of an independent morality than you'd get in a cop story and I like that, I think it's a really smart direction to take your writing in.

On a (mostly) separate note, holy shit Arknights is really good at writing cowboy stories. Between this and chapter 9 (and I would argue An Obscure Wanderer), Arknights has repeatedly made it clear that they Do Not Fuck Around with their cowboy stories and I'm surprised I haven't heard more people talking about it. It kinda has everything:

- It takes place in a rural, working-class setting undergoing a larger imminent societal shift that can inform the larger narrative, and deals with a semi-mythologized past that is rapidly disappearing.

- It has a protagonist and an antagonist that serve as foils, both very heavily affected and defined by the (same) violence in their past that they've both had different reactions to. Our protagonist has come to terms with the violence as a tool to maintain order, while our antagonist has used it for personal gain and in some ways lost control of it.

- It's a story about community, and heavily emphasizes local and personal community over larger artificial corporate "community". That's my reading of the recurring motif of the cold btw, warmth represents the close, personal community Davistown used to have and the cold that now pervades it comes from how the bank has systematically dismantled that community.

- And, I'd argue most importantly, it understands the narrative power of a bullet. The Showdown at the end of a cowboy story is powerful because we've spent the entire runtime of our story with these characters, and they are now facing each other down with the intent to end one of their collective two stories. The entire weight of the narrative so far comes to rest on a single moment of tension. It's really hard to gather up the kind of narrative momentum you need to make that hit like it does in CV. For example, it requires a really light hand with actual action in the story, so that it really does feel like it's an even standoff between our protagonist and antagonist. On the other hand, though, you do actually have to establish the relative skill of both parties and actually sell the danger of the moment to the audience. It's really hard to toe the line between tension and actual action in a way that makes for a satisfying resolution, and CV does it extremely well.

Honestly, Arknights just seems really good at getting the vibes of American media right. This is something I noticed in DV and Lonetrail too, and I haven't really been able to put my finger on what it is about them, but the vibes are just really on-point. I want to write more about this at a later point once I actually figure out what it is that I'm feeling, but maybe it's the setting, maybe it's the cast, maybe it's the plot points, maybe it's something in between — it just seems to understand the spirit of period cowboy stories in a way that I can't describe. Good shit.

Finally, I wanna end this with where Jessica is now. The events of CV take place In between the events of Loneterail and Ideal City, so the current "now" of the story is a few months ahead. Jessica left for the frontier along with Woody, Helena, and Miles. They live together in a small new settlement, building the place from the ground up with Woody and Jessica acting as town sherrifs. At the point we're at now, rhe town is fairly well-established and Woody has temporarily left on other business, leaving Jessica the sole sherrif of their new settlement. However, she's risen to her new station, and is growing into a stronger person than she ever was before.

[nathaniacolver]

i think ab this all the time bc there are SO many other quality and foundational wlw ships out there. but the CHOKEHOLD. the supreme chokehold belongs to them and their unconfirmed but undeniable homoerotic subtext, dialogue, staring, and soulmatism

god i don't know what they put into supercorp but whatever it is it clearly works and it more powerful than any drug Ever

[uneducated-author]

I love how Bungou Stray Dogs writes Geniuses.

Dazai and Dostoyevsky are very obvious foils, but BSD never lets that feel lazy, because the two still have distinct ideologies and strategies. The line is less blurred with the two. Both are willing to kill, to manipulate and to utilise any means necessary to achieve their goals. In the script distinguish themselves majorly in one particular way, which is their understanding of God (or at least fate) and their perspective of humanity. Fyodor believes fate rewards perfection and harmony while Dazai posits that the works of destiny are happenstance and absurdity. Fyodor thinks he's controlling the situation while Dazai says the ones making the World move are the people trapped in contingency. They both agree that humans are sinful and foolish. But to Fyodor that makes them undeserving and boring, while Dazai says that their inherent flaws make them great. They aren't different in an intellectual level, only an ideological one.

Then compare than to Ranpo, noted as the strongest man in the agency. A kind of walking deus ex machina with Ultra Deduction, but a really complex character. We saw him as a strategist in Cannibalism, except that he largely was supporting Kunikida, but now he's essentially running all of the ADA operations. He fails to account for all the contingencies that Dostoyevsky would implement, but arguably knows the limitations and capabilities of the ADA better than even Dazai (think of that scene where they're planning to take down the moby dick).

I like how Ranpo and Dazai are portrayed in their respective arcs right now. Ranpo's strategies are explained clearly to the audience, with flashbacks to him explaining their route of action occurring as the plot unfolds, and clear agendas and techniques used in real time. In contrast, Dazai's plans are kept secret even from the reader, so we are left oblivious to his true agenda and plan.

Then compare that to Mori, who is a very grounded genius. He's smart enough to calculate that Fukuchi is Kamui, which before only Ranpo had deduced, and has been running the port mafia, even maintaining it during intense internal turmoil from when different factions were fighting against him. In the dark era we even see him out manipulate Dazai, with him being the one to smuggle Mimic into Yokohama and leak the location of the orphans without Dazai knowing. But he doesn't have aspirations beyond keeping Yokohama safe, so most of his schemes are directly for the city or for the Port Mafia. He utilises peoples access to information, and affects their circumstances to influence their actions. He has a great understanding of how individuals will both act and react, and how to manipulate both.

There are multiple 'genius' characters, but they all have distinct skill sets and ideologies, and I love seeing how the narrative handles each if them.

[greenerteacups]

my heart aches for one Theodore Nott after reading the latest update 😭 GTC, could you tell us more about your thoughts on him, his characterizations, how you manage to write him so poetically and beautifully, and (a shot in the dark, but i'll bite) the role he'll play in books 5, 6 and 7? congrats on another chapter GTC, i love you tons 🩷

Thank you so much, friend. I love talking about Theodore Nott. I'll gladly bite on that question.

To start off, Theodore's middle name might as well be "THE FOIL," because everything about him is tailor-made specifically to Say Things About Draco Malfoy. He practically hands Draco a card saying "I AM YOUR JUNGIAN SHADOW SELF, PLEASE HANDLE WITH CARE" upon introduction. They meet when they're both fresh off the train. (Hermione beats Theo to Draco by a matter of hours; there's a ton of ways this story spins differently if minor details about the first chapters were changed, and that's definitely one of them.) Then Theo and Draco ride in on the boats together. (Admittedly, I was not aiming for subtlety points with this intro. They are literally "in the same boat.") Immediately, Theo is throwing out narrative parallels like he's getting paid for it: they both have a dead parent. Both parents died under weird circumstances. Their fathers were both Death Eaters. Both of them are the sole heirs and only sons of great wizarding houses. Then they go into the Great Hall together, standing in line, but — and @piedrafundamental left a really banger analysis of the Sorting Hat scene in the comments on that chapter, but I'm going to crib just one line — crucially, "M comes before N." Draco's sorted before Theodore is, and he goes into Gryffindor. Immediately after that, Theodore's shunted into Slytherin, and their paths diverge. Call this the prologue of their relationship. They're not actually gonna get to know each other until Book 2 and Book 3, but this is the part where the narrative is basically jumping up and down and waving its arms at you, going "HEY! THIS GUY! IMPORTANT TO THE STORY! GET WORRIED ABOUT WHAT HE'S DOING, OKAY?"

Then we meet him again in Book 2, and just like Draco, a year at Hogwarts has changed him. He's a little more confident, a little more cocky, a little more comfortable, and — hey, look! He's got a weirdly intense friendship with a girl around his age, too! (Surprise, surprise, Draco is with Hermione when he meets Theo again, and who makes her debut in that moment but Pansy Parkinson?) And there's Daphne, the third leg of the Slytherin Trio, the kind of girl Draco probably would end up with in Slytherin — pretty, sociable, cunning, knows his family history (literally cites it to him in their first introduction, like c'mon), is the sister of his canonical wife, etc. etc., we got layers to this shit like lasagna but this post ain't about Daphne so we gotta move on — point being, either way he flips, Draco's going to be the fourth of a quartet. Which is the entree into the Slytherin politics storyline of Book 2, a.k.a. "the temptation of Draco Malfoy," where Theo is — I mean, to be honest, for once he's really not doing anything that sinister; from his perspective, he's kind of just putting his fucking back out trying to make a friend? He's drawing Draco in a regression towards prejudice and comfort, naturally, but that's not how he sees it. But there's a counterpoint between what Theo's offering and what waits for him in Gryffindor.

So that's the starting block of his character. The rest of the work is building a real person out of that; obviously, you can't just go "this is Foil Man, does whatever a Foil Can" and expect people to be interested. Part of what makes Theo interesting, to me, is that the traits he shares with Draco include a lot of what we tend to like about him — he's driven, intelligent, cunning, and brutal in the defense of those he loves — it's just that the people he loves, the people he surrounds himself with, are deeply prejudiced people committed to doing profoundly bad things. He's been trained from birth in the art of making bad people happy, and he's gotten good at it. And he's just enough of a coward (again, pot and kettle) that he can't imagine a world where that's not the case.

And it drives him fucking crazy that Draco won't admit that. Because I think Theo thinks if he can get Draco to admit they're similar people, it'll validate the choices he's made — like, yeah, he's fucked up horribly, but anyone would do the same, if they had to face what he has. Even Saint Draco. And of course, Draco is absolutely unwilling to go there with him, because:

(a) he very much does not want to believe that his years of grueling internal growth and struggle for betterment are just the product of some good luck with a hat; i.e., a suggestion that is not just insulting but terrifying because it suggests how very close he could be to regression at any time; but also:

(b) it is a fundamental tenet of Theo and Draco's dynamic that Draco does not like Theo as much as Theo likes him. Because where Theo sees his mirror in the light, Draco sees his mirror in the dark. And it's an increasingly ugly picture.

[vladdyissues]

I hate to like Pompous pep as an older Danny. It just makes him an OC who's aging. If They didn't like adult-minor relationships, there's no reason to like Pompous pep in the first place

Well... yes and no. I agree, a lot of older Danny content made by fans features designs and traits that seem incongruous to his canon character¹. These choices are a reflection of the fans' personal interpretations of Danny as he ages. I think that's perfectly fine—fantastic, actually! If fans were only allowed to draw art and write stories that strictly obeyed canon, things would be very boring. I doubt the fandom would have survived for as long as it has.

¹ But really, how do we know? We were never shown an adult version of Danny in the show, and I deliberately choose to ignore Butch Hartman's "10 Years Later" artwork because it's just... really dumb. And ugly.

Regarding the adult/minor relationship aspect of Pompous Pep, while I'm sure most of us aren't bothered by a stylized cartoon boy in love with a cartoon man, I'm equally sure there was a small number of fans who initially wanted to enjoy the ship—enemies to lovers is a very popular trope, after all—but were repulsed by the thought of a minor, even a cartoon one that barely resembles an actual human teenager, romantically involved with an adult². So they draw or write Danny as older, and that solves their problem. Wonderful! They're doing what makes them happy and comfortable, and as long as they allow others the same courtesy, I don't see any reason why their interpretations would be less valid than those of us who enjoy younger Danny content.

² I know for a fact there are some fans who don't like adult/minor relationships but will make an exception for Vlad and Danny. Pompep is the only age gap pairing they enjoy.

There are more reasons to love Pompep aside from just the age difference. The rivalry, the power imbalance, the narrative foils, how they complement one another and yet are distinctly different. There's so much to love about these two.

I guess what I'm trying to say is: All Pompep is good Pompep, and there's no "right" or "wrong" way to ship them 👍

[demaparbat-hp]

Hello. I wanted to say that I really like your art style, especially how you do Katara's face. That's awesome.

But every time I read the description of your AUs, it gives me the creeps. You once said you try to stay true to Katara's character, but... your AUs are like "what if I take one of her major character traits and throw it in a trash bin?".

Halfblood AU: no connection to her culture that basically defies everything Katara thinks and feels about her waterbending.

Helping the Fire Nation AU: no hope for the avatar that Katara expressed in the intro of every episode of the original show.

And lowkey less kindness. She's cautious and bitter and wants to help only Zuko.

She seems like a completely different character. Not Katara at all.

Zuko too. I doubt he'll be in the White Lotus, it's not in his character at all. He may use the help of the members, but the original ("The Desert") tells us he will not be one of them, it's just not his style.

You make zutara look shallow, like you think that Zuko and Katara as they are in the show would never work together. As a person who sees appeal in this ship I feel very uneasy seeing your interpretations.

And my god, why do you hate Hakoda so much? Every time you add anything to halfbloodAU he looks more and more disgusting. I cannot believe mister "you and your brother are my entire world" would do what you are saying. And a married man with a child cannot be so naive to think that a woman won't become pregnant after having sex with him. Hakoda would've returned and checked and tried to help.

Sorry. I wish I could enjoy your art, but you're making it so hard.

Hello, and thank you for writing. I'm glad that you enjoy my art, at least to some extent, and I'm sorry if I ever made you uncomfortable with my AUs. However, I find myself in the need of defending them.

Creating AUs is something I take seriously, and one of the core traits of an AU is that it's, inherently, a different world. I can change virtually anything, and that's okay. Haven't we all read a fic and thought, this character wouldn't react like this in canon, but went along with it anyway? Because we know this isn't supposed to be canon. These characters are living in a different context, and react to things differently.

Canon exists for a reason. An AU does, too. They're different concepts and must be treated accordingly. It's a matter of context.

But we're talking about characters, aren't we?

You've pointed out that I've changed Zuko and Hakoda, too. And you're right. I've found that people online are more... defensive of Katara when compared to other characters. And while that may not be important to this specific discussion, I do find it rather curious. It's something to think about.

Anyways, I change characters. And I've gotta confess, I'm not ashamed of it.

My Katara is still Katara, and my Zuko is still Zuko. I'm just playing with how I believe they would react in different scenarios, and with different backgrounds (that's important, too).

You mentioned that my AUs are like "what if I take one of [Katara's] major character traits and throw it in a trash bin?". And I'm sorry that they give you the creeps, truly.

But maybe I want to explore how being a product of two different cultures affects not only Katara, but also Zuko as characters. Halfblood gives me the opportunity to address these sociocultural issues through their personal experiences, and I find that kind of narrative awfully compelling.

And maybe I wanted to change one core trait of Katara's personality and see how that affected both her journey and the general plot. Hunters is a writing experiment, and it has taught me a lot about human nature. Thanks to what you so kindly call "throwing a character trait in a trash bin", I've gained a lot more respect for who Katara is in canon. If anything, I consider Hunters!Katara as a foil for Canon!Katara.

And I don't hate Hakoda. I have a lot of respect for him as a leader and a father. I think he's a great character and role model for others within the ATLA universe. Bashing characters for fun isn't really my thing. The choices I made for Hakoda in the HalfBlood AU (and Aang in Hunters) are a matter of narrative and plot building, not my opinion on his character.

Just think about how different that AU would be if Hakoda made better choices, if he didn't have a wife and a son waiting for him at the South, or if Katara's father was a random Earth Kingdom villager. About 60% of the conflict in the story would disappear. And I could build that conflict with other stuff, I admit it. I could use different plot points or make the characters do other things or give Katara One Big Happy Family.

But it would change the core themes of the story I want to tell.

It's important to me that Katara is a product of two different cultures. It's important that she has no father figure in her life. It's important that Hakoda, who is a great leader and a great man and a great husband and a great father for Sokka, made a huge mistake in his youth that has been weighting on him ever since. It's important that Sokka is suddenly faced with the realization that his father, his idolized role model, is human and has also royally fucked up.

I want to talk about these things.

But I'm able to recognize that they're heavy subjects and, really, most of us are just here for the fluff anyway. So I'm sorry if I've made anyone uncomfortable. I won't hold it against you if you don't like what I do or just ignore whatever lore I set up for my AUs.

This is fiction, this is freedom, and this is the way I express myself. We all do it differently, and that's part of the beauty.

[alittlebitofloveliness]

darry def haunts Paul… “the one that got away” and all you know? ur parry fic was soooo good, you think you gonna write more of them in the future? Also ur darry x Tim w/in that fic is sooooo good

Oh for sure. Ngl, i feel like based on how the Curtis boys are described anyone who's ever been dumped by any of them will probably have a little piece of themselves ruined forever because how do you fumble a nice dude who looks like a movie star????

I'm def considering writing more parry! Specifically more doomed Parry because there is no universe in which they're endgame unfortunately. It's probably gonna have to wait until I'm finished midterms though, I'm very busy at the moment but should be back to writing in a couple weeks!!!

You'll def see more Tarry from me, I love exploring Tim and Darry's dynamic as narrative foils, and the lense of a relationship is a good way to do that i've found

Thanks for the ask xx

[autisticandroids]

Yeah re: soulless Sam I was always interested and a bit troubled by the way s6 handled it where like they presented soulless sam as the primary issue/threat yet I found deans controllingness and dislike towards soulless sam equally if not more threatening. Like it felt like soulless sam was Not The Problem- dean reacting very poorly to a sam he could neither control nor understand was the issue. Would you have handled it differently than the show and if so, how?

so i think this ask is a response to this post.

yeah i mean this is something that really bugs me in the show. so first of all, the writers don't really have a handle on what it means to be soulless - they never do, throughout the whole show.

this is firstly because the concept of soullessness is cribbed wholesale from buffy, where it is ALSO stupid and makes no sense. but in spn, it's worse, because spn already has its own interpretation of buffy's vampires - you can draw a pretty one to one line between how buffy uses vampires and how spn uses demons. except that demons are one of the things that spn actually does better than buffy - instead of being inherently evil in a way that's justified by nature, demons have two things going on. first, they are soldiers in an army - they have a reason to be evil and it's that that's what they're ordered to be. second, the difference between a demon and a human is that the demon has gone through centuries or millennia of torture to turn them into a new person. which is like... a comprehensible difference. the reason that all demons love violence and constantly commit it is a result of being intentionally shaped into being that way by the other demons who tortured them, who were also tortured in their turn, on and on all the way back to lucifer. this is to me more compelling and makes more narrative sense than "vampires don't have souls and so therefore they're inherently evil (so we can have lots of cool scenes of buffy killing them and not worry about it)."

so the concept of soulless sam is basically "hey let's crib one of buffy's stupidest worldbuilding elements for a second time, but this time we won't iterate on it until it's good." bad, broadly, i would say.

man. 3.5k words. the rest goes under a cut.

secondly i would say that the individual writers have totally different ideas about what a "soulless sam" should look like. this is partly just stupidity i think - ben edlund's* idea of what soulless sam is isn't that different from brett matthews', they both write him as an unemotional pragmatist who doesn't actually have bad intent. it's just that matthews is a bad writer, and he's also taking the directive from the top that sam should be "evil," which edlund clearly isn't listening to. whereas for example dabb and lofflin are writing soulless sam as an active monster. same with gamble i would say, though that's less clear cut.

now, there are people reading this right now who think that i'm about to say "we should throw out soulless sam" but i actually don't agree with that. i LIKE elements of soulless sam. i think at his best he makes a really great foil for like... where dean is at in season six. i think that his, like, existence is a great torture for dean, partly because he's such a fabulous foil. and frankly, i also think jared padalecki seems like he's having an absolute ball playing a cheerful bastard, and it makes soulless sam absolutely magnetic to watch. oh before you read any further you should probably read this post, it's really good.

anyway i'm going to take three episodes and compare them. we're gonna look at live free or twihard, clap your hands if you believe, and caged heat.

i'm also gonna talk a little about later handlings of soullessness.

but first i'm gonna say that the concept of soulless sam as "evil sam" is dumb. if he's evil sam then... do something else to him. but the premise of soulless sam is just that he lacks emotion and lacking emotion is not like.... Becoming Evil. that's so stupid it's unreal. and it doesn't lead to an interesting idea of the character of soulless sam!!! there's nothing to do with that except Bad Guy!!!!! stupid.

anyway, between twihard, clap your hands, and caged heat, i would say twihard is absolutely my least favorite, clap your hands is my most favorite, and caged heat is somewhere in the middle, at least in terms of handlings of soulless sam specifically.

so in twihard, sam lets dean get turned by a vampire. it's not malicious, he just wants to test the vampire cure on him. this is so fucking stupid it's unreal. brett matthews is going for "unfeeling pragmatist" here but he also clearly wrote backwards from the idea of sam as the antagonist who got dean turned. it makes very little sense for sam to have done this, it's not unfeelingly pragmatic, it's silly, and it exists purely to manufacture soulless-sam-as-antagonist. dumb and bad.

vs. clap your hands, where soulless sam isn't an antagonist. he's a foil, and he makes dean very upset, but he mostly acts both reasonably and in concert with dean. he's just offputting. like, dean gets abducted, and then sam does his best to get him back, but when he can't work anymore, he cheerfully has sex with the hippie girl. that is, genuinely, offputting to the point of a little disturbing. it very successfully shows us a man who is not feeling things the way most people do. but it's not evil. it's just weird. and it's really successful as a foil to dean's "feelings are king" shtick.

vs. caged heat, which has a little bit of both. i'm mostly going to look at the first scene with meg, which has both my favorite and least favorite moment.

my favorite moment is this:

SAM laughs. DEAN: Something funny, Sam? SAM: Yeah, Meg. DEAN: Really? ’Cause where I’m sitting… SAM: Don’t worry. She can’t do jack squat. She’s totally screwed. DEAN: Sam, not helping! SAM: Look at her, Dean. She’s furious. If she could kill you, she’d’ve done it by now. She’s running. MEG: Am I? SAM: Judging by the level of flop sweat on all of you, yeah. Which means you’re running from Crowley. Which makes sense. Crowley would want to hunt down all the Lucifer loyalists now that he’s the big man on campus.

so what's happening here is that dean is being very genuinely menaced. by meg. like he's in maybe some serious danger. and sam has been trying to protect him by talking to meg. but sam is also totally calm. because he doesn't care. he doesn't want meg to rape dean, to cut him up, to kill him. but he's not scared, and he's not empathizing with dean's fear, even though he knows it exists. in fact this fact allows him to notice that meg is scared, that she can't actually cut dean up. her threats are empty. i think this is a great use of soulless sam because, again, it's offputting, and it's obviously callous. dean would be totally within his rights to be pissed about this, like sam is out of pocket here. but he's not really doing anything bad.

and now my least favorite part: literally the next two lines.

MEG: How would you know? SAM: It’s what I’d do.

STUPID. STUPID STUPID STUPID. ooooooooooooh sam is soooooooooo evil he can obviously perfectly predict crowley DUMBBBBBBB. STUPID DUMB. sorry i get so mad when i hear this line. genuinely i kind of love caged heat there's a reason it's one of my most-watched eps but this line makes me SO mad.

like this is so clearly a finger on the scale to make him seem evil. it makes zero sense and is just... making the scene unwatchable.

for better ideas about soullessness, i actually think we should look to season eleven. in season six and season fourteen with soulless sam and soulless jack, things are kind of a clusterfuck. i talked about soulless jack here in preparation for making this post, but suffice to say that the soulless jack arc was even messier than the soulless sam arc - primarily because being soulless simply did not affect jack's characterization that much. the opposite problem to sam, who got his characterization fucked so he could say "muahaha look how evil i am" occasionally.

but in season eleven none of the main characters are soulless, so there's no need for a soulless person to be an "evil version" of a main character. instead, the soulless are amara's victims. they constitute problems, but are primarily indicative of a larger problem.

this is how the episode "thin lizzie" exists. that's my favorite soulless episode, because it tries to actually take seriously what having "no emotions" would mean for its characters. so you have soullessness as tragedy and as heroic trait. because len can no longer experience joy or fear, his life is empty, but he is also fearless and has nothing to lose.

or another interesting idea of soullessness is. deep sigh. jack in the box. because jack's emptiness leads him to be unable to understand the emotions of others, and therefore to be easily tricked because he can't empathize well enough to predict that salmondean are obviously lying to him.

both of these are concepts of "emotionlessness" that don't revolve around "you become an evil genius." which is just.... it's stupid. it's dumb.

anyway all this to say that a more coherent concept of soulless sam primarily modeled on clap your hands if you believe would really improve season six. for me.

anyway that's NOT really answering your question All That was like a prologue to answering your question which was actually about the character drama. anyway the thing about dean in season six is that i really like him. he's my special guy. he's melting down like a reactor core every moment of every day.

and soulless sam is perfect for this because he's making it so much worse.

the thing about dean is that he has just had one of the worst(?) years of his life. first of all sam was dead. for a year. sam was DEAD for a YEAR. dean winchester, noted soul seller, noted enmeshment enthusiast, noted identity lacker, his sam was DEAD!!!!!!! FOR A YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!! i don't think people recognize how crazy it is that sam was dead for a year.

this is like the most important thing. but also: dean tried out being Normal. and he HATED it.

the thing about dean is that he doesn't really think normies are people. he thinks they're cardboard cutouts. sitcom characters. he thinks their life has laugh track and they stop existing when the camera stops rolling.

and dean desperately craves this. he wants it so bad. except then he tries it and. and he still exists. he still has to wake up every morning and put one foot in front of the other. still has to go to sleep and dream of alastair. every excruciating moment of "being dean winchester" still happens and he's still experiencing them. and that's the worst case scenario for dean: he doesn't want to exist. he doesn't want to experience "being dean winchester" because it's awful. being dean winchester is nothing but pain. but becoming a normie didn't actually make "being dean winchester" stop happening to him. he's still suffering. except now.... now his last comfort, the idea that maybe someday he could have a normal life and stop "being dean winchester" for good? that's gone. there's no hope. he's this or he's dead.

like, i made a joke about dean's breakdown in unity being kind of about this, dean being desperately hopeful that killing chuck will make "being dean winchester" stop happening to him. like dean's most desperate wish for his whole life has been to stop existing, in some way or another, death or identity destruction or mindlessness. and to take hope of that away, to ruin his chance to not exist anymore... well, that's going to have an impact. that's a big part of what's going on with dean in season six.

and then there's the less world-endingly tragic element that he just... doesn't like being a normie. this is imo mostly just because he set himself up to fail. lisa is a stranger, she's very nice but she's basically just an idea to him when he moves in with her. it's not clear if they even like each other. he throws himself into this concept role of the Normal White Picket Fence Guy without asking himself if he enjoys any part of it. he keeps drinking - he was on fifty drinks a week in season five and even if he cut that way down, like in half or something, that's still potentially "at least impaired most of the time" levels of alcoholism. and again, sam is dead, but also dean cut himself off from everyone else he knows. he cut off bobby, most relevantly, but also cas, and he's certainly cut off any other hunting-related contacts given that he cut off bobby. he's totally stripped himself of his support network. he doesn't even let himself drive his fucking car. and then of course there's the fact that no matter how traumatizing and horrible hunting was, there were things about it that he was used to and would likely have missed. he didn't have to work a nine-to-five. he could go wherever he wanted. he in general had a kind of freedom that most people don't, even if it was more the "me and bobby mcgee" sort than anything else. and of course: hunting is exciting. it kept him stimulated. with nothing keeping him on his toes, the horror and trauma of the last twenty eight years of his life can hit full force. all he can do is wallow in it. there's no new horror to keep him focused. and also he's just..... used to living an exciting life. i'm sure that he finds normality just, deeply understimulating. which is its own sort of horror.

and in his mind there are only two options for him: be normal, in exactly the way he tried with lisa, or be a hunter, in exactly the way he always has. so when he realizes that being normal in that way is awful.... well. he settles in. this is another way in which his year with lisa strips him of hope for the future: he can no longer imagine any life other than his current one, because the one other option he thought he had turned out to kind of suck.

and then. i've said this before. but oh my god. everyone LIED to dean about sam being back!!!!! for a YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! they lied to him for a YEAR! he grieved sam for a YEAR! and NO ONE told him. dean is surrounded by people who have betrayed him in this horrible way! everyone he loves INCLUDING SAM participated in this betrayal! wouldn't that make you crazy? wouldn't that make you insane? to live a year of life-destroying grief and then find out that that was basically orchestrated by the people you love most? no matter how good their reasons?

and then of course... of course there's the fact that sam is back. sam is back and he's... real. he exists in the world. he's not dean's sainted sammy who exists in his mind, dead and glorified. he's a real person who does things and makes choices. and that's... that's hard. this is once again fantasy bumping up against reality for dean. his relationship to sam has always been tortured but of course while grieving sam, sam exists only in his mind. and part of the problem is obviously that sam came back wrong but also, it's just that absence makes the heart grow fonder. even if sam hadn't been soulless dean just can't really cope with like. conflict in a way that doesn't make him crazy. and of course once again i must remind you that SAM LIED. SAM LIED TO DEAN ABOUT BEING ALIVE. FOR A YEAR. WHICH IS PRIMING DEAN FOR SOME FUCKING CONFLICT.

so you have all of this. and also when dean is like caaaaaaasssss come fix it for me cas is busy. and also dean's destructive anxiety over lisa and his resentment of her. and you put this all in a bottle and you shake it up. dean is NOT a happy camper. he's miserable and he just can't cope. but life keeps going on! things keep moving!

and i think soulless sam, as he is in clap your hands, is like this perfect foil for that. i wouldn't dream of getting rid of him.

but the thing is. that's all in 6x01-6x10. killer stuff, but it is absolutely wrecked by what comes after.

i fucking hate appointment in samarra. it's just not a good episode. even though tessa and death are there!! i love tessa! i love death! can't save appointment in samarra though.

like first of all. dean kills himself in it and it's not even fun. dean just kills himself. you will never be advanced thanatology. but second of all...

okay lets talk about other times dean has saved/fixed sam in some way at least somewhat against his will. i'm going to use three examples: selling his soul, the panic room, and the gadreel thing. the first two, gamble was intimately involved with writing (she wrote crossroad blues AND ahbl 1 AND when the levee breaks! come on) and the other is clearly an intentional retread of appointment in samarra.

in ahbl 2, dean sells his soul because... well because he can't cope without sam. because he has no identity outside of sam. because familial duty is the reason he's alive. because he wants to die. because a moment of loneliness is more terrifying to dean than eternity in hell.

and in season nine dean is in a similar place. obviously he's not killing himself, and he also is less like, absolutely codependent with sam because he has more people in his life now, but he still would have no idea who he is without "look out for your little brother, boy." he still can't imagine a life without sam.

with the panic room, dean is angry at sam, he's absolutely punishing him, but he's still.... there's still duty, there. "at least he dies human" is horrific, but it carries within it some twisted attempt to justify dean's decision with sam's wellbeing. and dean is punishing sam for like, betraying him. dean is deeply hurt because he LOVES sam and he wanted to slide right back into their old life together but little sammy grew up while he wasn't looking, and also REPLACED HIM with that DEMON SLUT. like dean is angry because he WANTS HIS SAMMY BACK.

whereas in appointment in samarra... it honestly mostly just reads like dean thinks soulless sam is a problem he needs to solve. it feels like he would be happy with either outcome (sam going back to normal or Just Straight Up Dying) not because he wants to save sam in any meaningful way but because he wants to get RID of soulless sam. this is the dean who feels like he needs to take a rape shower because he took orders from another man.** he's just sort of lovelessly grasping for control. which i guess you could say is a reasonable direction to take his character, he certainly felt like he was out of control in the first half of the season (hell. just twihard alone is like a massive loss of control for him and has echoing ramifications) and clawing to get it back i guess makes sense. and of course the other times he "saved" sam were also about control of COURSE they were. even ahbl a little. but it's so loveless in appointment in samarra/like a virgin. it creates a dean who is just... hard to like. not because he behaves badly but in a way that makes it just.... hard to care about him.

you could probably easily fix this by adding a theme of nostalgia for the "real sam" integrated throughout the preceding episodes. or like, there's a perfect scene that exists in my heart where immediately after dean beats sam to a bloody pulp in you can't handle the truth, he scoops him up in his arms and rushes him to the hospital because he saw gray matter on the last punch. that creates a kind of tension within dean that makes the horrible things he does to sam more charmingly tragic and less plain awful, even though they remain horrible. you can create a perfect pear wiggler for dean where he behaves monstrously and yet it's all shot through with twisted love. that's something i love to see from dean. the first half of season nine does this fabulously. but as it stands it's not there with soulless sam, and i wish it was. especially when dean is trying to fix him.

just in general broadly i think dean's characterization in the back half of season six is just. a clusterfuck. it makes sense in 6x06 that dean doesn't care about the angel war because he's having his little freakout about sam and nothing matters to him except that. but in 6x19? 6x20? what's the deal? why do sam and dean decide cas is their enemy for trying to save them? it's not like they have a plan. they certainly accepted the angel civil war mattered at the end of 6x10. they just backstab cas for no reason. broadly, the character conflict in the back half of s6 is just fucked. in the front half it makes sense because dean is having one long irrational but understandable temper tantrum due to the horrors already outlined in this post. but in the back half it's just. nothing. to have a good soulless sam arc i think you would have to just throw out the back half. get sam re-ensouled a different way. not have the godstiel arc be Like That. it just needs to go a totally different way, because s6 is a mess afer caged heat.

*although edlund isn't exactly without sin here. mr. Being Soulless Makes You Fuck Good

**and the thing is caged heat is doing something with that in the sense that caged heat is about how dean IS sexually vulnerable, you just Can't Show It On Television. meg is dean's proxy but we are meant to understand that all that Could happen to dean. dean saying he needs to take a rape shower after taking orders is underestimating his own vulnerability to sexual violence. it's notable that brett matthews only wrote two episodes and the other one was twihard. but i digress.

[aingeal98]

The funny thing about the canon Tim fans is that they will do all this . . . then blame Jason and his fans for like Didio's stuff because Jason was reintroduced around the time Didio took over. Like, Jason fans not focusing more on Helena, who hasn't really interacted with Jason, is misogyny but their centering Helena's relationship with Tim over her actual character and their treatment of stuff isn't. The misogynistic writing around Jason is on Jason but misogynistic writing around Tim is on the women around him. This fandom is a kingdom of misogynistic glass houses.

"This fandom is a kingdom of misogynistic glass houses." is so real like every fanon batman and batboy fan will end up accidentally taking from female comic book characters in an attempt to make their 1 dimensional fanon faves more interesting 😭 happens with Jason, with Tim, with Bruce, with every fandom focused on male characters to be quite honest. I don't think fanon stans deliberately steal these traits they just think "wouldn't it be cool if my fave did this" and don't realise that there's a story out there of a female character doing exactly that, which they're of course never going to read because it's a female character.

In terms of canon I'd say the two female characters most harmed by Jason are Starfire in rhato which thankfully didn't stick the way Roy's flanderisation did, and Mia because while her initial confrontation with Jason was very much centered around her, with Jason acting as her villain/narrative foil, batfandom took it and ran with it to the point that there were way too many accounts referencing Mia for the first and only time just to use her own suffering for Jason angst. Which was very nauseating to witness I can't lie! You only care about this female character and her arc about living with HIV because of the headcanons it let's you project onto your male fave? Yeah never mention her again thanks.

(note I'm specifically talking about the general batfam/dc fandom and not Jason fans who've read the comics and have interesting thoughts and analysis on the two of them. The former is more frequent than the latter the same way fanon content is more frequent overall than canon in this fandom.)

And then meanwhile with Tim there's Cass there's Steph there's Cassie there's his treatment of Prue and his girlfriends and just generally pre New 52 if you were writing a story involving Tim and women and it didn't have any sexist bullshit designed to prop him up at the expense of female characters then it was a small miracle. And he's not even the worst offender by a long shot when Bruce exists!

I think the only batboy who's genuinely exempt from this is Duke and in my opinion that's largely because he is not only black but also too visibly Not White to work as the white male power fantasy some writers project on Bruce, Tim, Jason, Dick and even Damian. With Dick they can ignore his Romani heritage with Damian they can vilify his Asian side of the family and throw a bunch of misogynistic writing at Talia but with Duke any bigoted writer who gets to write him isn't going to be able to ignore how visibly black he is in order to project their misogynistic and racist power fantasies on him. And so he gets ignored instead the same way the girls do, because far too many people can't imagine characters having rich internal lives and personalities worth exploring if they don't already fit the pale skinned male character mold.

[little-alien-duck]

I think it was a strong narrative choice on voyager to not show very much of the characters in the alpha quadrant the crew is trying to get back to. the story of voyager is exactly that, it's about voyager, the ship and her crew. the show does exactly what it tells you it sets out to do (show the journey of the ship getting home and absolutely nothing more than that). it's fitting that the narrative is just as cut off from the alpha quadrant as the characters are. the absence of the crew's loved ones from the story works well because harry might describe his parents to tom for example, but the only way tom — and the audience — can picture them is from that description. it's the same reason why it's a strong narrative to choice to have the show end with the ship arriving at earth but not quite there yet, it's about the journey, not the destination.

all that being said, if — gun to my head — I had to write a version of voyager where we see them get back to earth, this is how I would do it.

it has to start well before they make it home. part of the reason it's a strong choice not to have their families appear in the last episode is that while the characters know who they are, we as the audience don't, we have no investment in them outside of how the characters feel about them. to make that reunion meaningful, we have to care about those characters first.

I'd write an episode set probably directly after message in a bottle in the same mode as tng's family. outside of minimal scenes with the voyager cast to fulfill contractual obligations, the episode would be entirely set in the alpha quadrant. the premise of the episode would be one character, most likely owen paris, having to inform the families that the crew is alive but lost. there's so much you could do with those scenes, the joy at knowing they're not dead followed by the immediate grief of knowing they still might never see their relatives again. the way owen knows exactly what they're feeling because his son is out there too. in that episode I'd have the scenes intercut with scenes of voyager, a rare slice of life episode aboard the ship.

from that episode forward, I'd have periodic scenes in the alpha quadrant, especially ones that foil scenes aboard voyager so that the audience could get to know the characters as individuals outside of just "janeway's mom" or "chakotay's sister" so that when the reunion happens in the finale, the audience is equally invested in the interactions from both sides. a character who exists only to be another character's mom is boring, but a character who happens to be another character's mom is interesting, and I think the only way to really get the pay off of having those characters reunite is for the audience to be invested in both sides.

the problem with this whole thing is that something is lost in widening the scope of voyager, a show with an intentionally narratively limited scope, and that to develop these characters in the alpha quadrant you'd have to take time away from stories in the delta quadrant, but imo, if you're going to do it, this is the way to go.

[undead-moth]

I would love to read more about the themes and tropes and storytelling tools you notice the writers making use of when writing sydcarmy. I just love thinking about this show and reading other people’s takes especially when it’s people who appreciate good writing and aren’t just disappointed their ship didn’t jump on each other the first chance they got.

Hi. Thank you for your ask. I think there are stories in which it narratively makes sense for two characters to get together right away, or to get together with little development - it all just depends on what the structure of the narrative is, and what the writer's intentions are, and ultimately what the relationship is being used to say - but it wouldn't have made sense narratively to canonize SydCarmy this season based on the narrative structure The Bear is using. This is true whether you're looking at it from an in-universe point of view, or from an out-of-universe point of view.

In-universe: Carmy has just gone through a devastating breakup at the exact same time he has opened a restaurant. The trauma he endured with the NYC head chef has been refreshed in full. He's also quit smoking. He not only has all the usual pressures of starting a new restaurant on his back, but he also already owes Cicero so much money. He is Syd's boss, and her idol, making their relationship somewhat unbalanced. I don't think someone in this situation in real life would be jumping into a new relationship with someone they work with every day.

Out-of-universe: The writers spent all of season 2 developing a romance between Carmy and Claire. This wasn't for no reason. If Carmy had shrugged off their breakup, not only would that have weakened the integrity of season 2, but if he had also gotten in a relationship with Syd right away, Carmy's relationship with Syd wouldn't have rung true. We would have a hard time believing that there's any real depth in his feelings for her, or any real meaning to their relationship, if he was able to get over Claire so quickly. Who's to say Syd isn't a rebound? Who's to say she'll be different?

His heartbreak also has a narrative purpose. Claire is a narrative foil to Syd. Claire represents Carmy's "dream girl," but she is not treated either by the narrative nor him as a person. She's more of an idea, and as a result, his love for her is based on a fantasy of her.

Carmy's heartbreak now is going to be useful for us to reference later when he is pursuing Syd. Based on the story structure, I believe he will face heartbreak with Syd before he enters a relationship with her, but regardless, we'll be able to compare how he looks at Syd to how he looked at Claire, and the difference will be stark when his heartbreak is for someone he sees and loves as a real person, and not as a fantasy. Without the ability to compare how Carmy is with Syd to how he was with Claire, it is more difficult to understand the significance of Carmy's love for Syd. That isn't to say there aren't ways - there are many - but I believe the way they chose was with Claire, and it's an extremely common way for writers to convey how a character feels for their intended love interest. First pair them with someone they think they want, and when that ends, pair them with the character they're actually intended for. Allow audiences to compare notes.

Anyway, I want to be able to offer you more, but I don't want to without rewatching the show. Only season 3 is fresh in my mind. I was already going to rewatch them anyway, and when I'm done, I'll add to this post and tag you.

Thanks again for asking.

[nalyra-dreaming]

It's so validating to see the show (and Jacob!) confirm that yes, Armand has definitely tampered with Louis' memories to some degree. Obviously we still don't know how deep the mental trickery goes, what his motives were, how much consent Louis gave etc, but either way I'm glad the show had the guts to go there. I never understood why this idea was controversial to anyone, or why non book-readers were so desperate to defend Armand's honor when they clearly knew nothing about him - they'll never admit it now, but imho they really thought he was going to be Lestat's wholesome narrative foil and that Loumand would be the palatable, "soft" pairing. And now they're writing the same type of boring "callout" posts about Loumand as they were about Loustat during season 1. Sucks to be them, I guess! (the only positive difference is I haven't seen any hate directed towards Assad, they don't seem to be conflating him with his character as much as they did with Sam, so that's nice at least!)

Let's hope it stays that way.

And yes, I mean... you probably know my "rant" post... this has been hinted at, since forever. And it really was... something else to be called things for simply pointing out -.-

But I am also very, very relieved for a) the show to make it crystal clear, but also for b) JACOB to put it out there so plainly in the episode insider.

It was a betrayal. A big one. Everything he knows can be pulled into question now. His mind has been "edited". He cannot know right from wrong memory now... and we cannot know what of the narrative is true either.

It's all up in the air. 80-90% correct. But the rest... the rest.

I bet there will be another big shift with the revisit of episode 5 incoming. And I bet that episode insider will be interesting, too, lol.