#-and that his nature as an avatar does not contradict his morals!!!! | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

itsclydebitches · 1 year

Text

Jonelias thought of the day is that Elias must come across as so stuffy and boring to those at the Institute - which, you know, very much helps hide his true nature - but as an avatar of the Eye and a man determined to avoid the End, Elias is someone whose entire being revolves around the interplay of knowledge and experiences. He's compelled to Know it all and his efforts to avoid death invite him to Experience it all too, a fascinating combination of passive observer and, by virtue of being a 200+ year-old in search of true immortality, an active participant too. This is a man whose longevity and thirst for knowledge invites an obsession with life that contradicts the 'Sits in his office doing nothing but spreadsheets all day' image he's learned to cultivate. (Though, to be clear, he does love the spreadsheets.) And I don't just mean "obsession with life" in the sense of him avoiding the finality of death, but actually loving the act of being alive.

I think a lot of what the fandom (rightly) jokes about in regards to his characterization is a reflection of that obsession. Elias has a relationship with Peter Lukas that goes far beyond the cold practicality of an alliance, hinting at a romance (if you steer towards a LonelyEyes reading), or just Elias' desire to still be able to place bets with someone while he's trying to end the world. Similarly, his powers ensure that he's never truly alone - if he dies, he takes the rest of the Archive with him - forever supplying him with a warped companionship that doesn't threaten him like he perceives he was threatened as Jonah Magnus, with his acquaintances working to complete their own rituals. In true Beholding style, he's got the heart of a fucked-up scientist who's endlessly curious about the world around him: 'Oooh what happens if I let my friend waste away in the Lonely?' He shows up at Jon's birthday party not just to secretly gloat and keep an eye on things (ha), but because he legitimately wants cake. Who wouldn't want cake? What's the point of living forever if you can't have cake?? Well, for an avatar the exquisite sweetness of fear is just as good, but my point stands. Beyond his fear of death, that enjoyment is at the heart of Elias' goal, with Jon describing his experience as the Pupil as a kind of agonized bliss and Elias confirming this by saying he was having the most wonderful dream. Morality aside, he likes interacting with the horror of the Entities, something we saw all the way back during the "[PLEASURED EXHALATION]" scene. Learning new things feels good. Experiencing news things is enjoyable. Learning and experiencing Bad Things is especially nice given his patron. Consistently, Elias' setbacks are met with interest, or a mild annoyance that then eventually settles into satisfaction because they are also new experiences for him and the Eye: going to jail, getting to psychologically torture Martin, having his own secrets exposed. There's a lot throughout the series to imply that Elias enjoys watching Jon become the Key, not just because it means he's succeeding in his goals, but because there's genuine interest and pride in seeing him "grow" by Elias' standards. The repetition of "our world," "our patron," etc. implies a connection; the intention to experience this new world with another, to enjoy it rather than simply exist in it for the mere sake of existence. Elias is a man whose entire essence boils down to, "I NEED TO KNOW ALL THE THINGS, EXPERIENCE EVERYTHING, AND LIVE FOREVER WHILE ACHIEVING THAT, TO UNDERSTAND IT ALL SO I CAN CONTROL IT ALL AND HAVE A DAMN GOOD TIME IN THE PROCESS, EVEN WHILE I SUCCUMB TO THE PRIMAL FEAR THAT DRIVES ME I WILL PARADOXICALLY EMBRACE IT, AND YEAH THAT'S LARGELY BECAUSE I SERVE THE LITERAL GOD OF JUDGY SURVEILLANCE BUT ALSO THAT'S JUST ME."

So anyway, I keep thinking about how this characterization could intersect with S1-2 Jon: prickly, awkward, semi-isolated, desperate to be recognized by someone whose authority he believes in. AKA the boss who, at an unprecedented young age, rose to the top of the Institute they both work at, perceived by those around him as far less interesting than he actually is. Parallels, anyone? Imagine Jon getting to really talk to Elias, realizing how much he has to offer after 200 years of life (though of course he doesn't know that), and just constantly being blindsided by not just the knowledge, but the enthusiasm for everything he's learned and been through - the good and the horrifyingly awful that, despite himself, Jon is equally drawn to. Elias recognizes every quote Jon drops into a conversation and has another witty line to pair it with. He doesn't just indulge his nerdy rambles, but participates in them. He's refined in all the ways that Jon expects - books, opera, music, etc. - and also casually drops in references to acid trips and fucking orgies. Imagine an early series Jon who forms a strong bond with Elias outside of the web (ha x2) he's been weaving, becoming dependent on his friendship and just a little bit completely in love. Elias is inherently fascinating, but he's also just Some Guy, and the combination of that is just perfect for a necrotic Archivist who simultaneously wants to be guided by his 'betters' and prove that he's an equal. Why Elias would be interested in turn barely needs stating: Jon is literally Elias' everything, in a horrifyingly tragic and like, Gothic Romance sense? What would that kind of relationship have changed? It would have likely made Elias' job even easier, but what about Jon?

...I'm not saying that Jon's drive to protect humanity would have been warped into something tragically dangerous if he'd first come to see his intelligent, complex, shockingly kind (from his nonexistent self-esteem POV), secretly-an-eldritch-monster boss as the epitome of humanity... but I'm also not saying it couldn't have!

#TMA #The Magnus Archives #Jonelias #this is so rambly I'm sorry #I'm just having a lot of feelings about these two #Jon deserves a corruption arc that he's convinced himself is a hero's journey #as a treat #also I keep thinking about Elias' refusal to define a human #and the Witcher line about Regis - a vampire - being the best of humanity #can a monster be human?#sure why not #especially when so many humans are already monstrous #I just want Jon to rule under a horrifically misguided idea of which humans are worth protecting #his wonderful desire to protect molded into not just the key that will end the world #but the thing that perpetuates its torment #as! a! treat!

261 notes · View notes

luna-rainbow · 1 year

Note

What draws you to a character? Is it moral conflict or cardboard good people ??

Oooh thanks for the interesting question but why do I get the vague sense this is bait 😅

Very few people with an ounce of writing experience or critical analysis skills likes “cardboard people” regardless of whether they’re good, bad, or anything in between. A cardboard person has not been written into a character. They’re just a collection of traits to serve a certain role in a story. Depending on the genre and their importance, that is not necessarily a writing flaw. When you have a 100 minute movie you cannot possibly develop every character. However, if your main character is a cardboard person that means the writer hasn't done their job and by gods other writers pick up on that. Nat, for example, was not a character in IM2, she was a cardboard femme fatale, because she had no inner world and no inner conflict to speak of.

On the converse, a well-written character will always have conflict , regardless of whether they’re good, bad, or anything in between! And a good conflict, one that has complexity - both ethical and emotional - will reveal layers about a character's value systems and psyche and make them a whole person, and that's what I like.

As I've always said, the first character I liked in the MCU was Tony, because here is a guy who was introduced to us self-centered and has it all, then you realise how little he has in term of human relationships (partly due to his own doing), and in the end he lets go of some of his material possessions and earns human connections. The second character I loved was Loki, because he's not a bad guy by nature, and he's perpetually torn between genuine love for his adoptive family, and anger at the lies they built around him and the identity they took away from him. The third character I loved was T'Challa, who through a fairly small role in Civil War was able to go through an entire conflict around grief, loss, compassion and forgiveness.

I came to like Steve and Bucky after I've gotten some context about 1930s America that the movies didn't give us. Steve's entire existence is a conflict with the world. He starts off the direct opposite of the eugenics ideal (I want to say 'save for the colour of his skin' but eugenicists scoffed at the Irish, so his colour didn't give him an advantage there) then through the serum became the Aryan ideal. He himself continually questions and disobeys the system that has tried to make him into an avatar for their agendas. He yearns of moving forward but the only way he seems to do that is after he finds the piece of his past that he had let slip through his fingers in the alps. And Bucky has a similar arc, how does he marry the identity that was forced upon him to who he once was and who he now wants to be? He is also trying to move forward, but can only do that by reconnecting with the past that was forcefully taken from him. Speaking without the shipping angle, Bucky is Steve's narrative mirror, and very similar conflicts drive their stories (which is why Endgame did the equivalent of narrative suicide by making Steve just...abandon all his conflicts and leaving Bucky to continue on with the same conflicts without his mirror) and there's something delicious in exploring that.

Conflict doesn't have to be just the character choosing between right and wrong, although that is a common conflict. You can have a pure good character forced to be in conflict with people around them and that can still be an interesting conflict (when well-written), and it doesn't mean that the character is "cardboard good".

If this ask is about Peggy -- I might enjoy her character if the story had the self-awareness to recognise the moral conflicts in her character. But it doesn't. It writes her as a series of contradictions and presents her as the perfect model of goodness. She fails at even being a cardboard character.

#writing #anti endgame #bucky barnes #steve rogers #anti peggy carter #asks

67 notes · View notes

justpracticingwritingalittle · 2 years

Text

Character Deep Dive - Argrona Paupuroati

1. More importantly, if Argrona did not have her mother to take care of, she may live more freely than she does. She may ask to join the Runewives [is this possible?] or perhaps to the Bedehouses of Ruþ or Bower. Are there more Ershly options?

2. Argrona would of course trust A., and anyone A. trusts, w/ her life.

3. Core Moral Beliefs -”Be a friend to all of Bess; treasure every loveliness.”

4. Obvs, Argrona deeply [+fungibly] cares for her mother, and has made it her brooking to clear peace for her in her final years. She does not see this as a burden, but as a necessary end of her love, and of her Arshoaths. She recalls very little of her father, but has largely stood behind his [virtue] according to what her mother and A. have told her. As for A., she has spent a good deal of energy in her life on being the peace and play to A.’s role as the tough defender trying [at times desperately] to get him to soften + have fun, to enjoy Life and Love. She is hoping is current journey will broaden his horizons.

5. Far from War and with her values, she makes it a point to be a friend to all of Bess.

6. A child of the military class, Argrona understands a lot of its ways and values, mainly through A., and does not place a lot of stock in them. Similarly, the concept of nobility holds FAR less weight in Paupuroats, and contradicts her CMBs. Authority is a concept she sees value in, and knows how to navigate for survival.

7. Argrona, common to churlish She-Yumans, typically wears her dark hair up so as not to get it caught in brambles. There are intricate braid songs, a Hobgob? custom. She wears her Arshmark around her neck on twine and little decorative ‘charms’ she’s picked up + put meaning onto. The purple is available to all, and Argrona wears it whatever chance she gets. [She has a scar from the time A. accidentally slashed at her?]

8. Argrona can’t imagine feeling at home anywhere else than the Purplands. Her blubberyard is p. peaceful.

9. Argrona was raised by her mother, and built on her love for Arsh and her values, as well as the Earthmother and Starmother.

10. Argrona makes Blubberjuice, blueberry wine, to build up her and her mother’s wealth. She spends time perfecting it.

12. Currently Argrona is seeking work for the shat to buy a Torfling-and-cart to make it easier to bring things back to her mother quickly, and making plans for if A. does not return.

13. I see no reason why Argrona’s whole deal would lead her to NOT wanting kids. I’m sure she wants love and marriage, if only LATER.

14. I think Argrona has been the recipient of many offers of love and devotion, but has not met anyone who has offered anything exciting enough to make her eager for the day her duties to her mother are fulfilled.

15. The attack on Arshbath obvi changed a lot for Argrona, as her brother and 3 other Paupuroati left with a strange little Jeimon on a journey south to Hestackle, the Deathlands.

16. In another weird, Argrona may have served as a Fratly. Perhaps as a giddy! This would have made her a Nature cleric I think.

17. OF COURSE her favorite season is the Spring!!!!

18. In pop Þrigwegian astrology, Argrona was told when she was born that Chirsche’s Berrybush shone Arshpurple. It’s possible this was true.

19. I think Argrona knows how good she has it and is eager to see ANY other place to understand her world from the outside

20. Yet to be made, Argrona’s mistake will be to give bede to Arsh upon a Fallen Star. Will she become Arsh? A vessel? An avatar? Can she be ‘saved’?

21. [Pending] Once when she was young, she snuck up on Adger while he was drilling with his sword and was accidentally slashed across the upper left arm?

22. She is represented best by....a purpledove! What a name! The Purpledove!

23. Argrona has few regrets but I think for A.’s sake she may dream of saving her their father? at the time, she was a baby tho.

24. Argron would likely get along GREAT with F., and champion her love of Plunkt.

25. She may wish the PCs hadn’t made Plunkt eat the Star?

26. She believes her best trait is she’s ‘good with people’.

27. Argrona fears a bitter, vengeful A., an A. who has given up compassion. She fears War, but from non-Paup. visitors?

29. She likes to listen to the Crowders at Wallgate?, and sit and imagine the story while she imagines the words she would add. So maybe she’d be a bard/

30. A cyncical person may meet Argrona and call her a people pleaser, but how many people need to be charmed before you’re just charming? She does have a bit of a ~need~ to help.

32. Is this what she is insecure about?

33. A. and their mother are folk she truly admires, her mom for her never-ending gladness and A. for his virtue.

35. STR 10 DEX 12 CON 12 INT 14 WIS 16 CHA 18 Trying to go off Commoner stats, her strength is just ~average~, and her DEX maybe slightly above average because she maintains a very playful lifestyle. CON for the same reasons. INT +2 because while she has no “education”, she is v smart and maintains extensive remembrance of story + song and always attends the Wenderweird. WIS +3 because she was raised REAL GOOD and absorbed a lot? CHA +4 because she’s GREAT WITH PEOPLE [and maybe pretty privilege]. What is the scale for those last three supposed to look like?

38. Argrona has their father’s glazed Purple Oat. If she becomes Arsh, or some associated Soul, she will turn it into an artifact for A. [add to embertooth?]

39. Speaking of, Argrona would love to find Embertooth to ~elevate~ A. to a certain status among Hiltwolves which would come with some wealth padding for the whole family

40. Truthfully she feels most at home in her blubberyard.

41. Most complaints typically wash off her back, but she typically doesn’t voice them if she can help it anyway, but the charm she has isn’t FAKE, that’s just how she’s learned to be. She’s p oblivious to what folks ~think~ of her.

42. For Argrona, I like that her meaning of Life is to be a friend to all of Bess; treasure every loveliness.

43. Because of her work, she almost always smells like blueberries.

44. Argrona tends to feel first, then think through, but will only feel when she has the appropriate environment.

45. She had a nightmare where a fire consumed all the Purplands, and it’s been causing her anxiety.

46. Argrona holds so much respect for Fratlies and Runewives, and has admittedly not had any negative experiences with either. She thinks well of the FAts, and thinks little of the Sun King, since he is so far away.

#character #working title star wars #paupuroats #lieflore

0 notes

sokkastyles · 2 years

Note

Hi, how're you?

When a few days ago I saw your post proving how the concept of Zuko's hatred for Azula being due to misogyny-based reasons is a just absurd, I felt Absolutely Delighted. ( Did Zuko actually ever hate Azula?) Because as someone who wants to fully understand Azula's character and fill the HUGE gap between 'sadistic, psychopathic killer' and 'sweet, innocent girl brainwashed by her father and thus unaccountable for her doings', I've taken to frequenting the Azula tag. While some things I see there have gone a long way in enriching my understanding of her character, some others have directly contradicted my understanding of Zuko's character in the series...such as the issue you addressed in this awesome meta.

One such common...analysis of Zuko suggests that he tried to kill Azula more frequently and treated her far worse than she did to him. It's vividly popular and revered by many. And I just can't agree with it. Show!canon Zuko's treatment of the man who made him suffer for three years, Mr.McMuttonchops suggests otherwise. As does his reluctance to kill Ozai by his own hands. Or him putting out fires with buckets rather than slicing right through the firebenders.

The posts insist that in the 'The Avatar State', Zuko first attacked Azula with his fire daggers 'clearly with the intent to kill.' Additionally, Azula apparently tried to retreat at first, but was then forced to retaliate with lightning. Also Iroh tried to kill her when he threw her off the ship, which might have been true had it been the real world but it's a cartoon( and they're all highly trained) so, eh, did he? ( I personally think he hadn't considered anything more than 'get rid of the threat to Zuko's life')

And in the last Agni Kai, Zuko tried to goad her into producing lightning so that he could kill her with that. And this... I'm more inclined to agree with this. While this still contradicts his other actions and goes against all we know of him, I can't really find any other reason for him to bait her. What do you think?

Also, on a slightly different note, did Zuko intentionally out Azula's lie to Ozai on TDOTBS to get her into trouble or was he just stating the fact?

And did Azula propose 'let's burn the EK to the ground' to divert Ozai's attention from Zuko in case he said something that would irk Ozai?( That would actually be kinda sweet and I wouldn't put it past her)

It's a lot longer than I thought it would be..

Also, kudos for crushing those Zutara haters.

Hi, first of all, thanks for the compliment!

Second, I think it's a mistake thinking that it's a dichotomy between "psychopathic killer" and "innocent victim," and that's the mistake a lot of people seem to make when discussing Azula. A lot of people who have committed horrible crimes became the way they were because they were abused, but that isn't an excuse. There have been, sadly, many cases of kids doing horrific stuff to other kids because an adult told them to, and that happens a lot of times because of a household with a narcissistic parent or parents who treats one kid as a scapegoat and encourages the other kid(s) to abuse that kid. It's a sad situation but it happens, and sometimes kids hurt other kids in those types of situations out of fear of becoming the target, but sometimes they do it because that's what they were taught is how the world works, and with Azula I think it is a mix of both.

I feel like a lot of people in fandom are uncomfortable with ambiguity, though, especially young fans. Hence the backlash that Zuko and Iroh have gotten. I saw a post yesterday that was complaining about fans liking them instead of the characters that were good all along, like that was a moral failing. It's not, it's just that people are naturally drawn to complex characters. But that's also the reason people try to make these kinds of statements trying to figure out if Azula is a victim or a villain, because they're uncomfortable with the fact that she's both.

You have to do a lot of reaching to argue that Zuko tried to kill Azula, and most of the metas about how he treated her badly just read as victim blaming because she is the aggressor in every single encounter that they have. You're right, it's a cartoon, which is why the arguments about Zuko's fire daggers and Iroh throwing her overboard are in bad faith. Every character uses force that would be lethal in the real world. This is like me arguing that Aang tried to kill Zuko when he blasted him through a building. At the same time, the show does make a distinction when it wants you to know that a character is using deadly force, and lightning is always used to show lethal force.

The show also makes a distinction between the violence of the aggressor and violence done out of defense. It would be ridiculous to try and blame Aang for attacking Zuko because Zuko was the aggressor. At the same time, it is ridiculous to say Azula was defending herself from Zuko and Iroh when she intended to capture and imprison them. She was retreating? You mean when she turned her back and her men immediately attacked Zuko and Iroh? Zuko and Iroh were also closed in, Iroh has to fight his way through the soldiers and says "let's go!" to Zuko, who goes after Azula because Azula continues to taunt him. She's not retreating, she looks like she's very much up for the fight. And she only shoots lightning at Zuko AFTER he is down. There's several moments that it takes her to charge where Zuko is literally on the ground, and the camera shows it from Zuko's first person view to emphasize his peril. The fact that he's looking up at her also emphasizes that she has the power here.

Self defense?

I cheered when Iroh dropkicked Azula off the ship the way I cheered when Aang blasted Zuko with a stream of well water. Not because I hate Azula, but because it's a cartoon villain getting what they deserve.

As far as the last agni kai, I think it's pretty clear that he was trying to goad her into shooting lightning at him with the intention of redirecting it the exact same way he did at his father, which didn't kill Ozai either, but stunned him. That way, he could theoretically take out Azula with minimal damage. The show emphasizes Zuko learning lightning redirection and not bending lightning itself as a tool to REDIRECT violence rather than continuing the cycle, so it makes more sense that that was his intention.

On the idea that Zuko was trying to get Azula into trouble by telling Ozai she lied: first of all, Zuko doesn't owe Azula anything considering that the reason she lied was so that Zuko would take the fall if the truth were to be revealed. Second, the reason he mentioned it wasn't about Azula at all. Zuko himself tells us why he did it.

Ozai: Why are you here?

Zuko: I'm here to tell the truth.

From the moment Zuko hears the lie at the start of book three, it eats him up inside. Partially because he suspects that Azula is manipulating him and he is afraid of what Ozai will do if he suspects Zuko of lying, but also I think it bothered him because 1) Zuko is honest to a fault and 2) He already had doubts at that point that fighting the Avatar was the right thing to do. It takes him a while to get to that point, and he has to sink even lower first by hiring an assassin, but that's precisely to show us the cost of maintaining a lie that he didn't even tell in the first place. So when Zuko confronts Ozai, he wants Ozai to know the truth. This is Zuko who is finally fed up with all the lies. And he doesn't lead with "the Avatar is alive," he leads with:

Zuko: First of all, in Ba Sing Se, it was Azula who took down the Avatar, not me.

Ozai: Why would she lie to me about that?

Zuko: Because the Avatar's not dead. He survived.

He didn't want Ozai to know that Azula didn't kill the Avatar, he wanted Ozai to know that HE didn't kill the Avatar. He only tells Ozai that Aang is still alive when Ozai asks why she would lie. Like I said, I think his main motivation was being able to confront Ozai with his bullshit and letting him know that he's not going to take it any more, that he's not going to be silent and let other people speak for him, that he's going to speak his mind, and he's going to speak the truth, and that he, Zuko, doesn't want any part in any of the lies any longer. I think he also wanted to be honest about his motivations, lest Ozai think that he came back as crown prince on a lie and was working with Aang all along.

It's ridiculous that people try to blame this on Zuko since Zuko never wanted Azula to lie for him in the first place, and it wasn't done out of the goodness of Azula's heart and certainly didn't give Zuko any peace of mind. It was something that tormented him that he finally wanted to be free of, just like all the other lies he leaves behind when he leaves the Fire Nation. It's also a rejection of Ozai and what he had hoped to gain from Ozai earlier in the series. Zuko no longer needs Ozai's approval, having seen that that approval is built on a lie and ultimately empty. It's a slap in the face to Ozai's narcissism just as much as Zuko telling Ozai that Iroh is his real father.

I also don't think Azula was trying to save Zuko in the war meeting, either, just like I don't think that her lying about killing Aang was meant to help Zuko in any way. I think she was trying to divert attention away from Zuko, but not to help him. More likely she saw another attempt to get leverage against him. She probably picked up on his sympathy for the Earth Kingdom and saw another weakness that she could exploit. Both to show to their father that she's the better sibling and so she would have something against Zuko and could one up him. Maybe on some level she thought it was helping him, but I have no doubt that she would have found a way to use it to manipulate him, if given the chance.

#zuko #azula #atla meta

87 notes · View notes

6blackfilin9 · 3 years

Note

I love your Anko fanart! Tell me, what are your views/headcannons on Anko X Kazuku?

hThank you so much for the ask, finally I can answer it

here is my big thank you for the waitng

In a nutshell, the shipp was created by accident while me and my buddy were working on our first Naruto AU in 2019, where Kakuzu and Deidara survived their shitty plotholes end eventually ended up in Konoha

Yeah

so, the shipp’s birth date is july the 1, 2019

anything like classy, aristocracy kind of tension-filled passionate gothic romance with playful, psychological games & hurt/comfort vibes with slight scent of rivalry is KakuAnko

Basically, they are: a very, very old man with absolutely horrendous background who’s trying to finally have his mother*cking 10 or 30 years of peace, and a rather young lady with a rocky youth who’s being good & noble yet has very strong antihero tendencies

You know, I think they do have potential, since, in fact, they seem to be very similar, at the core

They are both very pragmatic realists, the people of logic and reason, yet if Kakuzu’s irritability doesn’t affect him a tiny bit due to his ideal self-control, Anko’s can lead her to quite bad places, sometimes. They put their interests in the first place, and even though she tries to attach them to Konoha’s, she still has ‘personal’ things (I’ll write ‘bout it lower*). Their mindsets are so complicatedly organized that, at some point & way, it prevents them from having many close people, and makes them very hard to see through and predict

Both of them are very flexible & adaptive, independent individuals with similar outlooks on plenty of things and high intellectual level. They clearly can find plenty of traits that they would highly respect and adore in each other

Here I will speak mostly for “why and how” kind of things, bc both of them are terribly tricky to accurately figure out. But there will be some headcanons too

So, there are still some odds about them, due to the strong difference in their occupation, like, in plenty of cases they are really tricky to be brought together, because:

- Of the job

In original, Anko is a Konoha’s special jounin, and she is very dedicated to serving the country. Independently of whether she likes her job or not (depends on the plot), she orienteers at the people, at society’s gain from her work. So, accordingly, in any other AU her job is somehow connected to civil service, whether it’s something police-like, connected to science, or something like CCG in Tokyo Ghoul

Kakuzu, on the other hand, is a hitman and a persona non grata in literally all the five big countries, Konoha too (which makes it barely possible to bring them together in the original universe without hard complications or heavy drama. But still possible). He orienteers on his own gain alone, but, depending on the job, it can include others’ gain, too.

This detail makes him a saint once he holds supervising position in some company or any high position in the government (the better the working conditions of the staff now- the more money in the prospective), and the sheer nightmare once he has it on the opposite side of the law. Him as a mob boss is a complete different topic for discussion, but to get the point, in this case, the trouble isn’t him increasing the level of criminality (its rather vice-versa), but taking hold of too much control in the high and underground structures. Even as an ordinary hitman he’s rather tricky, since everything depends on the case

In most of the stories, they come to some sort of compromise, and how hard it is to reach it depends on how shitty his job is and how attached they are to each other at the moment

Like, in the above mentioned Shippuden AU and Harry Potter AU (which I also wrote with my buddy) everything went like clockwork, because there they are both more or less on this side of the law, in Tokyo Ghoul AU (which I also wrote with my buddy) it is a bit more complicated, with her being in-law and him being very much outlaw, in the Avatar AU (which I also figured out with my buddy, but we never happened to write it) it is also pretty smooth, with both of them being outlaws and then jumping out to the glory after all the shit is done, but in another Shippuden AU of mine, this all would be just a motherfucking bloody disaster

- Kakuzu is actually a hard nut to get attached to anyone

He lived too long to be truly afraid of anything, though. Its mostly because he doesn’t really need to get attached to or become close with someone to satisfy his need for communication. The man can get along with anyone once he wishes to, he can have countless acquaintances and plenty of buddies, but he doesn’t have many comrades and barely can call anyone a friend. Because he is used to lose everything and everyone he ever had or happened to have, because of his inhumanly lengthened lifespan.

It requires time for him to get used to the person, and then, eventually, in some cases, spend plenty of it to get attached

Plus, for him, due to his profession, each close connection is a really great responsibility for him. In most cases, he’d think twice of weather he is ready to take it or not

Though it of course has the personal factor, too

In Anko’s case, she has a grand privilege by being a very intelligent and keen woman, not just in cognitive plane, but in emotional, too. High emotional intellect is actually a rare trait, so she automatically stands out of the crowd for him. Even though it won’t guarantee his alliance, it will grant her his high respect and some sort of sympathy

- Kakuzu is, technically, an asshole

He does have his moral compass, which includes a great amount of common social morality, but he also has that “I am working” state

Even though Kakusu has a set of professional principles, and he still acts accordingly to what he thinks is right, one and the very same situation can be solved diametrically different once the context changes from working to casual and vice versa

This, and him being very independent and quite antisocial, makes the degree of assholeness depend on various factors

This can lead to major conflicts of interests, and if they are possible to have any compromise or not is strongly attached to the circumstances. After all, both are very, very prideful and dignified people

- In other words, the only major issue for them would be morality questions. It’s possible to make the case acceptable for Anko, since both of them ain’t truly squeaky clean, along with Kakuzu being willing enough to watch his borders

- She is provident and doesn’t really need a lot of money on a daily basis, which is much of a joy to him lol

- *they both seek for the stable ground, first of all

Taking in consideration the life conditions Kakuzu had in his youth (despite war state, he still stably had family, friends, grand respect from everyone, home, warmth and food) and how terribly he was torn out of his secured social environment, I believe what he seeks through all his bounty hunt and other money-connected manipulations is stability. Sustainability he had back then. The only way to have it in the conditions of our existent world order is to have money (and a very good mind and luck)

Anko has indeed much more altruistic motives, yet it’s still not that simple. It seems to be, on the first sight, yet considering the “Orochimaru related cases” and her very wayward behavior toward them, it’s clear she keeps her own motives and needs in mind oh so well. The service she has is very well payed, it allows her to do what she likes or believes is right, and to have the living conditions she finds comfortable. And only here, relying on the made sustainable basis, she does what she does

- Thus, they both illustrate the principle “first help yourself, next help the other” just right

- She knows she can keep an eye on him, yet it’s clear for her that her influence isn’t borderless, as well as telling him off some stuff is kind of a not wise thing to do. So in the majority of cases, she never interferes

- This is not common, yet he can actually change some plans if the situation is serious and the compromise can’t be found. He is that kind of person who works on a further prospective, and in this context, this would be the relationship with his loved one

- While Kakuzu is quite conflicted and has very reserved controversial persona, Anko is both controversial, conflicted, and sort of two-faced, on top of that

She is a very sincere, cheerful and humbly honest human being, yet she has some darker natural traits of her character that became rather strong with age and traumatic experience. Cunningness, guile, ways-depend-on-the-case and a bit of ruthlessness, that is. Moreover, she has some unsolved personal issues, which makes her even more twisted.

Like, remember the time when she confronted Orochimaru during the exam? And Kabuto, on the war? Getting rid of them is indeed beneficial for Konoha, but it’s clear that for her it is personal vendetta in the first place. She wouldn’t have tried to do this alone, otherwise, because these two are rather dangerous ones, to say the least.

She uses greater good to cover her real motives (even though it is not truly complete bullshit), and seems to have a terrible habit to keep silence about really important things, which makes her quite prone to lying, in some cases

And sometimes it very badly pisses Kakuzu off, since it makes her prone to doing useless but dangerous shit too

Yet this not any kind of separate hidden side, it is integrated into her personality, and coexists with her bright one. That’s where her violent humour comes from, for example.

But Kakuzu, on the other side, is completely monolith individual, yet sometimes his mindset can create contradictions when it comes to something important to him. but it's another topic

And seeing these layered constructions, and motives, they can pretty finely predict each other’s behavior. Not super-neatly, but they for sure see the basis. This is what helps Kakuzu to prevent Anko from doing some stupid shit, sometimes

- Anko has a role of an indicator for the people who don’t understand and see the changes in Kakuzu’s mood sometimes, since she usually reacts quite openly. Yet, when she has the same unreadable mask of cold, or one of guile, it’s a nightmare for them

- They prefer the non-verbal way to show their feelings, even though Anko is obviously the more chatty one

- They don’t say things such as “I love you”, or other sensual stuff like that really often, believing it to be some sort of cherished words that shall not be spelled mindlessly

- Anko isn’t majorly into PDA, but she fancies it much more than Kakuzu does. She has her whole moments of studying something with her hands, whether it’s a hand, scar or face. He’s more into passive display of affection, like wrapping an arm over her waist or leaning to her or something of this kind; they can allow themselves to (not sexually) kiss in public though

- She knows he doesn’t like to walk hand in hand due to considering it a youthful thing, so there are times when she intentionally walks holding on to his sleeve; generally they walk separately in order not to bother each other, but sometimes they walk arm in arm (like an old Victorian couple lol)

- Being older and wiser, Kakuzu eventually upholds some kind of mentoring position, yet he never considers himself any kind of a teacher or master to Anko, believing her to have a good head of her own. He is just insightful enough to break something through to her or give a word of advise

- This, combined with his highly powerful demeanor, also makes him have the leading position in their relationship

- Anko respects him much enough to fortify this, entrusting with plenty of life questions (like organizing the family budget), even though they make the majority of decisions together. Mostly because he is truly wise and highly experienced individual.

- This makes him one of the very few people Anko would actually listen to and take their opinion in consideration

- So basically they have equal relationship with some tendency to patriarchal order

- And it is, really, mostly economically-based disbalance, with him earning much more than she does

- Yet they never have any financial-based issues, since both of them keep in mind and respect the contributions of each

- There is major power play here, too. He has the absolute might, she has seduction. Anko loves how he makes her want to submit to him, let him have all the power, so she likes provoking him. And she knows he adores it, loves the subtle control she has over him

- They don’t have conflicts in their everyday life. Each knows how to avoid pissing one another off

- He cherishes her playful demeanor, her intellect. Combined with her cunningness, it allows her to rival him, in social sphere. The way she constructs her phrases, the way she speaks, mimics, moves, how bewitchingly it suits her feminine snaky features makes his blood boil and heart melt

- Both of them, actually, have rather specific kind of dry, dark humour. Kakuzu’s is very cynical, satirical, quite often menacing and subtly demeaning; Anko’s is very sarcastic and quite dirty, even gruesome and rather violent

- Sometimes they “fight” verbally as a form of a play. In some circumstances they may sound pretty vile, so some unobservant people mistake this for display of hate

- In general, Anko is the one to heat things up with her playful demeanor, which can include provocation and rivalry, and Kakuzu is the one to keep this energy in borders, accumulating it up to much more intense states

- They both put the comfort in the first place when it comes to household. Everything must be cozy, useful, silent and super clean

- Yet they are both very unpretentious and modest, really

- She absolutely adores when he is showing his serious, severe side, or powerful demeanor. She finds it incredibly suitable for him. She also likes how his real age is sliding out in this or that way. Like, even though he has rather young face (that of 37-40 y.o.), his eyes give away that he’ve seen oh so much more than it seems; the grumpy noises and grunts he makes, the lazy attitude in movements and the way how rapidly he finds a comfy pose once he has a chance to take a seat

- They are both rather patriotic, yet while in the most stories Anko’s feelings mostly lay towards the country she lives in, Kakuzu’s more often lay towards some places, so called small motherland.

- Kakuzu actually could be a source of deep, strong admiration and delight for her, despite all of his bullshit. The unbreakable will he has, mighty burning heart, all the wisdom, talents and mind. Being sent to fight god damn Hashirama, clearly a genius of his times, financial & management genius at the least. And, still, after all the hard times he’ve been through, he maintained the very strong sense of dignity and nobility, even though slightly twisted due to the profession and abnormal lifespan

- And the very same things can serve as the source for her chagrin: with all those traits, he could have been so much more rather than a criminal. With all the gifts he’ve got, he could have been of great use to society. He’s much easier about this, since his prospective is much wider and embraces decades (and in some universes even centuries) instead of months & years, and he knows that he’d be switching sides throughout his life, being on this and that side of the law, yet he still is a bit uncomfortable once it’s brought up

- They are deeply into science, which makes them atheists. He’s into medicine and human biology, she’s into chemistry and reptilian biology; both of them are nuts for physics, history and psychology

- They solve complicated physical and mathematical problems together time to time. She is the first one to have tea-breaks due to losing her temper over it, he tries to figure things out right until you can sense the smoke coming off his head

- Actually, they do have a stumbling stone aside from job & morality complications. And this is Anko’s attitude towards Orochimaru

What she does is basically ruins her life very-very slowly, maintaining the issues she has and planning to make him pay for all he’s done

Kakuzu knows exactly what is really going on with this attitude and why, but he can’t really do anything about it. Like, he knows he can’t make her change her mind or put something into her head

All he can do is really nothing but try to explain how those things are working, and even this option is basically a landmine field for him. At some level she does understand that he could probably be right, yet she just refuses to go back on her mind. And this is actually really dangerous, so at some moments they can fight quite badly about it

- He’s scared shitless to lose her, though; especially like that, even though he knows clearly that he will, anyway, sooner or later

- he knows that losing loved ones ends up with sheer disaster for him, yet he isn’t afraid to pay such a high price for those six, five or four decades of being with her. Because these decades are that of a paradise ones for him. Wife and family, as well as stable job, incomes and life conditions, are some sort of physical definitions of sustainability he craves. Especially family, yet it’s far ahead to plan

- The fact that he will have to bury her one day makes her rather depressed, as well as the knowledge that the only thing she can really do about it is to try to bring him as much happiness and comfort as possible before she dies

thank you, i'd say more, but it's too much already

#my art #naruto #naruto shipuden #akatsuki #naruto akatsuki #akatsuki kakuzu #kakuzu #naruto anko #mitarashi anko #kakuanko #they are very entertaining disaster

84 notes · View notes

herglowinggirl · 3 years

Note

Hello, familiar anon here, I didn't ask the question about an SOK ending where Yun lives and gains redemption. I also wouldn't mind having my own tag. I haven't found any other evidence of Yun shipping Kyoshi and Rangi outside of "The Boy From Makapu". How does Kyoshi view Yun later in her life( up to the first year after "The Meeting", creating Kyoshi Island nearly 25 years later, the last years of her life)? Would Kyoshi ever mention or talk about Yun after the events of The Shadow of Kyoshi?

hello! and yes I have some thoughts on this and how it would impact the advice Kyoshi gave to Roku and Aang. this got long but I’d love to break down parts of it to write fic, which I think I will do and perhaps post before Kyoshi Fortnight. But I digress, it’s long enough that I have decided to use subtitles. If anything skip to the end about the advice she gave Roku and Aang I think it’s most relevant to what I want to say and also my favorite part.

what I talk about under the cut: the ways I believe yun’s death would impact kyoshi’s actions after tsok and what the advice she gave aang and roku actually means (my thoughts on “only justice will bring peace” means)

would kyoshi talk about yun during her lifetime?

Yes. First off, it would be impossible to avoid him in the political landscape, because it is mentioned that he passed lots of judgements and signed treaties, ect. Although Kyoshi has grown in her leadership style and it’s turned a little (a lot) anti-establishment, she would still need to deal with the fallout of Yun not being the Avatar, because there would be a need to re-sign treaties and settle disputes with people seeking to take advantage of others now that the Avatar has “changed” would have to be dealt with and in tandem, Yun’s legacy.

But also, in a duology that features grief, I find it a natural continuation of the narrative that Yun would be mourned. You don’t stop knowing or loving someone after they pass, and I feel like mourning all of Yun—the boy he was, where he came from, his legacy, the decisions he made, the impact he had on the people around him, even how he hurt people—is only natural and is slightly unavoidable. I think Kyoshi mourns all of her deceased loved ones.

Just, like the concept of this: she’s always hated pai sho but now when she faces a board in her gut and in her throat things feel wrong because it reminds her of what Yun had to do to survive. A breeze smells like the flour and air Kelsang sent into her face the moments before everything changed. She collects pebbles that Lek would’ve liked. Rangi brings her fire lilies for an anniversary and she starts crying. She sings songs with Wong that were her parent’s favorites that coincidentally, Kelsang knew too.

community in grief and kyoshi’s relationships

He was Rangi’s friend, too. Auntie Mui and Hei-Ran are sure to mourn him in their own ways. In tSoK Kyoshi calls her team Avatar a group of contradictions and misfits and in his way, Yun was too. The false Avatar. What a title!

A continuation of the concept: Rangi and Kyoshi remind each other of him every day for a while, swapping stories about him when it gets to be too much, making eye contact when they can hear his voice making light of something stupid an official has said. Hei-Ran makes her do drills she made Yun do. Auntie Mui makes his favorite dish on his birthday that they do not pass in silence, because then what would they be, that group of misfits, to forget another outcast? If they don’t mourn the boy from Yokoya who will mourn them, or who would’ve mourned them if they hadn’t been so lucky? Who will care for the beggars and orphans of the world if not the Avatar who was once one of them and her companions? In a way, the retribution and pain of it all is justice for the life that Kyoshi took. Like, there’s just so much to unpack in the way she says “Was I right about anything at all? What will they say about me? Avatar Kyoshi, who killed her friend because she couldn’t save him?” But I don’t think her guilt would silence her.

That being said, Yun was fundamentally a victim of a system that failed him. The same one that failed Kyoshi. In another way, her actions are justice on a world that failed her and her best friend and the similarities they shared, and she’s able to take those actions because of the way that Yun impacted her, for better or for worse. So yes, I think during her lifetime, she would speak of Yun and who he was, not letting people forget the ways they (and she) failed him and how easily everyone wants to forget their failure. It brings me to the way she was so angry with the Earth Kingdom establishment for discarding him and trying to hide history away. I don’t think she’d ever do that, even if she did...uh, dispatch him.

kyoshi, immortality, and her role as an avatar

I’d like to turn to two passages:

Kyoshi: “The way you describe it, you’d have to decide what version of yourself you’d be stuck as, forever.”

Lao Ge: “Exactly! Those who grow, live and die. The stagnant pool is immortal, while the clear flowing river dies an uncountable number of deaths.”

and

In the future, perhaps, she’d become finalized like carved stone. It would be easier to deal with the world then. She could only hope.

[...]

She still had to be careful not to lose her balance and fall. Kyoshi kept her eyes focused on her difficult path, sometimes stumbling but making sure to catch herself, taking one step at a time.

This isn’t directly related to what I think she would say, but more about how she lets her experiences, and therefore, her experiences and relationship with Yun, affect who she is. Here, F.C. Yee is detailing the person we see in her cameo in A:tLA. It’s a testament to her growth, yes, but also to how she lived so long. She’s allowed to grow now, while she’s young and still learning. But eventually Kyoshi’s growth will wane, leaving us with the iron woman we saw in A:tLA.

Remember when I said I would call F.C. Yee a sap for the very last Kyoshi POV line? It’s the last sentence in my second excerpt, is that Kyoshi is allowing herself make mistakes. It’s pretty obviously a little deeper than the concept of walking down a slope: She became one of the most revered Avatars, we know how her story ends, if not lots of the in-betweens, but F.C. Yee tells us right here in that sentence. She changed and she learned.

I think, however, that eventually she had to pick a place to stop in order to stop aging. If I had to pick a point where she became “immortal” I’d pick Rangi’s peaceful and timely death surrounded by her loved ones on Yokoya (not Kyoshi Island since I’m going to maintain that her A;tLA cameo was “immortal” Kyoshi) and I think Lao Ge killed her—or at least convinced her to let go.

further thoughts on her longevity: rangi’s role and future

Ok before anybody comes into my inbox like “um zey herglowinggirl I need you to know that actually Rangi also lived to 230 😌″ because I understand the sentiment it’s more like here’s what I’d like to discuss: Kyoshi can’t be immortal around Rangi because Rangi is in so many ways her catalyst for growth. First off, it would be completely out of character for Rangi to be immortal, because she’s constantly moving and being and feeling and judging and that changes her. Positive jing. And Lao Ge says it: “those who grow, live and die.” Rangi believes in the best and strives for the best, for perfection. For Kyoshi to freeze herself and become immortal, that would require picking an imperfect state. And as we know, Sei’naka women do not accept imperfection 😤.

Although Rangi promises to always be by Kyoshi’s side, I think in the latter years of Kyoshi’s live it’s more like the impact that Rangi has had on her in that frozen state. That voice of Rangi’s is part of Kyoshi in those years. However, without Rangi, it is unlikely that Kyoshi will always or commonly choose to act on it. It’s stated multiple times throughout the novels that Rangi is Kyoshi’s center and that she doesn’t know who she’d be without Rangi, but I think the logical conclusion is immortal. With Rangi’s death she becomes her own center by stopping her growth; with Rangi’s death she just becomes...that stone she was talking about, where it does get easier to make decisions because you’re not striving to constantly change and grow. It’s almost a coping mechanism, if you will. Because Kyoshi is more than Rangi, can function without Rangi, it’s just not necessarily pretty.

lao ge’s role and future

Which brings me to my “in my personal version of canon Lao Ge kinda maybe killed Kyoshi” point. Rangi is in no way Kyoshi’s morality, but she is very much the idealistic ‘better’ half. With this catalyst of hope and change gone, I think back to the creation of the Dai Li—it very much sounds to me like something Jianzhu would do. Kyoshi, who had previously been the breakdown of negotiations, created a secret op police force?

I think the moment Kyoshi started being the establishment, the moment she was the band-aid instead of the solution (much like Yun was, hint hint) Lao Ge would’ve paid her a visit. Either this or the creation of the Dai Li created a catalyst for perhaps an existential crisis, perhaps just being tired, perhaps simply knowing what is best...Kyoshi is, and always will be, a sworn criminal who cannot uphold the law, only her own judgements. She is both the law and the breaking and bending of it, and when she loses this balance when Rangi falls from her side and she becomes her own rock I think it would swing her away from her center, and this is where she becomes immortal. Eventually, it would become enough of an issue for people to intervene and tell her that her time as an Avatar is coming to an end.

advice to future avatars

This is my favorite point and I’ll tie it back to Yun in just a second. I have posted about thinking about the impact of Yun’s death on Kyoshi and how that would’ve impacted her legacy and the advice she gave Roku and Aang before. Honestly what strikes me is how proud Kyoshi would be of Aang. The way that each Avatar must learn to forge their own way and become their own person and what their era needs, balancing themselves, is something so lovely. I think Kyoshi would’ve absolutely loved how Aang took the advice of his predecessors and said “no, I know what would be better for me,” and I think post-tSoK Kyoshi, who has learned she has to forge her own way and style as a leader, would love and be so proud of him for that.

However, that doesn’t mean that her advice doesn’t have weight. I think mainly her “immortal” phase would perhaps have an impact on the way Yun impacts her advice. I think “only justice will bring peace” also speaks to the finality of death. Just like immortality, death keeps growth from happening. “only justice will bring peace” is also a nod to the way you must learn to cope with your actions and the way you feel about them. It’s also about Aang’s inner peace, which is something I don’t think I’ve ever seen mentioned. Everyone always wants to talk about what he should’ve done and how Kyoshi was right because she told Aang about her choice to let Chin die, but I think she actually guided him to the idea that you should be ok with yourself. To be confident in what you do and take up responsibility for your actions. Kyoshi wasn’t telling him murder was good. She was telling him she owned up to her actions and chose to make those decisions as an Avatar. To me, this finality speaks of growth after Yun’s death and the end of tSoK. She has grown and then frozen, but that means she has changed.

And although I don’t have an answer for what advice she might’ve given Roku, I think it’s a good way to interpret this. The only thing keeping Kyoshi from being honest about Yun’s death is the fact that Zoryu has “Yun” locked up. I think this is likely one of her biggest regrets, that she cannot be honest and responsible for something that weighs so heavily on her soul. This, I think, guides her advice. Only justice will bring peace. Now that I’ve thought it out, perhaps it wasn’t Lao Ge, and perhaps it was the idea that Yun had never been done justice and perhaps that turmoil never changed, which made her long-lived but not quite immortal. She cannot quite know the peace of death nor of life.

I think she must’ve told Roku that no matter what, he must accept the consequences of what he does. He’s not willing to loose that friendship and I think Kyoshi would’ve understood that, and the questions Roku would’ve had to pose himself as an Avatar. That is Kyoshi’s advice. Only justice, true justice in the form of accountability and self-actualization as a leader, will allow you to make good decisions. The acceptance of this: that whatever he does, he must be willing to accept it’s legacy, learn from it, and teach the next Avatar just as she let Yun’s death affect her leadership and what she taught. And I think that’s probably incredibly poetic, even if I’m getting a bit ahead of myself.

#this might be my magnum opus. will someone on bryke's team just hire me to write an animated kyoshi novels please #honestly im filled with such love id do it for free nd everything #the shadow of kyoshi #avatar: the last airbender #yun #the kyoshi novels #rangshi #kyoshi #the rise of kyoshi #familiar anon #anonymous #answered asks #rangi #kyoshi novels meta #atla meta #z.txt

80 notes · View notes

tvandenneagram · 4 years

Text

Avatar the Last Airbender: Zuko - Type 6w5

Zuko is complex, emotional and holds a lot of self doubt. Throughout the series Zuko changes a lot as he learns who he is and becomes more sure of himself.

At his best, Zuko gains a sense of calm and a better sense of self (integrating to 9). By the end of the series, Zuko grew into a benevolent leader ushering in an era of love and peace. He finally realises the love he gets from Iroh and becomes truly happy.

At his worst, Zuko was bitter and jaded because of his exile. He carried a pompous attitude and had a fixation on regaining his birthright. Zuko would sometimes resort to dishonest means to achieve his goals or to secure his safety (disintegrating to 3). For example, he stole from the family who took him and Iroh in for dinner.

Even in the first season, Zuko was principled and loyal. There were numerous times when he had to choose between capturing Aang and the safety of his soldiers or Iroh and in every instance Zuko chose to leave Aang behind. Additionally, Zuko was banished because he felt the need to speak up because he felt it was wrong for Fire Nation soldiers to be sacrificed.

Throughout the series, Zuko experiences a lot of internal conflict and often behaves like a walking contradiction. For example, he would always say he was marked as unlucky but at the same time believe he made his own luck. This kind of duality and contradictory nature is something that is often seen in 6s.

Like Sokka, Zuko has shown himself to be quite strategic. For example, he successfully hid his movements from Zhao by using the damage done to his ship as a smokescreen. He was also able to evade an attempt on his life and make Zhao think he had died. Zuko is also able to think quickly and solve problems, such as using his swords to shine light on the sunstone.

Zuko was the typing that I struggled the most with, because he shares a lot of traits with other types. I have seen Zuko typed as a 4 and an 8, however the enneagram is about motivation and I do not think that Zuko fits the motivations of these types. For Zuko I was stuck between a 1 and a 6, because his main motivations were to regain his honour and to become accepted by his family again. Ultimately I settled on type 6 for Zuko over type 1 for a few main reasons. The first reason was that Zuko is very reactive and has trouble controlling his emotions. This is much more in line with type 6 than type 1, as 6s are part of the reactive triad. Furthermore a key characteristic of type 1s is that they repress their anger which is something Zuko is not successful with. Zuko often uses his anger as a sort of fuel for his actions and it is a driving force of his bending for most of the series. Another reason why I think Zuko is a 6 over a 1 is that he will resort to immoral acts if they need to be done more readily than a type 1. That said, Zuko does have an extremely strong moral compass and will always try to do the right and honourable thing. For example, he tries to save Zhao even though they are in the middle of an Agni Kai and Zhao had tried to assassinate him.

Type 6s often have complicated relationships with their father. Obviously this is evident in spades with Zuko (who at one point even called the Fire Lord the Father Lord). He was never treated well by his father but always wanted to earn his respect and approval. This is quite common in type 6s who often seek acceptance and approval from their parental figures. 6s seek stability and want to have a safe home. At the beginning of the series, Zuko has been exiled from the Fire Nation and has been told that the only way he will be welcomed back is if he finds the Avatar. This is essentially a wild goose chase as at the time he was given the mission nobody knew about Aang. Even so, Zuko doggedly pursued the mission as it gave him a false sense of hope of being able to return home. It takes Zuko a long time to learn that he will never get the acceptance he craves from his family and to appreciate Iroh's unconditional love.

Zuko shows his 5 wing as he is more reserved and aloof than a 7 wing. He is also more independent and will often push people away (like Iroh) which is unlikely in a 7 wing as they are more people-oriented.

Tri-type: 6w5 - 1w2 - 4w3

Some quotes to describe Zuko’s traits and motivations:

"I used to think this scar marked me – the mark of the banished prince, cursed to chase the Avatar forever. But lately, I've realized I'm free to determine my own destiny, even if I'll never be free of my mark."

"I've struggled for so long to do what's right; to even know what's right. [...] But asking you to end me if I went bad; that was like asking you to figure out right and wrong for me. [...] I understand now. The struggle isn't something a Fire Lord can escape."

"After I leave here today, I'm gonna free Uncle Iroh from his prison. And I'm gonna beg for his forgiveness. He's the one who's been a real father to me!"

“I finally have you [Aang]. But I can't get you home because of this blizzard. There's always something. Not that you would understand. You're like my sister. Everything always came easy to her. She's a firebending prodigy and everyone adores her. My father says she was born lucky. He says I was lucky to be born. I don't need luck, though. I don't want it. I've always had to struggle and fight, and that's made me strong. It's made me who I am.”

"For so long, all I wanted was for you to love me, to accept me. I thought it was my honor that I wanted, but really, I was just trying to please you. You, my father, who banished me just for talking out of turn! My father, who challenged me, a thirteen year-old boy, to an Agni Kai! How can you possibly justify a duel with a child?"

[yelling angrily toward the sky] “You've always thrown everything you could at me! Well, I can take it, and now I can give it back! Come on! STRIKE ME! You've never held back before!”

“I’m angry at myself!

“I don’t need any calming tea! I need to capture the Avatar!”

“Why am I so bad at being good?”

228 notes · View notes

dontforgetthedragon · 4 years

Text

vaguely remembered the one post about how the show makes viewers amenable to the idea of zuko’s redemption from the start, so now im finally watching through atla for the first time i decided to try and note down every time the show does this that i pick up on

Book 1

zuko is always placed alongside iroh, who is naturally very likeable

as early as ep3 zuko is pitted against zhao, who is highly unlikeable. as such, the audience is already being encouraged to root for zuko in certain situations

it is also through these early interactions that we first get a real good look at zuko’s need to have his honour validated with his vulnerable “did you really mean that?” to iroh after he tells zhao that zuko is more honourable than him. this is a much more sympathetic way to communicate this than the angry shouting about his honour he also does

in ep7 we are given our first example of zuko chosing to delay his quest for the avatar for the sake of someone else. in this case, he rescues iroh from his captors, giving aang time to leave for the fire temple

this is also in direct contradiction to his earlier threats to leave iroh behind if he didnt hurry up because catching the avatar was too important to delay. thus this moment also communicates that zuko may be more bark than bite, and that maybe he doesnt rank catching aang as highly on his list of priorities as he talks like he does

the zhao-zuko dynamic returns in the fire temple, when zuko is seen tied up along with katara, sokka etc, while zhao lords it over all of them. thus subconciously we may perceive zuko as temporarily on the gaang’s side through a common enemy

ep12 is of course the big backstory episode for both zuko and aang and the way we are shown both stories interwoven with each other connects the characters and makes us more likely to feel similar amounts of sympathy for both. the visuals also really help with this, eg: the fire nation crew’s can fire transitioning into aang and katara’s campfire

and that shared look as aang and zuko catch sight of each other in the eye of the storm as aang’s flying away? really cemented that feeling of connection

zuko’s backstory also completely recontextualises his scar as a mark of his compassion towards the common people of his nation, and his insistence in the worth of lives

despite his loud assertions that no life is more important than catching the avatar, zuko makes the concious choice once more to let aang go for the sake of others – in this case, his crew – thus solidifying what we learned in ep7

and just in case that was too subtle for some, we also get to see zuko risk his own life actively saving a crew member from certain death. yknow, just to hammer the point home that zuko values other peoples’ lives way more than he’s been actively taught he should

just one episode later we get that little friendship speech aang gives zuko while he’s still waking up after being hit by a drugged arrow. from this we see that aang doesnt want zuko to be his enemy.

we can also infer from their location at this point that aang carried/dragged zuko to safety after discovering his identity either bc he didnt want zhao to find out it was zuko who orchestrated the rescue or he really just wanted to talk to him that badly

interestingly enough i think this also counts as the first real step back, what with zuko’s response and aang’s sad “i guess not”

zhao’s underhand attempted murder of zuko has us rooting for zuko’s survival, as well as bc we hate zhao and dont want his plans to succeed, especially since it comes not long after a very human moment on zuko’s ship

in fact, the fact that we’ve been shown so many human moments beteen zuko and iroh and their crew in contrast with a complete lack of anything like that from zhao all the way through the season makes us much more likely to be emotionally attached to zuko and his antics by this point. zhao hasnt given us anything to be fond of

the moment when iroh genuinely thinks zuko may be dead and you can see it on his face. as mentioned before, iroh is a very likeable character and anything that might hurt him this badly feels like an awful thing. ergo: zuko’s death = awful

iroh and zuko’s little moment of scheming aka the moment zuko’s survival is confirmed. i never thought i’d be so hyped to hear a plot to capture aang for themselves but i hate zhao so much at this point (for previously mentioned reasons plus extra) that if aang had to be captured id be much happier if it were by these two (also im assuming im supposed to be riding the high from finding out that the awful thing that is zuko’s death has not actually occurred)

“ever since i lost my son” “uncle, you dont have to say it” “i think of you as my own”

finally, when the water hand grabs zhao and despite everything zuko tries to save him. this is the guy who tried to have him killed and when it comes down to it zuko still tries to save his life. zhao refuses to be saved. this isnt an unusual trope for the climax of a piece of media but normally it would be the protagonist trying to save the antagonist to highlight the protagonists moral superiority, not one of the antagonists trying to save another antagonist. by placing zuko in the position usually reserved for the protagonist, the show implies zukos capacity to become one

#atla #avatar: tla #zuko #a:tla

23 notes · View notes

firelxdykatara · 4 years

Note

Literally what? It makes perfect sense for Sozin to outlaw homosexuality. He wanted a war. He needed an army. He heralded the fire nation as the master race. That’s textbook “homosexuality is bad because we need to do whatever we can to make as many perfect fire nation babies as we can.” The fire nation as a whole, sure, doesn’t make much sense. Sozin specifically, abso-fucking-lutely he’d be the supremacist straights only because reproduction vital guy.

It only ‘makes perfect sense’ if you ascribe to the very childish system of morality that spawned it: well, he’s definitely evil. @araeph explained it quite well in this post, which I’m assuming you didn’t read, despite the fact that I linked it in the comment to which you are referring. I’ll quote the relevant bits, though:

The easiest, cheapest way to discuss morality in media is to gather all of the “evil” traits on one side of a conflict, all of the “good” traits on the other, and then assign people “good” or “evil” status while not allowing any overlap. We can give a bit of a pass to children’s cartoons (although they, too, have become more complex in recent years) because children are still in the earliest stages of learning right from wrong. But Legend of Korra is intended for an older audience than A:TLA, while being infinitely more childish in its morality.

Also below, an excerpt from a post defending Bryke’s portrayal of LGBT issues:

and there is Sozin banning same sex relationship which again doesn’t contradict the source material, and Sozin being evil isn’t anything new,

Here is the premise both these arguments are working from: that because person A believes in wrong idea B, that that person must also believe in wrong idea C, D, and E, all the way down the alphabet. Because they’re Definitely Evil. But that’s not the way it works at all, and Sozin himself is a prime example.

People with discriminatory beliefs always have a system for them, a rationale that they use to justify their worldviews and fit them into a larger belief structure. There is a method to the madness; if there weren’t, hatred would be much easier to conquer because dismantling it wouldn’t require undermining other deeply held beliefs, with which it’s often intertwined. Sozin’s madness was an extension and expansion of his idea that the Fire Nation is superior to all other nations, and that he alone is the guardian of that superiority. Every evil action he takes stems from those premises:

Colonizing the Earth Kingdom. In Sozin’s mind, the Fire Nation experiencing an unprecedented era of peace and prosperity equaled a mandate to restructure all other nations so that they would be as “great” as the Fire Nation.

Challenging Avatar Roku in the palace. In “The Avatar and the Firelord,” Sozin flatly states that Roku’s allegiance should be to Sozin first, and everyone else second. After all, if the Fire Nation is the greatest country in the world, anything that might challenge that belief—such as the equality and balance between four nations—is a threat and must be eradicated. In a similar vein:

Leaving Avatar Roku to die after helping him fight the volcano. The volcano was a threat to Sozin’s homeland, and so when Sozin and Roku battled it together, they were working as two Fire Nation citizens. However, as soon as Roku’s premature demise left an opening to begin Sozin’s conquest, the Firelord couldn’t see past his own vision of a perfect world, in which he and his country dominated everything.

Hunting the dragons. Sozin’s aggressive world conquest required that the general philosophy behind firebending be changed and all traces of the old ways be extinguished. Humans could be bought or frightened into suppressing the “fire is life” belief, but that wouldn’t work on the dragons. Thus, in his mind it became necessary to wipe out all traces of the dragons, and therefore, the true meaning of fire.

There is nothing in Sozin’s worldview that suggests he would invent, from whole-cloth, without it existing before in his nation, institutionalized homophobia--not unless you subscribe to the ‘well, he’s definitely evil’ mode of thought, which LoK does, but which AtLA approached with considerably more nuance:

Toph: It’s like these people are born bad. Aang: No, that’s wrong. I don’t think that was the point of what Roku showed me at all. Sokka: Then what was the point? Aang: Roku was just as much Fire Nation as Sozin was, right? If anything, their story proves anyone’s capable of great good and great evil.

And, at the end of the day, it all comes back to my personal problem with that entire storyline (nevermind the fact that Korra had nothing to say about Sozin except a petulant ‘that guy was the worst’, as if this was new information and she didn’t already know that he had orchestrated the Air Nomad genocide): the fact that it was completely unnecessary.

This was a fantasy world, and while inspired by many real world cultures, it was not beholden to real world history the way historical fiction would be. There was no need to inject institutionalized homophobia where there was no hint of its existence before in the entire franchise. Evidently, it was too much to ask that this one fantasy world exist where people like me were never persecuted for their sexuality. And it absolutely does not sit right with me that a couple of straight men shoved that ham-fistedly into the story they were telling with their newly revealed bisexual lead.

And it doesn’t even make sense that the Fire Nation--the nation with women in the armed forces, and a distinct lack of evident misogyny, particularly when contrasted with the anvils dropping all over the place in the Northern Water Tribe--was the one with homophobic attitudes (and not just attitudes, but actively pulling people from their homes for the crime of Being Gay), and not, say, the Water Tribes:

But you know where homophobia would most likely gain traction? In the Water Tribes. Sexism and homophobia often go hand in hand, and in a culture where men reign supreme and gender roles are fixed, it would make sense for Korra and Asami’s romance to be a threat to the perceived natural order. But you see, the Water Tribe are the “good guys”, so they can’t be discriminatory, right?

#atla #atla comics critical #anyway no it absolutely does not make sense for sozin to have created institutionalized homophobia out of thin air #especially not considering his on-screen relationship with roku #thank you and good day #Anonymous #asked

33 notes · View notes

lunelantern · 4 years

Text

~~~~🌙Uchiha Sasuke 🌙- - the light of the darkness🌙~~~

[~~Escaping the matrix / Infinite TSUKUYOMI dreamland~~]

{***💗💝💝💖Sakura's pure love and their unbreakable bond ***}

To put it bluntly, Sasuke's character shouts the following message: DO NOT BE A SLEEPY SHEEPLE PRAYING TO THE LIFE SCRIPT!🐑🐑🐑

BE YOURSELF!💡💖

I've always had this hunch that there's much more about Sasuke's character than the eye can see and how after minutely rewinding the manga and the philosophy behind his character, I've come to realize that his construction is a wending breadcrumb trail for the secret educational message of the manga: question everything, do not take anything for granted, think with an open mind, ward off manipulation, walk away from the clever manipulators who try to crush your free Will and whirlwind you back into the flock of obedient sleepy sheeple🐑🐑🐑

Uzumaki Naruto as the hero and the promoter of the status quo fits into the pattern of the cookie-cutter hero that flatters the vast majority; he's the Serpent 🐍🐍🐍 disguised as the guiding lighthouse through the storm in the "Happy-ever-after" fable. Naruto keeps the Life Script narrative a-flame under the guise of morally and politically righteousness.

Funny thing is that the allegory of the manga illustrates this warped, reverse herd mentality that's meant to crush the free Will and freedom of speech. The real Serpent of the manga isn't Orochimaru who quests the ylem of our existence as presented and struggles to free himself from the "Infinite dream", but Naruto himself who tries to lure and "guide" us back to the cattle of loopholed slaves in the prison-like cage of so called democracy and status quo. When in reality, he shoves the Life Script under our noses served on a silver plate with the false promise of accessing to spirit elevation, freedom, love and peaceful cohabitation and happiness.

Which contradicts the sequel of the manga as per Orochimaru's statement in Sasuke's Novel: there is always upcoming conflict bubbling and waiting to erupt. Which is reiterated in Boruto Manga's narration.

Obito Uchiha too makes us alert not to fall for this clever web when he mocks Naruto's vehement lifetime goal to whip Sasuke's ass back on what he calls the "real track", stating that without considering and acknowledging Sasuke's worldview is yet another form of manipulation. 🧟‍♀️🧟‍♂️🧟‍♂️🧟‍♀️🧠🤪

Sasuke is presented as the tragic anti-hero who lost his path, the fallen angel who needs to be guided from the Purgatory and led to heaven. When in reality, he warns against manipulation, indoctrination under the false pretense of righteousness and politically correct. 💡

Sasuke is the character who seeks constant enlightment🧠🧠🧠. He doesn't take anything for granted. He questions everything he hears and he won't stop until he unearthed the truth. He encourages us not to fall for the sugary coated words of the society who'd do anything to whoosh us back into the chain of slavery🔗🔗🐑 and punishing us for trying to be our own true selves.

Sasuke is correct in brazenly throwing the truth into the flabbergasted faces of the Rookie Nine🐑🐑🐑 upon joining the war: "I don't care what you think about me."👏👏👏 Meaning that he won't alter his own true way to fit into the Life Script. He won't forgo his true self in lieu of having their acceptance.👌💡💯

In this case, being accepted and acknowledged by the masses is yet another false validation of self served as politically and morally correct. The shinobi world won't accept Uchiha Sasuke for what he is (only Sakura does 😉), unless he follows the predetermined scenario of Life. 😍💖💗💝💋

Haku himself admitted to having fallen for the Life Script willfully because he lacked inner power and self-identity🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♂️; he accepted the Life Script, he mirthfully accepted to be a mindless obedient voiceless and kitless sheep 🐑 in the hands of a criminal, in lack of a life purpose.

The ones with a different onset of life principles with always be shunned and rejected and antagonized by the masses. Because they poses as a real threat to the self-identities of the masses of obedient Life Script devotees (which perfectly explains racial and gender discrimination).

People have a natural instinct to reject what's different and Naruto is a prime exemple of this survival instinct. He never accepted anyone who does not share his worldview and always fought to curb everyone back into the Life Script.

Sasuke's rejection by the society only proves it that breakthrough ideas, inovative and creative people who think differently will always struggle in a tug - of - war with the Life Script consisting of obedient sheeple.

Don't be inovative, don't think differently, don't behave differently, be like us and follow wordlessly and mindlessly is the message that Uzumaki Naruto spreads through the Manga 🧟‍♀️🧟‍♀️🧟‍♂️ under the pretense of acquiring universal peace. Which proved to be a sublime faux pas because naruto's installment as Hokage proved not to solve anything; there's still a lot of conflict undergoing (see the clownish grotesque circus of the Manga's Las Vegas aka the "reformed" Hidden Mist 🎠🎡🎢🎪💈 village the shambolic motherboard of crimes and conspiracies as the drain pools is ready to flood), there's still pain and remorse bubbling hot and there's still a deep state with an abscound agenda (Boruto - Kara and Otsutsuki aliens 👽👽👽) unfolding right under the flimsy veil of peace.

Not coincidentally, Sasuke is the only one who tapped his real conscience that's hidden deep into the soul and awakened true enlightment, through the spiritual journey of his inner dialogue with the Creator of Ninshu, the Sage of Six Paths as the prophet of the manga: the ultimate visual Doujutsu which raises the veil of deceit off the eyes, the key to unlock the ultimate truth - - the Rinnegan (aka the Third Eye of eternal knowledge in Buddhism).

Sasuke is the only living in the universe who is immune to the dreamland cast by Infinite TSUKUYOMI. Sasuke is the only one who can break free from the matrix and ward off any deceit and manipulation.

Even having knowledge of his true intentions and his peculiar vision of a Hokage, the Sage of Six Paths imparts half of his chakra with Sasuke.

There are interesting theories about consciousness and reincarnation which profer that, upon death, our souls are presented with two choices: either go back to earth and reincarnate as a recycled soul with erased memories or ward off the light and walk into the void of darkness to reunite with your true form (remember, Naruto is the deceiving "light" 💡🌞 and Sasuke is the blissful "darkness" 🌑🌙).

Without sounding like a far-fetched conspirationist who went too far into the rabbit hole, there are challenging theories which go as far as to assert that our recycled souls are lured and trapped by mishiveous entities which would use an entire repertoire of manipulations into trick us back into reincarnation and rebirth, in order to feed from our souls and energies, which makes it impossible for us to break the matrix of Earth and reunite with our true selves in the afterlife. Which is exactly what the Otuatuski Clan of unearthly entities do in the Manga: use the earth shinobi as chakra vessels to feed from 🤔👀

Sasuke Uchiha shares a very strong, soul-enriching message: never trust what you see, never take it for granted what the other say, break free from the mind-benumbing spirit-crushing Life Script scenario, never blindly follow the herd without using your own mind, always think, always ask questions, always seek for answers, always make sure to see things for what they are, always look behind the veil, always trust your gut, trust your instinct, open your mind and let them atune to your senses and trust only your own self. Sasuke teaches us that the truth and the real source of light must be sought only inside our own hearts and pure, selfless and love is the answer.

Sasuke teaches us how to break free from IT😉😎 and not to be scared to do so.

Sasuke tells us to not be scared to be us, to think differently and to seek our own answers (he's the only one who didn't take anything for granted, who didn't blindly join the Shinobi War without digging for the truth - - he resurrected the former Shinobi who created the village to seek for the truth and filter it through his own mind).

"I am not a child nor I am pure", his answer to Hashirama's remark means that he isn't an obedient sheep into the flock who accepts the Life Script obediently. "impure" in this context means that Sasuke is not corruptible or brainwashed. Sai was wrong when he stated that Sasuke "is a blank canvas ready to be painted in colors", namely he's a naive idiot ignoramus to the manipulation going afloat who's bend to every puppet master's commands. That's Sai, he unconsciously perfectly depicted himself.

Sasuke incites us to find the light withing ourselves and find the answers inside us because that's the only source of truth.

If you'd like a movie analogy, Naruto Manga suggest that we're living in a matrix, a simulated dreamworld and you're presented with the two pills - the red pill or the blue pill, with Naruto and Sasuke as the avatars of the two pills (Naruto will trap you into the matrix and Sasuke is your ticket to break free from it).

🌅⛩️⛩️⛩️⛩️⛩️⛩️⛩️⛲🌌🌌🌌🌌🌌

➡️ Now for what true love means...

... Sakura.

She's the whirlpool from where pure love stems. She is the only manga character who loves Sasuke for what he really is. She's the only one who'd follow him unconditionally without abandoning her own true self.

Sakura surrendered to Sasuke unconditionally. She gave herself to him so intimately with abandonment and unadulterated heart. She offered her heart selflessly without asking him for anything in return. And that's why her love is benediction; she remains an angel who only wants to shower Sasuke with her love.

And that's why sasuke is the sole keeper of her heart. The only man who can love her. Because sasuke is the only man who reached spiritual enlightment. He's the only one who can see her love for what it is - sacrosanct, noble and pure.

Sakura would have followed him when he joined Orochimaru only because she wanted him to feel loved, to give him her love.

Sakura knew something that only Kakashi, Obito and Zetsu knew because they were witnesses, namely that a clash between Sasuke and Naruto would inevitably result in both dying. And that's why she pleaded with him one last time before being silenced with a RINNEGAN genjutsu by sasuke who desperately tried to break from the matrix. 🔗🔗🔗. She simply wanted to give him love, selflessly, with nothing in return.

Even Itachi tried to place sasuke under a matrix by fabricating a credible past for him and possibly channeling his future back into the Life Script - - Itachi knew that the less he knew, the less he'd suffer. Which obviously didn't work out well and in the end, Itachi admitted his fault for trying to change his little brother and manipulate him.

Sakura's love is transcendental, is pure and unbiased. She's the only legitimate source of love in the manga, the paramount of it. Because one who loves forgives and accepts unconditionally.

The one who loves you genuinely will never try to manipulate change you.

Sakura love the real Sasuke. She loves him for everything he represents, his soul, his mind, his heart, his history, his body.

Naruto selfishly suggests that they'd finally get along in death when he'd not be a kyuubi vessel anymore snd he won't bear the curse of knowledge the Uchiha on his shoulders, which is a romanticized brainwashing way of stating that Naruto attempts to erase Sasuke's hystory, roots and ancestry by cutting the ropes with the Uchiha. Ultimately, Naruto suggests that Sasuke gives up with his true self and join the cattle.

Sakura doesn't do this. She accepts Sasuke's true self and loves him unconditionally and that's what true love means, one that glows, heals, accepts and surrenders unconditionally, with no prior ado or conditions. 💖💝💗

#Sasuke #Sakura #Sasusaku #Naruto Manga analysis #Naruto Manga pairs #Naruto Manga symbols #Infinite TSUKUYOMI #Reincarnation #Matrix #Consciousness #Naruto Manga philosophy #Uchiha Sasuke analysis #Sasusaku pair explained #Sasusaku love #Sakura love #Naruto Manga theories

19 notes · View notes

gascon-en-exil · 4 years

Text

I’ve been thinking for a bit today about the women of Three Houses, and I came to conclusion that if were to rewrite my top 10 list of FE women today it wouldn’t include any characters from this game on it. It’s easy to see that this game has been great for inspiring lesbian content, but as I am not a lesbian nor am I or ever was a woman (although sometimes I play one in bed) that’s not something with which I can connect very strongly. There are a small number of women in FE16 who ping on my radar of strangely specific traits that get my attention in female characters -

Ingrid the impoverished aristocrat, although as her response to this is to attempt to break into the highly gendered world of knighthood she loses me at that point,

Manuela the flirty alcoholic almost-maternal mess who gets fanboy’ed in-universe by a theatre queen, drawing comparisons to various divas venerated by gay men,

and possibly Constance, whose just-released profile indicates she may appeal to me for the same reason Ingrid does only without the knighthood angle

- but of course the one everyone judges you over is Edelgard and how you feel about her. More than once I’ve been called a misogynist because I’ve been critical of her, and while I don’t think what I say about her below the cut is going to change any minds about that I do feel like providing some context for why she just doesn’t do it for me.

It’s easy for me to lay out that Edelgard lacks any of the aforementioned traits that tend to get me invested in fictional female characters. She doesn’t have Celica’s religious angle or Camilla’s twisted maternity or Micaiah’s multi-layered design elements that call back to Jugdral and also employ my favorite magic type - so through the pre-release phase I approached information on Edelgard with the assumption that I wouldn’t care about her as much as I would the two male lords. Also, the plot hook of a not!German rebelling against a pseudo-Catholic church immediately gave me the thought that she was going to be some kind of fantasy Martin Luther...and naturally I’d be heavily biased against that.

And what do you know, it turns out I was correct although not for the reasons I was expecting. Edelgard isn’t a fantasy Martin Luther at all; she’s a villain with some extremely confused writing who the game practically demands that you be sympathetic to in all cases. When talking about how Three Houses attempts to make imperialists sympathetic I think it’s important to make a major distinction between Claude and Edelgard. In Claude’s case you can draw a clear line between his childhood trauma and his current driving motivation; you cannot do so with Edelgard, or at least not between the trauma she and game play up and the goals she actually pursues. You can draw a line between the Insurrection and how it disrupted Edelgard and her family and her drive to curtail noble power in the Empire and then reunite the continent under her by force...and in a way I love that. I can’t personally relate to Claude’s struggles as a biracial person, but as a French person living in an Anglo-controlled state I can somewhat connect with Edelgard feeling like her people have been passed over by others in recent history and can draw parallels between her childhood experiences and those of Louis XIV who is, if nothing else, perhaps the most storied ruler in French history and one of the reasons that Louisiana exists as it does at all. If the game had chosen to focus on that trauma and carried it forward in Crimson Flower with the script previously laid out by Arvis I think Edelgard would have been an amazing villain protagonist, as well as an even better antagonist in Azure Moon where she’s allowed to really go all out.

Though of course that’s not what FE16 actually does. It plays up the Agarthan torture because the morality there is black and white and the physical and psychological trauma Edelgard experienced as a result is visceral and easily understandable. It apparently doesn’t matter to Byleth or to Edelgard’s staunchest supporters in the fandom that there’s zero connection between that trauma and the war she starts, that they indeed lie in contradiction when her torturers are her close allies. It also doesn’t matter that the constant moral dissonance on display in CF prevents it from ever feeling heroic but also hobbles it as a villain route because of the playable cast only Hubert is willing to own how much of a terrifying evil bastard he is. All that makes Edelgard difficult to appreciate on the basis of her real motivations, not to mention impossible to relate to unless the player gets genuinely invested in the self-insert aspect of Byleth and how much CF leans into the Edeleth romance. Not a fan of Avatars or their dating sim elements, and even if I were I’m not into women, so...you’ve lost me, sorry. I don’t think that second part matters so much though, because if everything else were the same but Edelgard were a man I’m pretty sure I would still be shipping Ferdibert while saying that male!Edelgard could have used some better writing because Byleth’s presence kills his character in so many ways. The most additional content you’d get out of me in that case would be headcanons on the Imperial gay threesome, if even that.

#Fire Emblem #FE16 #Fire Emblem Three Houses

26 notes · View notes

spockandawe · 5 years

Note

For the fandom/ships meme: B, D, I, J, K, Q, T, U, V, W, X, Y. (I mean, I like everything you say on fandoms, so you knew this would be fairly comprehensive.)

B - A pairing–platonic, romantic or sexual–that you initially didn’t consider, but someone changed your mind.

Oh man, there are lots for sure!! I’m a sucker for a well-written crackship, and I know I have fun writing them too :P From the last ask, starscream/optimus and jazz/soundwave were both things I’d never considered until I read a really amazing fic, and now I adore them both. Or ratchet/skywarp. That fic didn’t even GO there, but now I have a wip of my own and have already been experimenting with drift/ratchet/skywarp because why make any sense at all when i could so easily make LESS sense :P

I do it to myself too, I tossed off the idea of cyclonus/starscream as a joke, my “friends” encouraged me, and oh god suddenly I’m two fics deep in a series with at least four separate fics planned for the future. Oooh, or in a different fandom for a change, @veliseraptor threw me RIGHT down the steve/loki pit, and I’m never leaving, this is where I live now.

D - A pairing you wish you liked but just can’t.

HMMM. I think... I don’t dislike many ships in the franchises like homestuck or transformers, where there’s a giant cast to mush up against each other. I guess I wish I had a bit more natural enthusiasm for brainstorm/perceptor. It’s really cute and I definitely do like it, I just can’t muster up much enthusiasm for perceptor in general, which puts some damper on it. I do like it a decent amount, I just wish I liked it more.

I - Has Tumblr caused you to stop liking any fandoms, if so, which and why?

It’s made me... wary of some fandoms. Or fandom in general, in some ways. Steven Universe, if I get involved with that again, it’s going to be art and no words, because the moral policing atmosphere is just getting to be Too Much. If I wasn’t rolling around in a universe populated by nigh-immortal space robots, I’m sure there would be other stuff too, but I’ve been pretty sheltered.

J - Name a fandom you didn’t think about until you saw it all over Tumblr. (You don’t have to care about it or follow it; it just has to be something that Tumblr made you aware of.)

Boku no hero academia is the most recent one, I think. I don’t know if I’ll ever participate in things, but I finally read the manga and loved it a lot! I caught the edges of the buzz about the Imperial Radch books, and I don’t know if I would have ever read them if I hadn’t had prior awareness when my friend brought them up, and these are some of my favorite books EVER, so I’m glad tumblr clued me in XD

K - What character has your favorite development arc/the best development arc?

Oh no, this is HARD :c The trouble with casts of thousands is that nobody can dominate the focus too hard. But when a story is super-focused on a character and how they Develop, I tend to drift away. Umm. Cyclonus and Whirl both hold a special, special, special place in my heart. Megatron probably has one of the more dramatic development arcs, even though Cyclonus and Whirl both own my heart.

Or. I know it’s not the real question. But I love characters where the story WRECKS them, even if it doesn’t quite follow through on putting them back together again. Whirl is a long ways from where he used to be, but still definitely has issues. But oh man. Prowl. STARSCREAM. The transformers comics took two proud, cold, capable assholes and broke them DOWN. And it was GLORIOUS. It’s not really the same as a development arc, because they’re both still... not in good shape. But I wouldn’t care so much if I hadn’t seen where they started and what happened to do this to them. It’s negative development, but it’s so tragic and tasty and gives me such interesting material to think about!!

Q - A fandom you’ve abandoned and why.

Ahh... Avatar, probably. Of all the fandoms I’ve participated in on here, that’s the one I’m least likely to return to. I think the problem is that after I did Avatar, I rolled around in Homestuck. I moved from there to Transformers. I dabbled in Marvel. The Avatar universe is very interesting, but the cast is much more limited, the universe is more constrained, and there’s One Canon.

Canon doesn’t necessarily mean that much to me, I’ll cheerfully multiship no matter what. But it’s different thinking ‘well this is canon, but what if... Other Thing’ versus ‘lmao does anyone even know how many separate continuities there are at this point’. It breaks my brain wide open. I don’t start from canon and branch out. I think that ‘well, optimus and megatron have classically had characters and shippy dynamics shaped like X, Y, and Z, so I can pick and choose bits and pieces of settings, scenarios, backstory, supporting cast, the possibilities are ENDLESS--’ Homestuck plays a lot with the idea of continuity and comics universes are one of the closest parallels I can think of to the mess that is transformers. I just don’t know how I’m supposed to go back to playing in smaller sandboxes at this point XD

T - Do you have any hard and fast headcanons that you will die defending?

Autistic Cyclonus. Fite me.

Or, Starscream with his history and current mental health reflected in disordered eating and sleeping, with a persistent food-hoarding habit. I would say fite me, but actually, read my stories where I stick it right in the text and see how nicely it works.

U - Three favorite characters from three different fandoms, and why they’re your favorites.

Different fandoms? DIFFERENT fandoms?????? D:

1. Transformers: Starscream - he’s just... the complete disaster package. He’s vain and egotistical, competent and dangerous, but never manages to succeed and make it LAST. In IDW, he beat out massive odds to get where he is, and survived by the skin of his teeth, and has struggled and STRUGGLED and is prone to being his own worst enemy, and has sabotaged himself enough that he’s barely staying afloat despite sincerely wanting to try his best. I’m weak against all of these things.

2. oh god how am I supposed to pick a favorite homestuck character this is CYBERBULLYING. Okay. Um. I’m going to say Equius. There’s something about the Zahhaks being so stiff and cold and rigid and distant, but also somehow way too close, and swinging between antagonistic and desperate to please. I’ve done better words about Zahhaks in the past, and I’m starting to get sleepy right now, but I am ALWAYS a sucker for the characters who are a mess of contradictions and prone to sabotaging themselves :P

3. Steven Universe: Jasper - Ahahaha, one last self-sabotaging love of my life. She’s different from those others, because she’s been pretty much at the top of her game until very recently. But her issues!!! Everything to do with being the Perfect quartz (from a failed colony, belonging to a dead diamond). The pride and self-doubt are a delicious combination, especially once she gets a taste of fusion and the sense of belonging that comes with it. If I ever did write steven universe, it would have to be about here. Those contradictions and the way they pull you apart, that’s the same thing that draws me hardest to starscream, but it’s hard to do justice to the emotions when you’re writing about them, it’s got so much more impact when you show them directly instead.

V - Which character do you relate to most?

Ooooooh. This. Is tough. Ironfist is the melancholy answer, Nautica is the upbeat one. They’re both spergy engineer types with interests all over the place, who get so ENTHUSIASTIC and excited, and I’m not nearly as outgoing as either of them, but god do they ring familiar to me XD Or, Cyclonus is also a very valid candidate. Internet spock is an uncommunicative recluse, but that’s still a lot more outgoing than irl spock, and Cyclonus is many emotions turned RIGHT inward, even when it would be really, really useful to express them just a LITTLE. And all the plot that goes down between 47-55 with Cyclonus, god, it’s not like I’ve ever done anything like that, but it hits me right in the weak spot.

#spock replies #long post/transformers #starscream #steven universe #jasper #homestuck #equius zahhak #solluxisms

5 notes · View notes

syzygyzip · 6 years

Text

His Cage pt. 2: Wheel of Fortune

This essay may be read on its own, but it is a follow-up to another essay which psychoanalyzes the figure of Holy Knight Hodrick, a character from Dark Souls 3. In this section, the method and purpose of Dark Souls analysis comes under investigation, catalyzed by other images from Hodrick’s environment.

Hodrick as meta-critique of Freudian psycho-interpretation

Dark Souls 3 is known for its skillful, self-reflexive commentary; this game is keenly aware of the subculture that surrounds it. That in mind, what are we to make of the relatively blatant symbolic suggestiveness of Hodrick and the Greatwood? Perhaps their on-the-nose imagery is a reaction to analysis of previous Dark Souls games: the castration narrative is often cited in symbolic interpretation of Dark Souls 1, and the birth canal-esque passage of Dark Souls 2’s tutorial area is a classic introduction for people that play around with interpreting Dark Souls psychologically. And surely those myths and images are semi-intentional, relevant, and illuminating, but they are by no means the place to stop. This lore video points out how the vertebrae shackles collected by Mound-Makers resemble inkblots, the old psychoanalytic tool etched into the cultural memory as an image of Freudianism. One “reads out” of the inkblot the contents of their own unconscious. The understanding of projection, and the compensatory nature of the unconscious was one of the most significant discoveries at the dawn of psychology. Dark Souls could symbolize the principle of this discovery in a number of ways, but it is very intentional with its images, so when it decides to show us an inkblot in particular, the historical context is helpful. It’s an old and simple technique, which traces only the broad strokes of the analysand’s complexes. Likewise, Hodrick, the Greatwood, and Mound-Makers provide the interpreter with the rudiments for symbolic exploration of Dark Soul environments.

Though this area is introductory, it is – like any part of the unconscious – inexhaustible in its depth and generous in its mutability. Consider the amorality of the Mound-Makers. Are they good or evil? Vicious or tender? Sustainers of maya or karmic accelerationists? There is so much room for the player to read into this allegiance a preferred moral perspective, at least partially determined by the general attitude the player keeps in regards to the slaughter of enemies. For the totally “unimmersed,” Dark Souls is a game and a game only, to be played, poked, prodded, to be mastered and speedran, and in that case of course any covenant is merely functional, there to surround and present a mechanic. For that player, the Mound-Makers are truly amoral. But for those who roleplay, who make at least some of their choices based on the imagined ethics of their avatar (despite extremely scarce moral responses from the game itself!), the issue is a little more complicated. Those who are simply in the habit of asking themselves, “Do I want to ally myself with this person’s values?” will not find an easy answer. On the surface, the covenant is abhorrently nihilistic, but a seasoned player may come away with a different take. So in this way the Mound-Makers, like the inkblot, are a measure of a player(/-character)’s feeling-involvement, which is itself born out of the player’s interpretational attitude.

When analyzing an object in a video game, always take into account the method by which it is encountered! Though the route to all this Freudian material in the Undead Settlement is a little arcane, it needs to be. The cryptic riddle about “Nana”, the obscure side-streets: these are there to make the player feel as though they are uncovering something secret. The obscurity is baked-in to make obvious that this material is repressed.

Though the riddle is strange, it is spoken aloud to the player, which is actually quite a telegraph by Dark Souls standards. The handiness of this secret is also metaphorically descriptive of this level of interpretation. If one stops at the purely Freudian: the mother, the father, the phallus, then they will project that schematic onto every available target. They will see reality as nothing more than a circus of oral fixations and castration dramas. If this stage of psychoanalysis is not passed through, it is nothing more than another cage to be carried around. It is the most rudimentary place to get stuck in the engagement with the unconscious.

The Armory of Symbols

What are we to make of the fact that the treasure of this area is the transposing kiln? This round thing, this simple, Arthurian symbol of the Self? It is both representative of the totality, and a totally profane and reductive simplification. I’ll explain what I mean by that.

On the one hand it is a true grail, because it has the capacity to turn the game’s hardest challenges into new tools. This is a fantastic life lesson, fundamental and perennially true. It is the pure gift of interpretation. It is said that the Buddha, in his realization that there is nothing outside of Nirvana, thereby saw that even the most torturous experiences of life, and the most unforgiving realms of Hell, were not apart from Nirvana, and that seeing them in this way thereby rectified this subjective experience of being in Hell. Once it was rephrased as Nirvana, it was always Nirvana, because all the suffering was born out of false views. Anyway, that is a very lofty height of interpretation, but one can see the boundlessness of the tool. That when the true cosmic appropriateness of an instance of suffering is groked, it is changed. On the other hand, transposition is a cheap parlor trick. It changes the essence of a boss into a weapon. It really only does one thing. Some of these weapons are useful, and most are flashy. It is almost mandatory for these weapons and spells to have a unique gimmick. So most of the time they convey to the wielder some unique flavor, some specific characteristic to consider, but even collecting such interpretations as these is merely a “building a collection.” Pinning down butterflies into a glass case. It is really no different than stockpiling corpses as Hodrick does. This device encourages the player to keep fighting, collecting, stacking bodies, finding new and interesting ways to kill people.

And ultimately, the same is true of collecting symbolism. Stockpiling a collection of unused weapons is no more or less a perversion that keeping a catalogue of archetypes for its own sake. The psychological interpretation of Hodrick, the Greatwood, and their unsightly tableau is relatively simple and straight-forward because it is meant to provide the player-interpreter with an introduction to the technique. The “game” of symbolic analysis is pointless if you spend your time taking potshots.

Wheel of Fate

Understanding the symbolism of the Mother through the eyes of Hodrick may be relatively simple, but the Undead Settlement also provides us with a more complex and transpersonal variation of the birth motif, localized at the far edge of town, hidden in a valley below. There we find catacombs tunneled into the rock, reminding us of the community of villagers who labor all day burying their dead. The Great Mother is thereby invoked, in her role which deteriorates form, which composts. The bodies decay, return to the Earth, and nourish new life. We see the skeletons sprouting branches in this dank place.

Also in the catacombs there are the dual figures of Irina the saint and a statue of Velka, goddess of sin, both of whom sit abandoned. The juxtaposition of these two sacred feminine figures is symbolically dense and deserves its own essay, but I mention it here as an echo of Kristeva’s philosophy that we passed by earlier: that of the child’s necessary bifurcation of the Mother into sublime and abject.

Velka alone is highly useful here, amplifying the Great Mother motif to a vast and cosmic context. Velka is a notoriously elusive figure in Dark Souls: she is never seen, rarely spoken of, her motivations are unknown, her ontological status unconfirmed, her objects and attributes seem to contradict each other. Nevertheless she is a crucial if not essential force in the world, and her presence can be inferred for those with eyes to see.

The main Velkan element that should be addressed here is her association with Karma, which is perhaps her principle attribute. From the beginning of DS1, she is introduced as governess of ethics, law, and equity. She explicitly oversees sin, guilt, and retribution. What practices are promoted through this governance? Mechanically, there are primarily two: keeping track of invasion penalties (in DS1) and resetting the world. If you incur penalty as an invader, the Blades of the Dark Moon will find you and punish you. So Velka prolongs and complicates PvP dynamics.

Resetting the world is an effect Velka provides that suggests forgiveness. If you aggro an NPC, and wish to get on good terms with them again, Velka allows that condition. In this way too, Velka is prolonging interpersonal relationships, but it is the relief of debt rather than the accruing of debt. Velka keeps the cycle going, she is like a keeper of the wheel that turns the age. In Dark Souls 1 a statue associated with Velka turns with the cranking of a wheel, in a room full of bonewheel skeletons. In Dark Souls 3, a similar statue turns with the cranking of a wheel in a room full of flies. In both cases, the wheel is hidden in a wet chamber behind an illusory wall. This suggests that behind the façade of the world, there is a primal place from which time is manipulated (though in this case it is but a single “tick” of the clock, an off-to-on switch which causes a fixed rotation).

Does Karma cause the rise and fall of the great ages? Is the distribution of karma the grease that turns the wheel of the world? It does seem to be that desire is what sustains the age of fire. Consider the enemies in the place where the wheel turns: bonewheels, who cling to their instruments of torture, to their suffering; flies, who bury themselves in a mountain of rotted food, a symbol of greed.

The skeletons who throw themselves into combat, and the flies which gorge on their rotting piles: either is a handy metaphor for Hodrick. His lust for the battlefield is another way of keeping himself stuck on the wheel of Samsara, collecting those shackles, representing the Velkan attachments of karma. Velka’s totem, the Raven, is found in flocks on a ravaged cliff in the settlement, among a wealth of corpses to be looted. The Raven is “associated with the fall of Spirit into that which is impure and enjoys carnage […] To raven is to plunder. This is what the word means. To have a ravenous appetite suggests greed and lust and insatiable desires.”(Valborg) Ravens keep the circus of suffering going!

Grist for the Mill

Velka is a bleak goddess, associated with “lifehunt”, the capacity to drain the essence of life, dreaded even by the gods. For this reason one of her attributes is the scythe, so she is something of a reaper figure. But we have seen she is also life-giver and sustainer, through her arbitrage of karma. This ambivalent nature is expressed by the Raven, which is a solar bird yet dyed deep black, who is cruel and enjoys carnage, yet in many myths is associated with the bringing of light and the creation of a new world.

The raven flies to and fro between the solar orb of eternal life and the dying eyes of man in time. He mercilessly pecks away at the delusions formed like veils over the cornea's shield until he penetrates to the darkness of the pupil's cavity and releases the invisible light within. (Valborg)

If the goal of Dark Souls is the realization of the Dark Soul -- the unique potential of the human being -- then perhaps Velka and her karmic processes are meant to midwife that birth as well. Could all the weight of karma, the pain of enduring a body, the cruelty of life’s entropic march … could it all be in service of birthing the Anthropos? It would explain why the Lords of Dark Souls are so antagonist to the Ashen One -- in Gnosticism and Buddhism the makers, the deities, are said to envy the actualized human being. And to be fair, the theme of surviving hardship and loss is central in Dark Souls’ reputation, and something to which countless players can attest, on practical or psychological levels (eg: “Dark Souls Helped Me Overcome Depression”).

Identity Riddles

I am the one who is disgraced and the great one. Give heed to my poverty and my wealth. Do not be arrogant to me when I am cast out upon the earth, and you will find me in those that are to come. And do not look upon me on the dung-heap nor go and leave me cast out, and you will find me in the kingdoms. And do not look upon me when I am cast out among those who are disgraced and in the least places, nor laugh at me. And do not cast me out among those who are slain in violence.

But I, I am compassionate and I am cruel. Be on your guard!

Do not hate my obedience and do not love my self-control. In my weakness, do not forsake me, and do not be afraid of my power.

-- excerpt from The Thunder, Perfect Intellect ca. 100-230

The abject Mother sits at the edge of the symbolic order, in fact it is her abjection that positions the boundaries of that order, yet it itself does not accept boundary. “Abjection preserves what existed in the archaism of pre-objectal relationship, in the immemorial violence with which a body becomes separated from another body in order to be” (Kristeva 10), referring to birth and symbolized by the Hodrick and Greatwood scene, but beyond that it also refers to the Dark Souls creation myth: the archaism in that case being the undifferentiated fog of arch-trees and everlasting dragons in the Age of Ancients. For there to be matter and objects, psyche (dragons etc) must be born into time. Once psyche has materialized itself upon the wheel of time, it cannot exist in immediate, gestalt totality – it moves and changes, expressing its fullness over aeons through its becomings. But everything must be accounted for; Karma only brings what is due. The mystery of how psyche is refined by its extension into matter will likely stay with us until the “end” of time. But with common sense we can suppose that the condition of duration allows things to be taken apart and put back together, and that at least in our mundane lives that process frequently brings about some freshness in the object. But neither the meaning nor mechanics of the larger karmic process can be groked, just as Velka and the Mother are archetypes who inherently escape the fixidity of signification. The ultimate force of taking things apart, entropy – symbolized again by the raven and its desecration of corpses – is something that has been deeply culturally villainized, and it usually takes a second to stop and consider how the diffusion of matter engenders the condition for new forms to grow.

[Ravens] tell of the renewal of the world in terms of the past which is yet to be. The unwanted Truth is told and its insatiable desire to express itself may produce terror and loathing in one who is not prepared to give up all to its insistent glare.

This is keeping with Kristeva’s view of the abject as the eruption of the Real into consciousness. Aside from their role in pecking open an aperture of light, crows have another specific job in the renewal of the world, as described in a number of myths: measuring the size and extent of that world, flying in “progressively longer intervals in order to estimate and report on the increasing size of the emerging earth.” The extremes of incarnation, the edges beyond which dwells the abject, are scoped out in order to create the blueprint; the raven brings knowledge of the schematics.

Interpreting by Attention

And what about our own schematics? We’ve thrown away our tools – the colorful cast of characters transposed into weapons of interpretation – but perhaps it’s time to pick them up again. We cast them off because we didn’t want to fix the Dark Souls myth through explanation. Archetypes cannot be superimposed, prefab, onto a tableaux of psychological symbols. Interpretation is rather the act of elaboration: flying, as the raven does, around and around a widening and changing arena, reporting back continually new understandings of what is appropriate.

The meaning of a game is determined by what a player thinks and feels while they play it. What decisions they make, what their attention lingers on. The game is the inkblot. There are special times when the game insists upon a subject, like a film: for instance, when the crank is turned and the Velka statue rotates. But such a sequence has a different meaning in games than it does in film, because of its context: it anchors a player to a single necessary and unchanging action in the context of a world that is typically responding to their decisions with nigh-unrepeatable novelty. The fixedness of the cinematic exposes the malleability of the rest of the game. “Velka” is an approximation, an aggregate; she is not the same goddess in each playthrough, the scope and the flavor of her influence is always changing – but it is always reflecting the actions of the player.

So how then, can we arrive at a judgment regarding Hodrick? We can’t, because again, each player’s experience of him is different. Earlier I implied that Hodrick is clinging to the world, out of horror and alienation in regards to the Mother figure, and that his killing spree is only building his attachments, keeping him fixed to the wheel of incarnation. So what is the difference between his wild manslaughter, and Velka’s own penchant for carnage and lifedrain? Only the intent:

The transformation of relationship can come about through a genuine understanding of the difference between murder and sacrifice. Both kill or suppress energy, but the motives behind them are quite different. Murder is rooted in ego needs for power and domination. Sacrifice is rooted in the ego’s surrender to the guidance of the Self in order to transform destructive, although perhaps comfortable, energy patterns into the creative flow of life. (Woodman 33)

But see, it is only the inner experience of the act that has authority. In my view, Hodrick’s actions are clearly ego-driven, but another player with different exposure to this character could come away with a different impression. And the archetype speaks through the individual encounter itself, not through lore videos, essays, or any other metatext. This is a crucial function of video games that bears repeating and is rarely addressed. Games commonly use the act of killing as a metaphor for the transformation of relationship (the very notion of EXP hinges on that). The unconscious is receptive to these mutations regardless, but the nature of the effect is dependent on the conscious attitude of the player.

Kristeva, Julia. Powers of Horror. Columbia University Press, 1980.

Layton, Bentley, ed. The Gnostic Scriptures. Yale University Press, 1995.

Valborg, Helen. The Raven. Theosophy Trust, 2013.

Woodman, Marion. The Ravaged Bridegroom: Masculinity in Women. Inner City Books, 1990.

19 notes · View notes

lvtvr · 7 years

Text

s4 thoughts under the cut

i have criticism and i have praise, but most importantly i have common fucking sense and i dont lose my mind if a kids cartoon doesnt go my way so dont worry about that palios

please read this post in a neutrally speculative tone because that’s my voice in my head as i’m typing it. also of course my opinion is just a star in the sky and your mileage, as always, may vary. warning its the Great Wall of Text

sweet stuff

most importantly its a great time to be a lotor stan. i love my boy my problematic trash fav i love him so much hes officially my favorite character now 1000000000% (it used to be lance, but he’s been dethroned for real now)

not only is he a fucking babe but whenever he appeared the plot was guaranteed to move forward so every time he came onscreen i got my two favorite things in one

listen im just not going to go overboard w this but lets just say i think about him and grin a lot what a fucking GREAT character he’s so MORALLY GREY so FUCKED UP so INTERESTING so sexy

matt holt is in fact a meme! good job fandom, well predicted. the allura heart eyes stuff was lame stock cartoon humor which imo added Nothing of value, but that aside he’s an angel boy and brilliant addition to the recurring cast and i love him

i thought the rain and the big no during the cemetery scene were kinda over the top cheesy but that episode was, overall, really great

okay but real talk that one dog looking captain has to be somebody’s fursona???????????? somewhere a furry is fucking thriving right now

fighting animations and space backgrounds were gorgeous, as always

i adore where they’re taking keith’s development!!! i had some pretty serious concerns post s2, but they’re taking him in exactly the direction i had hoped for

i feel like he’s honestly really happy with the blade, their style really suits him and i mean that both figuratively and literally *wink wonk*

he’s a loner, but he’s not alone. he’s in a position where he’s expected to function as an independent unit within a team, instead of being literally connected to the others in his squad; at this point in time that autonomy is what’s important for his development. he has both the insight to realize that and the empathy to be concerned that it might be selfish or wrong in the eyes of others

but his friends support him!!!!!!!! the group hug oh my god

his self sacrifice... i almost died that was just so. beautiful

im just really emo about keith

why does zarkon hate lotor SO much? i have a feeling it must be connected to the circumstances of his birth. SOMETHING is up and i can’t wait to find out WHAT

and what the fuck is going on with haggar

shes still the most aesthetic character in the show sjlgdjsdgjsg PURPLE WITCH PURPLE WITCH

LANCE AND ALLURA!!!! OMG IM CRYING honestly i am still rooting for no canonical romance but at this point i wouldnt even mind canon allurance, because the way they’re having lance mature and act around her is just... im still crying dont look at me

that said i think its beautiful how canon lance, in stark contrast to the awful character that is fanon lance, is a selfless and insightful boy who -- once he steps out of his theater-kid attention-seeking leo persona -- has a better grasp than perhaps anyone of the true dynamics of the team

he gave allura the speech that shitty lance stans want the rest of the team to give him. i can’t believe he single handedly screwed over all bad characterization. im so proud of him.

salty stuff

lance’s sweet moment at the end of ep6 aside, i’m still pretty bitter about the fact that we know virtually NOTHING about either lance or hunk. to some degree shiro is also still a mystery.

the reason it’s so frustrating is because to varying degrees, keith, pidge, and allura all have some sort of backstory and ongoing arcs

in comparison, hunk and lance have been kind of stuck in support roles for four seasons now. they are occasionally shown maturing, but im just lacking a foundation for what’s driving them?? besides lance’s insecurities, what do we really HAVE?

episode 4 was a waste of time that i hope the under-12 demographic enjoyed more than i did. the meta wasn’t on point like, for instance, the avatar theater episode. also, it treated hunk terribly. like, lampshading how horribly he’s treated as a fat comic-relief character isn’t funny when your writers are the ones giving him that treatment in the first place lol???

it was, how u say, a shitty filler that could have been dropped entirely without affecting a thing

the sailor scout poses were pretty okay tho

why would you create a setup for whatever is going on with shiro and then not so much as allude to it during an entire season?

like, a forty-second scene implying some weird juju would have been enough, but completely dropping one of the plot threads for six consecutive eps makes for a pretty porous story-tapestry. im assuming they’ll pick it up again but this season is just... a gaping hole, dramaturgically speaking.

if i had written it i would be kicking my own ass for lack of continuity

seriously this makes me feel less bad about my first-draft mess of a fanfic because holy shit lol its a lot tighter than this was

lotor killing narti came literally out of nowhere, and im not saying this to defend him (she was my favorite general and im incredibly sad she’s gone?? im lowkey hoping haggar’s mojo will revive her tbh) -- but, again, we have some really weird writing decisions going on here

lotor was set up in season three as someone who values mercy and explicitly orders his people not to kill. like, im not trying to excuse what he did -- im just saying it seems like a contradiction, based on what we’ve been shown

why wouldnt he just incapacitate her or kill kova instead?? the nature of the psychic bond was never addressed enough to make killing her seem motivated, and his character was never built up as someone who would succumb to a random murderous impulse, so tl;dr I Don’t Get It

also we havent been given enough background on the team to be able to say for sure, but what i assumed was a tight-knit elite group with history seems to have actually been a ragtag group of neutral-aligned mercenaries, temporarily banded together for personal gain.

while i’m okay with a plot-driven show that doesn’t spell things out and leaves most things as implied subtext, i still feel like there is such a thing as being too subtle

like you can’t set up plot threads only to put them completely on pause to have some ships blow up, it will only frustrate the audience and make the action seem like a cover-up for the writers having no idea what the fuck is going on

its not hard!!! to just throw in allusions to things!!!! like we’re talking literally just tossing out HINTS so people remember that “oh yeah that thing existed at all” @ dreamworks please uh... do that?

the pattern seems to be that we get a mindblowing season followed by a mediocre season so time to hype s5!

so anyway those are my two cents ("its more like ten dollars char" yeah yeah i know!!!) and i’m very happy to discuss the events of this season, and for people to disagree with me (as long as its polite and... at least relatively motivated lol)

#vld4 #long post #noises from the void #vld spoilers #just dont fucking look at this post if you havent seen s4

41 notes · View notes

stretchjournalemerson · 5 years

Text

Do I Look Like That?: Bitmojis and Perspectivism

By Tori Serpico -

The Bitmoji app, launched in 2013, is massively popular and has seemingly ever-growing success. The app allows users to create cartoon versions of themselves, which then are placed into hundreds of small animated photos, or “stickers,” that can represent nearly any mood or situation that you can then send through text -- all integrated into your phone’s keyboard. In the early days of Bitmoji, the app’s avatar customization was sparse. Should my Bitmoji be fully blonde or fully brunette? What skin tone is just right? Would I even wear that outfit? After spending too long attempting to answer these questions and make a Bitmoji to capture my essence I showed it to my sister. She looked at it, and then at me, and then back at it, and said: “That doesn’t look like you.”

This was a disappointing response. I handed her my phone and let her give it a try. She would periodically examine my face or ask me to turn my head. “Done!” She handed me back my phone. It didn’t look like me.

While what I am describing is truly a first world problem, there is an underlying question that reaches far beyond the Bitmoji: how can we truly capture the self?

To begin, we must consider the factor of perspective from someone who has explored this in depth. Let’s look backward to discover what historian and theorist Jane Tompkins, has already explored this topic of seeing the self through varying representations (Pifko). Tompkins, in her essay "’Indians’: Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History,” describes the trouble she faces in attempting to piece together the encounters between the Europeans settlers and the Native Americans. Throughout her research, she discovers massive disparities in information as she reads varying accounts of what should be the same experience. This is troublesome to her, as clearly there is only one true history. However, these inconsistent records suggest otherwise. Due to this frustration, Tompkins concludes that the nature of facts, or of truth, is that although there is only be one base truth in the context of any given situation, due to the external human factor of perspective, multiple truths exist. As seen through Tompkins’ essay, this concept of perspectivism, or the idea that truth is inherently muddied by point-of-view, is closely aligned with understanding historical events. But I can’t help but wonder, what role does perspectivism play in an examination of the self?

The Bitmoji conundrum I described serves as an instance of perspectivist self-examination. When noting the disparity between the Bitmoji I created for myself and the Bitmoji my sister made for me, the differences were slight. A wider nose, a longer face, a few freckles.

But I was bothered by these small details that I failed to recognize in myself that were so simple for someone else to identify. Which was more accurate? Should I trust an outside eye’s perspective of my physical appearance because it is inherently less biased? Or is my own recreation of myself more true, as I am the self I am attempting to capture? And where do these two selves intertwine? If we view these questions through Tompkins perspectivist lens, then even "...if the accounts don't fit together neatly, that is not a reason for rejecting them all… one encounters contradictory facts and divergent points of view in practically every phase of life” (Tompkins 118). By the logic of perspectivist theory, there is no one true self to capture because each perspective provides a new insight. Therefore, I am all of my failed Bitmoji attempts. Yikes.

The belief that the self is a collective idea as opposed to a static being is not new. In fact, it’s almost three hundred years old. David Hume, a skeptic Enlightenment philosopher discusses his views on the permanency of self in “A Treatise of Human Nature.” Hume writes: “I may venture to affirm of the rest of mankind, that they are nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other with an inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and movement” (134). This is known as the Bundle Theory. What this theory is arguing is that the self ever-evolving concept as it is constantly the object of others’ perspectives. These perspectives are so varied and so frequent that it is impossible to claim that one’s identity is singular-- it is only within our minds that we prescribe oneness to self. In this way, the Bundle Theory is inherently perspectivist. There cannot possibly be one true self if that self is being constantly externally perceived.

So who are we, if we are not who we think we are? To attempt to answer that question, let’s get back to basics: we are all human beings that possess human features and qualities. Now identifying these qualities is what creates implications that illuminate our perceptions of ourselves, ultimately aiding in others perceiving us. For example, my hair was once both brown and purple. At this time, Bitmoji did not have the option of multiple hair colors, meaning I had to choose between the two in order to best represent myself.

These hair colors are “signifiers,” or physical representations of greater meaning, or the “signified.” If I consider this post-structurally, as Tompkins would, these signifiers create a multitude of meanings that then contribute to larger structures of culture and identity. As I chose between two coexisting signifiers, I was deciding between selves. My choice would ultimately force me to perpetuate an idea of myself that was not entirely physically true. The implication then becomes that I view myself in a way which is inherently inaccurate. We all possess our signifiers, but the deliberate nature of the creation of a Bitmoji places a pressure upon the user to have a heightened understanding of them.

This pressure to have an accurate Bitmoji exists for several reasons. As its popularity has grown, the app has been integrated into a multitude of other popular social media apps, such as Snapchat and Tinder. Now instead of our “real” faces being plastered onto profiles, it’s our recreations of ourselves. Why is this preferable? I feel the aspect of control over our signifiers is something that society has striven for. Through the lens of the Bundle Theory, this is entirely impossible in reality. We are constantly being captured by various perspectives that we have little to no control over, no matter how much effort we put into physical appearances. The ability to capture the preferable, to show what we want to be seen, is a widely accepted part of social media culture. Bitmojis indirectly caricature our inclinations towards either embracing or rejecting this culture simply through the choices we make in attempting to recreate ourselves.

This is not to say that Bitmojis cannot be true to self or to say that Bitmojis deemed to be misrepresentative of their subject are done so purposefully. As I described, there is a margin of inaccuracy due purely to the lack of signifiers to choose from within the app. However, Bitmoji has become aware of this and has since released a game-changing update that drastically increased the accuracy of the recreation of the self: Bitmoji Deluxe. Bitmoji Deluxe offers such specificity in its signifiers that the pressure to have a true-to-self Bitmoji has not been relieved-- it has been heightened. In her essay “Thanks to Bitmoji Deluxe, my Bitmoji now gives me anxiety,” Stolyer expresses exactly what her title implies. The increased realism of the update caused Stolyer to “question physical looks [she has] never noticed before,” and described her “experience with the new feature [to be] filled with(…) anxiety.” While I cannot assume that this is a universal experience, this account clearly illuminates my point. Bitmoji is a new form of virtual identity that requires users to constantly be in a state of self-examination.

And for the reasons I have already discussed, self-examination is not a simple task. If I am truly just a bundle of selves or a collection of contradicting perspectives, then how can my Bitmoji ever really look like me? I posed the question: “how can we truly capture the self?”-- a question worth my exploration, and a question I wish I could answer within the confines of these closing thoughts. The only sentiment I can confidently leave you with is that we cannot allow philosophy to rob us of the existence of something as simple as physical appearance, as tempting as it may be. Truth and self still exist, just not in the ways that we think they do. Tompkins says it herself: “bringing perspectivism to bear in this way on any subject matter [has] a similar effect; everything is wiped out and you are left with nothing but a single idea-- perspectivism itself” (Tompkins 117). Perspectivism gives us the ability to diminish almost any truth, whether it be historical or personal. In my opinion, understanding the complexities of self is not an excuse to reject the self altogether and make your Bitmoji look like a big fat purple dragon. We are difficult to define, we are not intrinsically indefinable. As we must in any undertaking, in attempts to capture the self we must make decisions-- decisions formed by accepted facts. I will always have brown eyes-- and even if they may look hazel in a certain light, or if an unknown onlooker mistakes them for blue-- they will always be brown. We must take perspectivism with a grain of salt, and acknowledge that while truth exists in layers, there is always a foundation. So let’s use Bitmoji responsibly, with the understanding that even though we are victims of perspective, ultimately our own perspectives of ourselves should rise victorious. But first, be honest: does this look like me?

Acknowledgments

For my mom and my sister, who love my Bitmoji no matter what it looks like!

Works Cited

Hume, David. “Of Personal Identity.” A Treatise of Human Nature, 1738, pp. 133–139.

Pifko, Matthew. Class workshop. 15 November 2018.

Stolyar, Brenda. “Thanks to Bitmoji Deluxe, My Bitmoji Now Gives Me Anxiety.” Digital

Trends, Digital Trends, 1 Mar. 2018,

www.digitaltrends.com/features/my-bitmoji-gives-me-anxiety/.

Tompkins, Jane. “‘Indians’: Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History.” Critical Inquiry,

vol. 13, no. 1, 1986, pp. 101–119., JSTOR,

www.umsl.edu/~alexanderjm/IndiansbyTompkins.pdf.

#technology #philosophy #social media #bitmoji #tori serpico #stretch2019

0 notes