discussion #2 (a boss and a babe): guncher + their making love scene
yesterday, before ep 10 aired, forcebook had a short interview with p'leo. they talked about lots of things, one being the fascinating intimate scene.
so, p'leo asked for some spoilers, and forcebook hilariously mentioned part 4 in ep 10. quoting directly from forcebook, they said part 4 was the longest and hardest scene to shoot. i believed it required lots of concentration, emotion and energy. //idk why i'm smiling
and i kind of understand why the scene was taxing for them? from what i see, it wasn't merely sex. sure, they were going in that direction. but there was much more complexity in that scene and i swear, i was blushing really hard last night.
more than just lust
from my perspective (and from a fair amount of intimate scenes on-screen consumption throughout the years), bed scenes are usually direct, steamy, quick and action-driven. but this doesn't apply to all media because i do notice a slower and more subtle making love scene in more recent dramas (that i don't watch ㅠㅠ).
and i get it. i get why forcebook were so shy after filming the scene. they couldn't look at each other. they just lay on the bed and didn't speak a word for five minutes (again, quoting directly from their interview last night 🤭)
the intimate scene wasn't triggered by lust. it happened after all the shit they went through. it happened after gun's sincere i love you, and it dawned on cher that, wow, i'm in this deep shit for life. it happened after both faced the consequences of losing each other to the world— and they had enough of those bullshits.
honestly, they would've been so contented just by sleeping together on the bed. they would snuggle and make up for the lost nights of not being in each other's arms. but there was this drive in cher that navigated his body— almost too naturally— to initiate the first move.
cher + his struggle to express feelings in words
one of the reasons why cher started it was because he didn't trust his words. cher would always keep everything to himself. taking the blame on behalf of p'ink is a prime example that this man would never speak (unless someone puts a knife on that person's neck, and not his).
of course, cher finds it difficult to put his feelings into words when gun makes it look so easy. it's just his personality. this is when we realise that gun's most prominent love language is words of affirmation (as he constantly asks cher about his feelings).
how about cher? well, i personally think his love language is acts of service. and initiating this move is one of them.
as words deceived him, cher resorted to touching gun, feeling all of him, letting him in, and it resolved in that one moment when cher finally said, "cher rak p'gun na krub," (i love you, p'gun).
we know it gets serious when cher drops the boss and calls gun phi instead. this kind of deletes the power imbalance and discards the different status they have (in which they never give a fuck, personally). and everyone cheered!
it must have taken so much courage in cher to say those words aloud. but after everything they went through— after realising gun would do anything, literally anything for cher— answering gun's constant cries of confirmation was the least cher could do.
and gun was the happiest man on earth that night. as he deserved.
guncher + intimacy
i wonder why their making love scene gives me the most tingle. it really feels like i'm intruding on them. it's not a usual thing to experience. i'm shy.
i wonder if it's the gazes they give each other.
the quiet, heartfelt whispers and the tenderest forehead kisses.
the fidgety fingers around gun's waist.
the blinding sparkle in cher's eyes as he tugs gun's shirt and touches his waist.
or the subtle excitement and nervousness radiating from the way they hold each other.
probably, it's because this is the general idea of making love.
it's not just sex. it's not just lust. it's not just heavy breathing and moans and skin-on-skin sounds. it's the journey of reaching euphoria, but make it vanilla with a tinge of spice.
they talked. they teased. they confessed. and it was so on-brand of their characters. gun being so gentle and respectful. cher being shy yet forward. it was all depicted beautifully in this scene. it really showed them as two different people blending into one.
and i can't express how proud i am of forcebook. the story is messy. i completely agree. so many things can be improved. but forcebook's acting got me hooked. like really hooked.
it's so hard to nail intimate scenes, especially if it aims to be gentle, romantic and heartfelt like this. i don't know how they did it. probably it's the trust they have in knowing each other for more than 15 years. but they did it, and they did it well.
they're so good. forcebook did an amazing job. this making love scene is one of the best on-screen intimate moments i've seen in a while. i'm proud of them. <3
i'm inserting my most favourite part of the euphoric bliss with everyone (for scientific purposes, solely).
the other half of my brain while watching part 4:
god... this is the glimpse of topmew in only friends... this is how they'll be in only friends... they might be like this with more than one character... oh, god... fcuk—
Aiight all. I finished bag room 1 of... whatever. Time to look at some very bad photography!
Here is the outside.
Again, easy to lift with one hand, but it’s very tall, so maybe you’d have to carry it for your young one... or yourself. *wraggles brows*
Simple lock and tie mechanism. Pull the ribbon over, tie a half bow. So easy. Opens and closes like a dream.
See? The tab. Also, I kinda like the purple trim. I was on the fence about it, but yeah. Good.
I’m telling you, the HARDEST PART is the eyes. How the ever loving flippin ponies do people make it look so easy?! Anyway, fancy sitting room.
Okay, the doll is not the best. The body is cheap. The eye face up is not the best. But the outfit is not bad, imho. Belt is its own piece. The robe has belt loops. The slip night gown is beaded. Shoes are custom. Underpants can fit many types of dolls.
I will give the body this. It’s very articulated.
I hope to some day get better at the face up and hair thing. Re-rooting is long, but it is quality. Styling is harder, though.
Blurry. My carpet is scratchy. I need to shampoo it. Also, yes, that is a glowing fire place with changeable batteries. You can have a fire. You can not have a fire. Your choice.
What’s it look like when it’s not lit up? Like that. I painted it, but it is an insert, so you can pull it completely out if you like.
Now, window... I’m pretty good at windows. Here’s the permanent image.
Changeable image one:
Changeable image two:
Changeable image three:
You know. For verity. Here’s an image of everything that comes with this set.
And yes, there is plenty of room for everything in the bag. You can also move the pictures around if you like. There are two books that move and open so as to be interactive props.
And. There is ONE surprise for the new owner hidden in the set.
IF you want a doll room, let me know. It’s for sale.
I’m already working on the project for 15 - 28 of Jan. Again. Check the safety on your blades. It can really throw off your schedule.
after editing in bits and pieces all day i have now doomed myself to have to write four times as much as usual to keep my writing streak. pain and suffering
i give up trying to understand the size of games cause wym skyrim se is 15 gb but fucking euro truck simulator 3 is 25 gb but then bg3 is 150 gb but witcher 3 is 50 gb
i have too many clans on clangen but. omg. shrubclan. no clue what these idiots are doing but they keep losing their tails & legs. i’m 4 years (48 moons) in, at nearly 50 members, half of which are apps or kits. i have four cats who lost a leg, and six that lost a tail. two of which lost both.
to be fair shrubclan has gone maybe 5 moons with enough healers they’re always deprived of them but still. 10 amputations... in 4 years... that’s more than one per 6 moons.......
Reminder meta apo pathima: prepei na stamathsw na ephreazomai apo malakies pou lene gia mathimata ths sxolhs, vathmo duskolias , kathigites klp kathws katalava pws tipota den isxuei apo ta duo para apo 1-2 memonwmenes periptwseis
While we’re on the subject of names, is there an explanation for how traditional nicknames came about that are seemingly unrelated to, or have little in common with, the original name?
I am actually over a week into researching a huge follow-up post (probably more than one if I’m being honest) about the history of nickname usage, so I will be going into this in much, much more detail at a hopefully not-so-later date - if I have not lost my mind. (Two days ago I spent three hours chasing down a source lead that turned out to be a typographical error from 1727 that was then quoted in source after source for the next 150 years.)
As a preview though, here’s some info about the names you mentioned:
The origins of a good portion of common English nicknames come down to the simple fact that people really, really like rhyming things. Will 🠞Bill, Rob🠞Bob, Rick🠞Dick, Meg🠞Peg.
It may seem like a weird reason, but how many of you have known an Anna/Hannah-Banana? I exclusively refer to my Mom’s cat as Toes even though her name is Moe (Moesie-Toesies 🠞 Toesies 🠞 Toes).
Jack likely evolved from the use of the Middle English diminutive suffix “-chen” - pronounced (and often spelled) “-kyn” or “kin”. The use of -chen as a diminutive suffix still endures in modern German - as in “liebchen” = sweetheart (lieb “love” + -chen).
John (Jan) 🠞 Jankin 🠞 Jackin 🠞 Jack.
Hank was also originally a nickname for John from the same source. I and J were not distinct letters in English until the 17th Century. “Iankin” would have been nearly indistinguishable in pronunciation from “Hankin” due to H-dropping. It’s believed to have switched over to being a nickname for Henry in early Colonial America due to the English being exposed to the Dutch nickname for Henrik - “Henk”.
Harry is thought to be a remnant of how Henry was pronounced up until the early modern era. The name was introduced to England during the Norman conquest as the French Henri (On-REE). The already muted nasal n was dropped in the English pronunciation. With a lack of standardized spelling, the two names were used interchangeably in records throughout the middle ages. So all the early English King Henrys would have written their name Henry and pronounced it Harry.
Sally and Molly likely developed simply because little kids can’t say R’s or L’s. Mary 🠞 Mawy 🠞 Molly. Sary 🠞 Sawy 🠞 Sally.
Daisy became a nickname for Margaret because in French garden daisies are called marguerites.
Nan for Anne is an example of a very cool linguistic process called rebracketing, where two words that are often said/written together transfer letters/morphemes over time. The English use of “an” instead of “a” before words beginning with vowels is a common cause of rebracketing. For example: the Middle English “an eute” became “a newt”, and “a napron” became “an apron”. In the case of nicknames the use of the archaic possessive “mine” is often the culprit. “Mine Anne” over time became “My Nan” as “mine” fell out of use. Ned and Nell have the same origin.
Oddly enough the word “nickname” is itself a result of rebracketing, from the Middle English “an eke (meaning additional) name”.
I realized earlier this week that my cat (Toe’s sister) also has a rebracketing nickname. Her name is Mina, but I call her Nom Nom - formed by me being very annoying and saying her name a bunch of time in a row - miNAMiNAMiNAM.
Chuck is a very modern (20th century) nickname which I’ll have to get back to you on as I started my research in the 16th century and am only up to the 1810s so far lol.