#you want complex characters?

[mamuzzy]

I tried to think about more about my Nulls with ASPD blurbs or after a bit more consideration, a bit more broad picture of Cluster B personality disorders (antisocial, borderline, histrionic, narcisisstic), and my inability to separate the Nulls from Kal Skirata when talking about them, and it's not just my bias because I love them with all my heart.

It's because it's all tied together. Kal himself is mentally ill too right from the start. My theory is Kal is on the Cluster B spectrum too.

Narcissisctic spectrum because of the grandiosity of plans, his self-importance of his plans, the savior complex: he has to be of the center of the great plan of rescue of the clones, because this is the only way he can redeem himself of his previous mistakes. Remember when Ordo destroyed the datachips? He wasn't devastated because now there wasn't any means to save the clones from rapid-aging. He was devastated because now HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO KNOW NOW WITH HIMSELF. HE was purposeless. Kind of contradictory that his purpose of his life was about entirely of someone else, but it wasn't entirely selfless. He just can't be a bad guy of his own story, but he has to be a martyr. It won't work without it.

Kal can't be a bad guy. He just can't be a bad guy of his story. If he was, that would mean, EVERYTHING he did in life was wrong, was evil, everything was his fault, was his fault alone, including his parents death (which is insane they died in bombing but there is no logic in survivor's guilt), his fault that he was all alone, his fault that he was abused, his fault that he didn't know better, he fault that his wife and kids left him (kinda yeah) and now his fault that the clones don't have a chance for longer life. He is a bad guy in everyone's story. But it's okay. It's okay. He just have to create another personality, explain himself, why Ordo's is still the perfect little angel in the whole world who can never do wrong to cope the loss, because being angry at him is not an option, he can't be angry at him, angry himnonononononoangrynohecan'tbeangrynothatwouldtriggernonotriggertriggernofuckingtriggerfestbackandfort and move on and find another way to achieve this goal and never give up. <-And there is a nice little bpd mentality for you, mushrooms and gentlefairies. (probably there was a little bit a chanelling here, but I think there is a reason I meowmeow this miserable wet cat)

Personality disorders have symptoms during childhood too, IN FACT most of the reasons that are not genetic, start in during childhood due to societal and environmental causes, parental neglection, abuse, contradicting upbringing, emotional repression, traumas.

We saw the Nulls as children but not too much, but we barely seen anything about their later cadet years we have only shown a few mentions through dialogues, narratives, and because often is from the memories of Kal Skirata, people often dismiss it like Kal says so it must be untrue and ableist.

BUT.

What we actually saw is Kal's childhood and training!!! And traumas often carries through to another generation...

Vode, if you enjoyed my previous blurbs you are going to love my next one about him. Before I actually talk about Nulls and their Favorite Person and another topics like amorality, and aggression, I really should talk about PERSONALITY itself, and I think Kal Skirata is a beautiful guinea pig for that.

[biggest-gaudiest-patronuses]

i vote that next year instead of reading Dracula we do a Jeeves & Wooster Book Club. those two never got the rabid tumblr shipping fandom they deserved (disqualified for the sheer technicality of being published a century too soon). we must correct this injustice

[a-dope-fiend]

It irritates me alot when people say that making medic more compassionate is ''missing the point of his character'' when he is literally shown to be in the comics.... did you miss the part where he showed concern for both sniper and miss pauling's well being in comic 5 and 6.

His actions are a combination of genuine attachment + clinical interest and these things do not cancel out one another. He is always pushing boundaries and going against the grain and i think this is what led to him losing his license in the first place. He felt stifled by the rules imposed on him.

He is shown to be extremely passionate so it makes sense that he would use his endless fascination with medicine as a way to show his affection. He loves his friends so he will find a way to make them borderline indestructible. Malpractice is his love language.

[egophiliac]

redesigning my headcanon for Sebek's parents, based on important new information (SCALES)

(you can't see it but they're both wearing crocs)

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Bros before Ho(oh my god is that Hanguang-Jun?)

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[yearnerspermit]

I’ll be honest the way some people talk about this show makes it sound less like they’re interested in the messy nature of people failing and remorse and guilt and atonement and redemption and regret and the capacity to change and the inability to undo what’s been done and unforgivable actions and maybe forgivable people and how you face all of it and continue to live and endure. and more like they want to be sitting in that jury, determining who’s guilty or not guilty, deciding a sentence, and walking away satisfied in the result being final

[sebille]

Oh the little change in his expression

[birdy-babe]

I’m 100% sure this is already general knowledge but it’s my first time thinking about it and I’m kinda obsessed-

Bc of S2 Ep3 Exs and Ohs we get a small glimpse into Moxxie and Blitzø’s backstory, where we find out that they meet RIGHT after Moxxie’s impromptu “break up” with Chaz

And then based on the trailer we got a glimpse of what is supposedly (and in my opinion, most likely) Blitzo and Millie’s first meeting, based on how young they look and the fact that Millie has long hair.

So…

Does that mean Blitzø introduced Moxxie and Millie?

I don’t know why but I’m obsessed with the idea that Blitzo introduced them. I think it’s such an adorable plot line <3 I love the idea of them both being friends individually with Blitzø before they became a couple.

It would also describe why he’s so obsessed with the two of them. Maybe because he’s so happy to see their love bloom, knowing he helped get it there <3

(But maybe it’s also because he had to sit back and watch them get the thing he’s always wanted most in life: unconditional love. He looks at them sometimes and just thinks “why not me? When will it be my turn?”)

[s0fter-sin]

soap's whole deal being sniper and demolitions gets me going bc on the surface they sound so different but when you get into it, you realise it's bc soap's smart

sniping is all math; calculating distances and wind interference and bullet drop. something i think people overlook is he was listed as a sniper first so it can be implied that he's better at it than demolitions. he does more sniping in both campaigns than demolitions work; in capture or kill, ghost specifically calls on him to take down the aq snipers

and demolitions is math with a hit of chemistry; knowing what mixes with what, knowing how much to use, recognising environmental factors and adjusting accordingly. it's not just about the boom; so much work goes into contained/ planned explosions. especially when having enough power for a breacher charge and not bringing down the whole building is the difference between mission success and failure

the chemical bombs he makes in alone can't just be any old cleaners, they have to have the correct reaction to each other; he just knew off the top of his head what would mix with what to create what reaction. he would also potentially have to recognise them by sight/smell bc they would’ve been written in spanish

soap would also have to know architecture; recognising structural integrity and weak points so he knows exactly where to plant a charge to bring it down and how it'll come down

he has an incredible soldier's mind people just forget that bc he's sociable which itself is a skill

we know he tends to buck against orders he doesn't agree with like when he pushes back against ghost in capture or kill and shepherd when he tells them to release hassan

he gets closer to people and sees if he can trust them and that's when he follows them without question. really think about how he talks to alejandro and rudy; he asks about their home and alejandro's family and rudy's relationship with him. those aren't questions you ask a stranger after a few hours of knowing them. that's not even touching on his relationship with ghost

he also deliberately brings people of higher ranks down to his level; talking informally with ghost and giving him a shoulder punch, addressing alejandro (a colonel!!) by his first name and rudy by his nickname despite literally just meeting them. he personalises all of them and it’s in direct opposition to the reason most characters do that; it’s not due to insubordination or lack of respect, the more he respects and trusts someone, the more casual he is with them

he digs into people; he wants to know what makes them tick and that determines if he can one, trust them and two, follow their orders. once he decides that, he's the ultimate soldier; he bleeds loyalty which makes him vicious when that loyalty is taken for granted

he isn't naive or bubbly or insecure; he's an incredibly smart and aware soldier. he's aggressive and bloodthirsty and loyal and intuitive and i love him so much

[gunstellations]

In the world I love

_

In a different world

[ladyofthevalley]

People who don’t understand the Arya and Sansa sibling bond obviously didn’t have WWE style brawls in the middle of the living room floor with their sibling.

You can hate each other, say heinous things, full on battle until first blood.

But you’re still siblings,

all the Arya-antis and Sansa-antis are placing too much weight on the events of kings landing.

[smhalltheurlsaretaken]

y'all need to get a grip. you blab all day about how much you hate bigots and hateful people and how evil it is to dehumanize anyone and then you turn around and say "kys" and "i think [x] should all just kill themselves" and other disgusting, violent and childish trash

so many people on here are just full of hatred and vitriol and turn into frenzied sharks anytime the target 'deserves it' and they think they can get away with it and not be called bad people. then they whine about how sad it is that we can't all just get along and if only all the evil people in the world would stop doing evil things wouldn't that be nicer

you're just as vicious, hypocritical and fanatically puritanical as the caricature you have made in your minds of the people you think you have nothing in common with. if you've ever told someone, ANYONE to kill themselves you're not advocates of justice, you're not artisans of peace, and you certainly don't have any moral high ground that would allow you to pass judgment on others

[rhaenicentric]

something about rhaenyra and alicent being each other's most cherished wound.

bristling when someone else tries to share in their hate and misery for each other, because "she is my pain and mine alone. no one has cut this deep and drawn this much blood as we have done for each other. no one but us will ever truly understand it. only the both of us have a right to the despair we cause each other."

whether their hands intertwine to touch the flowers that grow under a weirwood tree or the cool metal of a blade drenched in blood, they echo: "i will live in you in any way i can. if i cannot be the one you love the most, i will be the one you hate the most."

(but isn't that almost, if not, the same thing?)

[ofbreathandflame-archive]

With the rise of booktok/booktwt, there's been this weird movement against literary criticism. It's a bizarre phenomenon, but this uptick in condemnation of criticism is so stifling. I understand that with the rise of these platforms, many people are being reintroduced into the habit of reading, which is why at the base level, I understand why many 'popular' books on booktok tend to be cozier.

The argument always falls into the 'this book means too much to me' or 'let people enjoy things,' which is rhetoric I understand -- at least fundamentally. But reading and writing have always been conduits for criticism, healthy natural criticism. We grow as writers and readers because of criticism. It's just so frustrating to see arguments like "how could you not like this character they've been the x trauma," or "why read this book if you're not going to come out liking it," and it's like...why not. That has always been the point of reading. Having a character go through copious amounts of trauma does not always translate to a character that's well-crafted. Good worldbuilding doesn't always translate to having a good story, or having beautiful prose doesn't always translate into a good plot.

There is just so much that goes into writing a story other than being able to formulate tropable (is that a word lol) characters. Good ideas don't always translate into good stories. And engaging critically with the text you read is how we figure that out, how we make sure authors are giving us a good craft. Writing is a form of entertainment too, and just like we'd do a poorly crafted show, we should always be questioning the things we read, even if we enjoy those things.

It's just werd to see people argue that we shouldn't read literature unless we know for certain we are going to like it. Or seeing people not be able to stand honest criticism of the world they've fallen in love with. I love ASOIAF -- but boy oh boy are there a lot of problems in the story: racial undertones, questionable writing decisions, weird ness overall. I also think engaging critically helps us understand how an author's biases can inform what they write. Like, HP Lovecraft wrote eerie stories, he was also a raging racist. But we can argue that his fear of PoC, his antisemitism, and all of his weird fears informed a lot of what he was writing. His writing is so eerie because a lot of that fear comes from very real, nasty places. It's not to say we have to censor his works, but he influences a lot of horror today and those fears, that racial undertone, it is still very prevalent in horror movies today. That fear of the 'unknown,'

Gone with the Wind is an incredibly racist book. It's also a well-written book. I think a lot of people also like confine criticism to just a syntax/prose/technical level -- when in reality criticism should also be applied on an ideological level. Books that are well-written, well-plotted, etc., are also -- and should also -- be up for criticism. A book can be very well-written and also propagate harmful ideologies. I often read books that I know that (on an ideological level), I might not agree with. We can learn a lot from the books we read, even the ones we hate.

I just feel like we're getting to the point where people are just telling people to 'shut up and read' and making spaces for conversation a uniform experience. I don't want to be in a space where everyone agrees with the same point. Either people won't accept criticism of their favorite book, or they think criticism shouldn't be applied to books they think are well written. Reading invokes natural criticism -- so does writing. That's literally what writing is; asking questions, interrogating the world around you. It's why we have literary devices, techniques, and elements. It's never just taking the words being printed at face value.

You can identify with a character's trauma and still understand that their badly written. You can read a story, hate everything about it, and still like a character. As I stated a while back, I'm reading Fourth Wing; the book is terrible, but I like the main character. The worldbuilding is also terrible, but the author writes her PoC characters with respect. It's not hard to acknowledge one thing about the text, and still find enough to enjoy the book. And authors grow when we're honest about what worked and what didn't work. Shadow and Bone was very formulaic and derivative at points, but Six of Crows is much more inventive and inclusive. Veronica Roth's Carve the Mark had some weird racial problems, but Chosen Ones was a much better book in terms of representation. Percy Jackson is the same way. These writers grow, not just by virtue of time, but because they were critiqued and listened to that critique. C.S. Lewis and Tolkien always publically criticized each other's work. Zora Neale Hurston and Langston Hughes had a legendary friendship and back and forth with one another's works which provides so much insight into the conversations black authors and creatives were having.

Writing has always been about asking questions; prodding here and there, critiquing. It has always been a conversation, a dialogue. I urge people to love what they read, and read what they love, but always ask questions, always understand different perspectives, and always keep your mind open. Please stop stifling and controlling the conversations about your favorite literature, and please understand that everyone will not come out with the same reading experience as you. It doesn't make their experience any less valid than yours.

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

He was just being a silly little guy!

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[k8lynjoy]

I genuinely want to know what show the people who say that Aang never respected Katara are watching. "Aang never let Katara feel anything other than what he wanted her to feel" "He idealized her" "He didn't care about her feelings" "He didn't support her the way she supported him". WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THIS FROM??? That's a rhetorical question because I already know what episodes/moments they're using to make those assertions (The Southern Raiders and the kiss in Ember Island Players), and even then, THEY'RE WRONG.

Let's start with TSR. This episode gets so misinterpreted it's not even funny. First off, Aang was never even upset with Katara in this episode, he's just warning her against killing someone??? He never gets mad at her or berates her. He just talks to her with a level head??? He openly acknowledges that he knows and understands how much rage and pain Katara is in, and he never tells her that she shouldn't feel it, he just advises her not to act rashly because of it??? Where is the lack of respect? Where is he ignoring her feelings or getting upset with her for not acting the way he wants her to? He lets her take Appa and even tells her that he understands that this is a journey she needs to take and supports her doing so, he just doesn't want her to kill someone. Honestly Aang shows more respect for Katara by knowing who she is as a person and not enabling her in her revenge than Zuko who is only going on this trip with her so that she'll forgive him, not because he actually cares that she's upset over the death of her mother (and this is not Zuko slander before people take it as such, I love Zuko, but it's not even subtext that his motivations in this episode are selfish and not about Katara).

As for the kiss in EIP, yes, it was not okay. Yes, it was a mistake. Yes, he shouldn't have done it after Katara laid a clear boundary, but he recognizes that immediately. After Katara- rightfully- gets upset with him, he gets upset with himself. We also see that he never repeats that mistake again and is fully okay with letting Katara lead after that. Which is why it's Katara who initiates the final kiss on the balcony. And if you still don't think he learned anything from it, he starts to ask for her consent in the comics before kissing her, showing that he absolutely DID grow from that mistake. So, we're really going to let one moment where a 12-year-old boy made a mistake dictate the entire show and negate everything that came before it??? That's coocoo banana's behavior.

I also think that those assertions are completely baseless because when does Aang idealize Katara? When does he hate her rage? When does he not support her? Is it when he laughed with her after she stole from pirates? Or in that same episode where he constantly reaffirms her skills as a waterbender- first by saying that he's able to pick it up so easily because she's a great teacher and then later when he refers to her as a waterbender which makes her so fucking happy? Is it when he gets so upset that Pakku refuses to teach Katara how to waterbend that he tries to walk away from his own waterbending training? Is it when he goes behind Pakku's back to teach her anyway? Or when he stands by actively cheering her on when she's raging against the patriarchy and fights Pakku? Is it when he calls her Sifu Katara because she expressed that he referred to Toph that way but not her? Is it when he helped her commit ecoterrorism and told her she was a hero for helping the people in that Fire Nation village? Is it when he holds her after she breaks down because she learned how to bloodbend? Is it when he comforts her after Jet's death? Is it... you get the point, don't you?

Aang recognizing Katara as someone who is strong and capable is not him idealizing her. Him not enabling her committing murder is not him hating when she feels rage. Aang actively supports Katara's rage on multiple occasions, he just doesn't enable her when he knows she's acting out of character. If you don't ship Kataang, that's fine, but please don't make up baseless accusations to try and tear them down just because you're mad that a ship that had no basis in canon (potential is not evidence) wasn't canon.