#their similarities/contrast would manifest itself in their Actual Interactions. even if it's in a flawed manner

[iridescentscarecrow]

do you think fujimoto is going in the direction where we'll see asa and denji in a relationship. it just doesn't sit right with me. i think they might become very good friends but them in a relationship is so off to me despite how much their dynamic works. it just doesnt feel like something fujimoto would do. what do you think

their dynamic feels off because we can't ever imagine fjmt giving denji a healthy endgame relationship /s.

no but for real this time, yep, anon i get you. i think this mostly stems from how their relationship itself is Set Up at least so far and i think it'll be a lot more interesting with time.

umm. to explain: fjmt's style of writing is not only relational but also one of active sides (characters) feeding into passive mains which is why part 2's deuteragonist based plot is so Interesting to me. i mean asa and denji parallel each other rather organically with how they view desires and normality, with their twin connect to intimacy and ambition. it's really quite blatant but i think where asaden hasn't established itself yet is the interaction of these values seen Directly in their interactions.

if you consider something like denreze, you'd find that both their parallels and the recognition of their mirrorship informs their interactions throughout the bomb devil arc. it's wonderfully raw and Very Real because it's the theme of identity (that carries over into part 2), there's that implicit Awareness of the other side from both reze and denji later on.

in part 2, identity is still pivotal but the quality of the asaden interactions so far lies in their relative ignorance of the other. they challenge each other inwardly but not Outwardly; you see them juxtaposed but you don't see them grapple with this juxtaposition. it's still ridiculously cute but i struggle to link this current cuteness to What Will Happen because i don't think fjmt writes conclusions to relationships like that. there's a lot more to come and i think we'd see their dynamic shift quite intensely when they do end up uncovering each other's identities but right now their interactions are rather a channel for their Own Desires rather than an entangling of that Desire in the other.

i can't hope to predict What exactly fjmt would end up doing but i do think all this set up is for a reason and i'm anticipating some sort of catharsis at Some Point which would make me invest in them a bit more :3.

#i would argue that this confrontation/mirrorship is in its beginning stages in yoshiden from yoshidas side and i can see a #a seed of it in asaden but p2 isnt Complete unlike p1 (cough cough. is a denreze shipper) #think whats important here is that i REALLY dont ship characters based on endgames or tropes but rather how interesting the realisation of #their similarities/contrast would manifest itself in their Actual Interactions. even if it's in a flawed manner #but i hope i pinpointed the source of your Issue with them anon? thanks so much for the ask #chainsaw man #csm #crow.asks #denji #asa mitaka #csm spoilers #csm meta #do i see them in an eventual relationship? i dont know. i dont actually know but if yes i doubt its in the manner the fandom is envisioning

[pilferingapples]

Tell me more about Marius and Montparnasse being mirror images of each other :3c

Since you ask, Nonny! But this will be a Long Post:

they really do get the same physical description: 

Marius was, at this epoch, a handsome young man, of medium stature, with thick and intensely black hair, a lofty and intelligent brow, well-opened and passionate nostrils...As his mouth was charming, his lips the reddest, and his teeth the whitest in the world, his smile corrected the severity of his face, as a whole. At certain moments, that pure brow and that voluptuous smile presented a singular contrast. ( 3.6.1, Hapgood translation)

A lugubrious being was Montparnasse. Montparnasse was a child; less than twenty years of age, with a handsome face, lips like cherries, charming black hair, the brilliant light of springtime in his eyes; he had all vices and aspired to all crimes. 3.7.3

--both got that Snow White thing going on:P   Hugo doesn’t bring in physical descriptions a lot in Les Mis; when he does, it’s for reasons beyond just painting a visual--generally to evoke a Type and/or some hefty Symbolism (always Some Symbolism, tbh, it’s Hugo).

More importantly, though, Hugo sets up Marius and Montparnasse as being different sides of the same virtue/vice.  Marius gets chapters talking about Heroic he is and how his poverty actually improves his nature because Marius overcomes it by working . Montparnasse, by contrast, is led into a life of violent crime because he wants to be idle.

There is like... a World of Concepts to delve into there, but in contrast with Montparnasse , it’s clear what specific fate Marius is being saved from by his time of poverty. He is, by choosing to refuse either debt or the safety of his family wealth, essentially refusing to become the kind of wealthy asshole that Bamatabois and Tholomyes are. It’s a life that would be very easy for Marius to have-- a life that Gillenormand is even sort of pushing him towards, though Gillenormand would doubtless find Tholomyes sorts to be impossibly dull and classless. It’s a life Montparnasse is willing to kill for , literally. And it’s a nice damn life! --If you don’t mind being the absolute worst sort of person, a person who cares for nothing but image, and who lives at a self-imposed distance from everyone else; someone who helps no one and wouldn’t know where to start if they wanted to, but hurts a lot of people and never cares, because caring is ever so uncouth.

Hugo really does see idleness as massively dangerous, at best--a soul-destroying thing. It’s portrayed as an injustice that Valjean can’t get work , not just that he just can’t have food because Humans Need Food. Part of the wrong Tholomyes commits against Fantine is taking her away from the habit of work ; it’s an important part of her Hope Spot in M-sur-M that she gets to enjoy Honest Work again, and earning her living by labor. To force Idleness on to another, or lead them into a Lack Of Work, is treated in  Les Mis as a moral wrong. For working people to not have work available is a condemnation of the system!  Again, it’s not about money (though Hugo definitely thinks work should pay enough to live on), the work itself is treated as something essential. For someone to choose idleness for themselves by that logic is...what, practically moral self-harming?,and a kind of deep depravity.

(Hugo does not like this ideal of the dandy. He does like flâneurs, though! That’s definitely something I want to get into more later, given how often the two are conflated....)

Anyway, Montparnasse is damned by the exact vice that Marius saves himself by avoiding--a vice that is, in Hugo’s moral universe, a very  big deal (as I try and fail to reckon with here).  This makes Montparnasse the crucial Example A for Hugo’s insistence on the valorization of Marius’  decision to work through his poverty! Work redeems Marius from the dangers of Idleness--and for Hugo, those are real and desperate dangers, that really do lead to crime.

BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE!

Even before the Gorbeau raid, Marius is always vulnerable to the damnation of Idleness. He’s prone to slip from thinking into daydreaming; he veers away from work when he thinks it might cut into his independence and Reverie Time. The narrative is not entirely negative about this with Marius, but it is  treated as a potential weakness-- something fine while, and only while, it’s kept in check by his habits of work and thought.

Because, post-Gorbeau mansion, Marius  really does  start to fall to the Demon of Idleness!  He stops working altogether; he goes into debt,  Gasp!; he loses the habit of work , he loses focus, he spirals into depressions and goes into pointless, directionless obsession with Cosette and starts spending all his time in The Field of The Lark, a field famous, though Marius doesn’t know it, for being the site of a murder .  Murder most Romantic, yet, committed over a passion. Marius is, at this point, symbolically mixing the role of lover and killer; as Montparnasse also does, rather less symbolically. 

And hey, why is Marius spiraling into The Hell of Idleness? 

Because of A Girl. Or rather, because of the Ideal Future he’s projecting off his interactions with that girl.  What was the Start of Darkness for Montparnasse, again? 

The first grisette who had said to him: “You are handsome!” had cast the stain of darkness into his heart, and had made a Cain of this Abel. (3.7.3, Hapgood)

Now obviously the grisette who complimented Montparnasse isn’t responsible for his murders, any more than Cosette is responsible for Marius pining his life away in The Field of Dramatic Murder Symbolism. I don’t think Hugo means to genuinely blame the women for the men’s behavior at all-- but both Marius and Montparnasse do  start their downward slide in pursuit of the elaborate head-canons about their own futures that a woman’s attention inadvertently sparked.

BUT WAIT !! THERE’S MORE! 

Marius and Montparnasse are both romantic interests for Eponine (and both are dead ends, with Marius representing a healthy future that she can’t have and Montparnasse representing the doomed future she doesn’t want). Both of them try (ineffectually) to act as guides and friends to Gavroche. Both of them do feel a certain duty to Thenardier, not so much for his own sake--neither of them owe him squat-- as because of an existing sense of duty to others. Both of them do  have a sense of loyalty to their friends, -- just as they share a potentially damning vice in Idleness, they both share a real virtue in their sense of loyalty and duty to comrades.  Note that this is a real  sense of duty and loyalty for Montparnasse as well as for Marius--he really does take a risk to free the rest of the Patron Minette!  But Montparnasse has given that loyalty to horrible people for a horrible cause. 

Also-- while they do  both have a  real sense of loyalty to their groups (groups where they are the junior members), they are also both prone to getting distracted from those friends and their goals by romantic interests-- Marius may be far more serious in his love for Cosette than Montparnasse in his flirting with Eponine, but they do both have this tendency to romantic distraction! That Marius, at the barricade, overcomes his to take his post again , while Montparnasse toooootally flubs his role in P-M’s Gorbeau scheme because it’s Flirting Time, is another manifestation of the Curse of Idleness, really. 

So yeah: Two dark-haired fresh-faced young Romantic beauty types, sharing in common a (potentially) Fatal Flaw and a (potentially) saving Core Virtue, sharing similar relationships to their relative social groups and  to specific characters. Both Very Good At Violence; both set into a new course of life by the sudden awareness of their potential future, prompted by a woman’s attention. --And I didn’t even get into the importance they both put on presentation (though in very different ways, again reflecting their crucial divergence)!   

Montparnasse is who Marius might easily have become if he’d been willing to Coast on his money and status-- oh, Marius would have been a murderer in the way Tholomyes and Bamatabois are murderers, then, not likely the hands-on style Montparnasse has (though then again, Marius is  prone to passionate overreaction...) .  But, as the narrative links between Montparnasse and those two emphasize, it’s really not such a great difference.  Montparnasse is the shadow haunting Marius, a reminder of why his dedication to work and independence is so crucial. And the ways Montparnasse and Marius diverge from each other are a constant, complicated combo of choices and circumstances changing very similar people into two utterly different lives. 

#Montparnasse talk #Marius talk #long post #like...1500 words #RIP me #and also your dashes #Antithesis in Les Mis #Hey Nonny Nonny #answereds

[jackiestarsister]

My thoughts on “The Rise of Skywalker”

I just saw The Rise of Skywalker with my friend @ewoking-on-sunshine. I’m still processing it, but I have many thoughts. Spoilers below the cut.

It’s not a perfect movie. But I enjoyed it and am, for the most part, satisfied. All I wanted was for it to be enjoyable and make sense and bring some resolution to the story. I think it succeeded overall.

I feel like I can’t complain too much, because the biggest things I wanted to happen did happen: we got Ben’s redemption, a freaking Reylo kiss, and Ben smiling. We even got beautiful things I wasn’t expecting, like Han’s scene, and the revelation that Leia trained as a Jedi for a time. I think it can stand on its own as a story in itself, though The Last Jedi may remain my favorite installment as far as story craft.

Here are my miscellaneous thoughts and opinions:

~ Much of it feels like fan fiction. Whether that is good or bad, I’m not sure. It could just be that the fans were particularly good at predicting possible developments and the general direction of the story.

~ Nothing was revealed about Kylo’s style/method of governing, or whether he did anything to expand the First Order’s power as Rey predicted they would do in TLJ

~ Palpatine’s return could have been set up better

~ The symbolism and significance of Kylo killing his abuser is changed, if not completely ruined, since Snoke was Palpatine’s puppet, and Kylo seems to enter Palpatine’s service after learning that he was the one who manipulated him throughout his life. Maybe Kylo thought if he refused he wouldn’t be able to get away alive?

~ Palpatine’s plans are as confusing as ever. Just how much he controlled, what he was aware of, and what his true intentions were is unclear. In particular,  I’m confused about the fact that Palpatine made Snoke, who seemed ignorant of Rey’s origins and told Kylo to kill her, and the fact that Palpatine told Kylo to kill Rey when it turned out he wanted her to come and kill him. Were Snoke and/or Palpatine using reverse psychology in giving Kylo those orders?

~ Palpatine probably had the means to prolong and/or restore Padme’s life the whole time Vader was trying to find a way to do so

~  It is unclear whether Rey ever told anyone about her bond with Kylo or how he killed Snoke (which is pretty relevant information for the Resistance).

~  It’s unclear whether Rey and Kyko have seen or felt each other through the Force at all in the past year. Each movie shows several Force bond connections in a short period of time (one or two days each), and that would add up to a lot in a year, so I’m guessing they didn’t have any for that interim. It seems that although Rey closed the door, Kylo opens it. I don’t really like what that implies.

~ The beginning revealed so much and moved from one set of characters to another so quickly that I wondered whether the story was going to continue following the hero/heroine’s journey(s). Eventually it did, but it felt like the strangest beginning for a Star Wars movie, especially compared to the brilliant opening sequence of The Force Awakens.

~ Rey and Poe’s bickering was fun to watch

~ They did pretty well using those bits of Carrie Fisher footage and making Leia’s death play a role in the story. I’m sure if Fisher were still alive they would have had more justice for Leia.

~ I wish Rose had played a bigger part in the story, and that her relationships with other characters had been clarified and explored more.

~ I wish Ben had interacted with other members of the Resistance. He and Finn had so many parallels in their arcs, and the two of them actually had a couple scenes together, but they were always distant, with Finn watching as Rey interacted with Ben.

~ What was Finn going to tell Rey? What was their relationship about when it came down to it? They had such a wonderful dynamic and intertwined arcs in The Force Awakens, but in this installment it felt like they were running parallel to each other.

~ Giving Poe a shady past as a spice smuggler contradicts his canon backstory revealed in Before the Awakening by Greg Rucka.

~ Hux’s death was disappointingly anticlimactic. Seemed like a waste of his character. I’m not sure how I feel about the twist of him being the spy. He seemed so much less the crazed man who fired Starkiller or the calculating menace who considered killing an unconscious Kylo. Before TROS, Hux’s motivations seemed more political and ideological, a contrast to Kylo’s motives which seemed personal.

~ In what capacity did Pryce serve Palpatine in the previous war?

~ The fact that Rey is a Palpatine raises all kinds of questions about her family. There could be a whole trilogy about what kind of relationship Sheev and his child had. I wonder if the mother of his child was Mara Jade or someone like her who worked closely with him. But the mention of cloning and other strange techniques for making or passing on life makes me wonder if his child was even “natural” or somehow made.

~ Rey’s Dark Side heritage makes her affinity with the light side even more ironic and miraculous. Or maybe the irony is that someone as dark as Palpatine could come from such an idyllic utopia as Naboo. Maybe they are trying to show that it is our choices, not our origins, that define us.

~ The fact that Rey is descended from a powerful established character takes away from the idea that Rey represented for me and many others, that a great person can come from humble, unimportant origins.

~ Finn’s arc was opposite of predicted stormtrooper rebellion. The stormtrooper paradox still holds.

~ The hunt for Sith clues doesn’t make sense. It makes even less sense than the search for Luke in TFA, which was full of holes and unexplained coincidences.

~ The way Ben stands on the Death Star looking out at the horizon was 100% Byronic hero, but also similar to Luke’s posture when looking at the Tatooine suns.

~ Seeing Kylo talking to Han and Rey talking to Luke underscored how Kylo and Rey are co-protagonists.

~ How long did Ben stay at the Death Star ruins contemplating his and Rey’s situation? Apparently long enough for Rey to go to Ahch-To, talk to Luke, and go to Exegol, because he arrives there later than her. Time and distance in these movies have never made much sense, but I wonder if there might be some deleted scenes involving Kylo at this point. Did he realize he had lost control of the First Order? Did he ever think about ordering them not to follow Palpatine?

~ Regarding minor pilot characters: Happy to see Wedge Antilles back, sad to see Snap Wexley die.

~ Poe could have had better resolution for his arc as an emerging leader

~ Finn tries once again to sacrifice himself despite what Rose said to him after he tried to do that in TLJ. (While I don’t think it was necessary, Ben’s death was in keeping with her words because he died to save what he loved.)

~ We finally got a Reylo music theme! If I’m not mistaken, it had the Force theme sort of underlying it but there were other things going on too. I look forward to hearing the What the Force podcast’s discussion on this.

~ Rose was right that they would win by “Not fighting what we hate. Saving what we love.” Rey refused to even hate Palpatine. Ben came to save Rey and that enabled her to save everyone else.

~ My favorite moments of each sequel involve Rey, Ben, and a light saber passing between them.

~ Everything that was said to Rey and Ben about home, family, coming home, coming back ... it was all leading up to their teaming up. Palpatine was wrong when he said he was Rey’s only family. Ben became her family, and that was part of the reason why she took his family name. Whoever wrote the caption “The belonging you seek is in Ben Solo’s arms” was right.

~ We still don’t know what, if any, ideology Ben held, how he felt about political power and different forms of government. That pretty much reinforces my belief that for him this has never been about politics, it’s all been personal for him.

~  Ben’s death is problematic if he is supposed to represent people who have been abused and made poor life choices. It’s a beautiful sacrifice, but did Rey really have to die and necessitate it? She could have been mortally wounded, and he could have healed her without dying himself.

~ If passing his life force to Rey cost his life, Ben should have died before Rey kissed him.

~ Ben’s death is tragic, but not technically a tragedy in the literary sense, because it’s not about learning how to avoid making mistakes like his. For all his faults (narcissism, anger that manifests in violence), Ben didn’t have a particular fatal flaw. He fell because he was a victim of circumstances and forces beyond his control. He died saving the woman he loved, which sounds like a good thing.

~ I’m surprised the Lars homestead was still standing after it seemed to have burned to ash in A New Hope, and I find it difficult to believe that on a planet like Tatooine someone else would not have claimed it.

~ The title refers to both Ben and Rey, since Rey becomes a Skywalker

~ From a certain point of view, Reylos and Rey Skywalkers were both right, and both wrong.

~ Why didn’t Ben become a Force ghost like Luke and Leia? Can he become one in the future? I find the matter of whether a Jedi/Force-user leaves behind their physical body or fades away to become one with the Force, and whether they become capable of manifesting as a ghost, sketchy and inconsistent.

~ What is Rey going to do now? Was she moving into the Lars homestead? Will she raise a family of her own? I think it unlikely that she would fall in love with anyone as deeply as she did with Kylo, and I think she might be hesitant to have biological children who would inherit her (Palpatine) Force abilities, but I can picture her adopting and/or mentoring children.

~ The theme of IX seems to be “You’re not alone,” the way 8’s was “Failure is the greatest teacher.” It is the lesson Rey, Finn, Poe, and Ben each learn. But in the end Rey does seem alone.

~ Rey’s greatest fears were being alone and being insignificant. Is the takeaway supposed to be that she is okay with being alone? That would go against the movie’s overarching theme. Similarly, Star Wars is about family, and while that theme definitely comes through, it would have been so well punctuated if the story ended with the main characters starting families.

~ Nothing was resolved regarding the government(s) of the galaxy. Is it in a state of anarchy now? Were they able to learn from the mistakes of the past two republics?

~ Did Rey, Ben, the Jedi, and/or the Resistance bring balance to the Force? Is the corresponding rise and fall of the light and dark finally over? Will this peace last? Will Rey be the last Jedi or will she pass on their legacy?

~ What was the point of this trilogy as a whole? What message are we supposed to take away from it? Is it still a Prodigal Son type of story?

Now I’m going to spend time thinking about how this will impact my fan fiction and my essays on the Christian themes of the Star Wars sequel trilogy. I will look forward to reading the (apparently expanded edition) novelization and having good quality screenshots and one more Shakespearean parody by Ian Doescher.

#The Rise of Skywalker spoilers