#I think it's because there's stuff going on in the fabric of the narrative here more than in the dialogue itself | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

mondfahrt · 2 years

Text

Questions About Art

In the last couple of weeks, you've probably seen a few twitter threads like these (or their re-posts on tumblr) about the "decline" of art and architecture. Now, these kinds of posts (and people like The Cultural Tutor especially) have a lot of fascist red flags that other people have pointed out much more eloquently than I ever could, but I'd like to give my own two cents about why this view on art, architecture and their history proposes a lot of problems but also some questions that are worth getting into.

Some of the problems I'll be talking about are directly from these twitter threads, some I saw in the comments of these threads, and some I've encountered in my daily life. I'm not saying these are all fascist! In fact, a lot could just be labelled as "things you learn about art history when you don't spend years studying it". This mindset and this kind of bias are, as you will see, very very old and there are reasons why we still struggle with them today.

I kind of want people to know about arguments I rarely see talked about in non-academic spaces. Diversify the public discourse, if you will. I know some of these things tend to get complicated but I've tried to keep it as simple as possible. But if you have any questions about any of this, please ask! I can talk about art all day every day.

Also, I'm not claiming to know everything. If nothing here seems to make sense to you, that's fine, too. I'd really like to know your opinion, though! And if I've made mistakes and you know better: Please tell me!

(I also really understand that engaging with these kinds of arguments is maybe kind of pointless. People will see and like and think what they will see and like and think. Art has always been devisive. But I love talking about art and I think I do have some perspective on this topic. And the discussion is kind of the point here. Also, if you read those threads on twitter, most comments are actually saying some good stuff. Not everything is mindblowingly wrong. I'm elaborating on some of it.)

Okay, let's get this thing going!

1. What is supreme?

There are several problems here: The choice of vocabulary is probably the least offensive. But this person presents their opinion (and it is simply that) as fact while assigning subjective values to the Pietá. What is extraordinary? What is beauty? Why is it surpreme? Is it because of the assumed value of marble, historically taken as a luxurious material when it isn't really any better than any other stone... Is in fact worse under certain circumstances because it really doesn't like getting wet... But I don't think this person wants to talk about that here. I think what they really mean is: It takes skill to make stone look like flesh or fabric.

Now, the problem with this is: It's a myth. Granted, we'll maybe have to leave Michelangelo out of it, because apparently he did do a lot of the work himself, but... a lot of artists did not. In fact, the artist as this unique genius working on his own, all by himself, is a narrative that's been pretty much established because of Michelangelo and the way art history has literally been built on top of his legacy. But most artists, before, during, and after Michelangelo's time, had whole workshops and teams of people working for and with them. We don't know a lot of medieval artists today because they didn't think it was important who had done the work. They shared their skills and time and resources to make and build and craft. Same goes for artists during the 17th century, because most of them still needed the help of craftspeople to make a bronze cast, for example. Sometimes we still can't decide if something is "by Leonardo da Vinci" or by one of his students or made in his workshop because sometimes an artist had an idea, drew a sketch and let other people do things like the background or details he didn't have the time for because he was busy inventing planes. And no one really cared because it was still from his workshop and having him paint the whole thing would've cost a lot more. Not only money but also time.

What we can see here, over time, is the development of the narrative of the artist as genius, and the devaluaziation of workshops and crafts in comparison to art.

2. What is an artist?

This is funny because idea, concept, and intellectual work in general are initially what seperated art and craft. The male artist as genius who creates something (the Pietá) out of nothing (a block of marble) is an important narrative! Saying that Jeff Koons' works are worse because he didn't do it himself is kind of ridiculous because it's nothing new. Artists have done this for centuries. And devaluing his work because it's only an idea/a concept is even funnier because that's one of the most important aspects of art in the early modern period.

For comparison: This is one of Jeff Koons' Balloon Dogs, mirror-polished stainless steel with transparent color coating (here in magenta), 121 x 143 x 45 inches (307.3 x 363.2 x 114.3 cm), made between 1994-2000.

Douglas Crimp says,

"The extraordinary status that has accrued to the work of art during the modern period is, in part, a consequence of the romantic myth of the artist as the most highly specialized, indeed unique producer. That this myth obscures the social division of labor was recognized by Minimal artists. Traditional sculpture's specialized craft and highly fetishized materials were opposed by Minimalism with the introduction of objects industrially fabricated of ordinary manufactured materials." (1)

Jeff Koons is not a Minimalist. Their works from the 1950s and 1960s looks more like this.

This is Carl Andre's 4 Square 4 Void, installation 2018, 12 unit hollow square on floor, 0.5 x 160 x 160 cm.

Minimalists like Andre intended to completely erase the hand of the artist by using materials that had to be very obviously made with machines. This is where another art myth comes in as well: "I could have done that." Yes, that's the point. Minimal art is supposed to let you reflect on the way we lift artists to higher standards. Why would you treat Andre's metal squares differently than the concrete floor their lying on? You're actually even invited to walk on these! To reflect the way you experience the room around you, with the artwork and your body in it... (The Minimalists had a whole thing going on relationships between art, space and viewer as a critique of the supposedly "neutral" gallery or museum space but that's a topic for another day.)

The Minimalists (Carl Andre, Sol LeWitt, Dan Flavin, Donald Judd...) also did these high finishes like Koons, very shiny surfaces that show no traces of brushes or chisels. You're not supposed to think these have been done by one person. And if they're not done by a person but by a machine, or by a whole group of people working these machines, then who is the artist? What is an artist? And can anyone be an artist?

3. Is it art if you (don't) need to explain it?

They also wanted to make art accessible. Since the kind of art the Minimalists did was pretty much completely new and unheard of in the 1960s, no one understood it, which meant that everyone started on the same level. You're just supposed to feel their art, its position in the room and in relation to your body. Everyone can do that. No academic advantage. Some critics were furious about that.

Of course, this concept falls apart a bit when you think about art historians and critics engaging much more with art in general, talking to artists and other historians, knowing about materials etc. You'll never get a completely even playing field, if you ask me, but at least the Minimalists tried to do something.

In contrast: The twitter post above claims that the Pietá needs no explanation or context. But that's not exactly true, is it? Sure, you can appreciate it without knowing anything about it. Pain like that translates well in any case, I think. But being at least culturally Christian puts you miles ahead of everyone else already. Knowing that that's the Virgin Mary, mother of Jesus, who's lying in her arms, dead... otherwise these two people could be lovers, or siblings, or friends. It's also placed in a church, you can't really get close to it, which could make it hard to even see that the man in the woman's arms is dead, at first glance he could just be unconscious, even sleeping. Not having this context doesn't make this work less impressive, on a skill-level, but it does add some things.

Context matters.

Which takes me to one point in the discussion on twitter that actually makes me angry.

4. What is context?

The OP says that they don't know what to think about these sculptures. Maybe you don't either, that's completely fair! Let me add some context:

On the left: Veronica Ryan's Custard Apple (Annonaceae), Breadfruit (Moraceae), and Soursop (Annonaceae), all from 2021. Now, I had to research this but it was fairly easy. I just used Google. The titles suggest that these are fruit. The fact that they are the UK's first public sculpture dedicated to the Windrush generation makes me think that they're probably culturally and historically important to these people specifically. People from the Caribbean, where the artist was born and where these fruits are common, who migrated to the UK.

I like this anecdote from an article in iNews on the day the sculpture was unveiled in London:

"On a wet October morning, shoppers wheeling trolleys nodded in recognition as they passed the work. A mother fielded questions from her young daughter, identifying the soursop for her and explaining what it was as they walked away. As Ryan posed for photographers, a young man sped past, pointed at the marble sculpture and shouted “sugar-apple!” - “That’s right!” the artist shouted back, beaming." (2)

I know what the Pietá is depicting, I've learned about it from growing up as a Christian and studying art history. I had to google what a soursop was, but other people have grown up with them and look at this sculpture, already knowing what it means.

Context matters.

I also think it's important to know that this is the first public sculpture in the UK by a Black woman. And I love that Ryan says she wants these sculptures of fruits to be a part of the community, to bring people together like food tends to do, to remind people of good things, to give them a place to sit or rest or climb on.

The Pietá sits high and mighty, untouchable, holy, and that's for a reason, too. But I like that sculpture like Ryan's, made from marble and bronze just like so many sculptures from the Renaissance, can also be like this, public and warm.

I don't have to understand everything about it. I have never eaten a sugar-apple, or a breadfruit. This is not art made for me. It does not need to be. But I can still find something in it, if I open my mind, do a bit of research, and don't expect everything to be spelled out for me.

Now, the sculpture on the right is a bit more complicated: It's Heather Phillipson's THE END, 2020, and it was placed in Trafalgar Square, London, on the so-called Fourth Plinth. The Fourth Plinth is a public art project intended to diversify the monuments in London. The other three plinths on Trafalgar Square all carry statues of white British men (two generals and one king). The fourth plinth was supposed to carry another general but the funds ran out and it remained empty until the 1990s, when it was decided that it would instead show different works of contemporary art temporarily, specifically commissioned for this place. Phillipson's work is supposed to look playful, joyful, even tasty, but with a darker twist. The drone on top of the whipped cream sculpture is recording a live feed of Trafalgar Square, a commentary on surveillance in public spaces, even - or especially - if those public spaces are places for people to come together and enjoy life and culture. The sculpture is not taking itself very seriously, just as it is poking fun at the seriousness of other (public) art, like the generals and kings surrounding it, or the paintings in the National Gallery behind it, but it's also political. Who does a public square belong to? Do we know who's watching us at any given moment? But also: Who are we watching? Everyone can watch the sculpture's live feed, all the people on the square, but also every statue of a dead white man there.

5. Do you need to be told this is art?

At this point, I do think OP is arguing in bad faith here. I'm not saying you have to like any of these artworks. Or that you have to understand them immediately, or get anything out of them. But they are so much more than just "shock factor". Actually, most of modern, postmodern and contemporary art is about so much more than shock factor, especially public sculptures. I've only talked about those here because the OP on twitter only talked about those but it's also my field of study. And I still needed to research a lot to write this, so I don't expect anyone to understand anything immediately. But when it comes to art, I urge people to keep an open mind. Most artworks are much more meaningful than you'd expect and I bet I could actually tell you a lot about Michelangelo's Pietá you didn't know that would change its interpretation to you.

Here are a few just for fun:

This is the only statue by Michelangelo with a signature. We're not sure why exactly that is. Because he saw this as a great work and was proud of himself? Or because he was only at the beginning of his career when he made it and needed to build a reputation?

Mary looks much too young in this to have an adult son. It's an anachronism that's maybe pointing towards her later ascension. Or towards some kind of "beautiful people are moral and good" metaphor that was very prominent during the Renaissance. Or maybe Michelangelo just didn't want to make an older woman.

This work is a masterpiece of composition: You don't even realise that Mary is much larger than Jesus because she's sitting and because her dress is so voluminous. But it's also only brilliant when you're looking at it from the front. It's placed in a church, in front of a wall, so you can't even see behind it. That means, Michelangelo didn't need to do a full piece that's amazing and interesting from all sides - which is, incidentally, a factor that becomes very popular during the Late Renaissance.

I think that last point is interesting because sculptures like those by Phillipson and Ryan do need to be interesting from all sides, since their placed in an open space. They need to do something with the space around them, not just with one wall in a church.

These sculptures are not random. Not even when you don't know what the artists wanted to do with them. If you get something else out of THE END or Custard Apple, that's fine! That's not random, that's just one way to look at art, it's interaction, it's dialogue.

6. What is the conceptual foundation of art?

We can disagree on this but I don't think the "conceptual foundation of modern art" is to question accepted standards of what art can be. (Setting aside that OP is most likely mixing up modern and contemporary art here.) There are hundreds of movements, styles, and theories in art. Andre, Koons, Phillipson and Ryan are just four artists out of thousands, and each one wants to do something different with their art. Yes, some of them want to question what art can be. Some want to question the assumed neutrality of the gallery. Some want us to think about our bodies in space. Some want to make political statements about surveillance. Some want to see their heritage represented in public.

Some of my favourite artists want to make you think about life and death and all the love we share in between. How we interact with people daily. Or how the world around us keeps moving and changing. Some want to make statements about gender and bodies, or the environment, or colonialism, or capitalism. Some want you to see all the shadows on a white canvas. Some just really like a certain shade of blue.

Art can be so many different things. I love Medieval art, and Renaissance art, and art from the Enlightenment... (I even have friends who study these periods in art history!) No work of art, no period in art history, is superior to another.

OP of the thread - as well as commenters like Mike Brook - assume that contemporary art is only one thing. They argue that idea and concept and meaning trump everything in contemporary art, that form has become meaningless. That's true for some artworks, concept art in particular, or art that can be reproduced again and again. Looking down at that art, criticizing it as meaningless or only interesting because of its shock factor, misses the point, though. And it is - and this is important - incredibly elitist.

7. What is art?

This is an argument we've had since the beginnings of art history - when one of Michelangelo's friends, Giorgio Vasari, published biographies of artists, likening them to nobles and popes and highlighting their unique skills in order to make them out to be geniuses. That meant, in turn, that you couldn't simply become an artist, but that you were born to be one.

Vasari had such an influence on art history - he's actually said to be the "father of art history" - that we still have to unravel these narratives today. Because when Vasari wrote these biographies, these stories, he only included the (in his opinion) greatest artists of all, with Michelangelo coming out on top. He's the reason we have an art historic canon, a set of artists who are considered important and great and worthy of study and admiration and remembrance. Of course, Vasari mostly included Italian artists because most art from north of the Alps was not as great. And anyone before Michelangelo couldn't be as great as Michelangelo because you needed to show progress, that art was moving forward, becoming better and better. Art made by women was always depicted as being less good than that made by men. And so on, and so forth...

The same narrative goes for understanding art. There are several instances throughout art history when people (mostly old white men) cried about the supposed "end of art". It happened with the Impressionists, with the Dadaists, with the Minimalists, with concept art and installation art and so on.

In 1967, art critic Michael Fried published an essay called "Art and Objecthood" in which he criticized Minimal art (especially in comparison to Modernist art) as being literal and theatrical. It is one of the most cited essays on contemporary art in recent decades. You might ask yourself, what about Carl Andre's metal plates on the floor could be theatrical? Literal can be understood: They are literally metal squares on the floor. They don't pretend to be anything else, like how Michelangelo's marble pretends to be Jesus, or how Ryan's bronze pretends to be fruit. In this way, they can be understood by everyone. You don't have to have read the Bible or been to the Caribbean to "understand" a metal square. You are simply supposed to experience your body in relation to it. That also means that the artwork speaks to every person differently and individually, because no one can experience art out of any body other than their own.

"Theatricality" to Fried means superficiality, deception, and emptiness of meaning. If a work of art doesn't claim to be anything else than what it is, it's superficial. If anyone can find different, individual meaning in a work of art, no one can really know what the artist wants to say, so it's deceptive. And if the artist doesn't care about universal meaning being found in their work, it must be meaningless.

Christa Noel Robbins says on Fried's essay:

In catering to each viewer in their turn, the ability of the work of art to transcend atomized taste and enter into something like a community of meaning making is foreclosed. Absent that community, Fried has long argued, a work of art has no real meaning; it is particularized, isolating the viewer in their own individuated field of experience. (3)

If a work of art doesn't transcend to give us some higher meaning, a meaning that's the same for everyone, is it art? Or is it an object?

That's basically what people who question any and all contemporary art, who ask "what is an artist?", have problems with. They don't want to see that a sculpture is just a block of marble, no matter the form. The form doesn't make it any less a block of marble, something very normal, and earthly, and not "supreme" at all. And not everyone will find (or needs to find) higher meaning in that block. Only if someone does find higher meaning in it, does it become art at all - Michelangelo's sculpture needs the viewer, just like the metal squares need the viewer to make them into art. Into more than objects. But this process is extremely subjective, for Michelangelo just as much as for Andre or Ryan.

"Anything can be art," complains The Cultural Tutor in another tweet. But that's not the real problem they have. The problem is: If anything can be art, and I don't like some of that art and I don't even think it's art, who's to say that Michelangelo's Pietá is art? If I can question contemporary art, isn't everything else in danger to be questioned as well?

(1) Douglas Crimp: "Serra's Public Sculpture", in: Rosalind Krauss (ed.): Richard Serra/Sculpture, New York 1986, pp. 40-56, p. 44. (2) Hettie Judah: "Veronica Ryan’s celebratory giant fruit are a lesson in how to do public sculpture well", in: iNews, 10/01/2021, URL: https://inews.co.uk/culture/arts/veronica-ryan-windrush-monument-fruit-sculpture-hackney-london-review-1227786. (3) Christa Noel Robinson: "The Sensibility of Michael Fried", in: Criticism 60:4 (2018), pp. 429-454, p. 432.

#art history #art #contemporary art #modern art #women artists #michelangelo #veronica ryan #carl andre #heather phillipson #michael fried #art criticism #turner prize #minimalism

126 notes · View notes

junkyardescape · 7 months

Text

Singed as Orianna's Father

Since this shot in Arcane there's been a pretty sizeable group of people suggesting Orianna will be written into Arcane as the daughter of Singed. I'm not entirely sold on this being the case, given that the shot we get is so small, but given that there's a chance, I've been thinking a lot about the possibility and I'm. Not A Fan.

This isn't to say I think it'll be poorly done or anything - The writers of Arcane are incredible, so I wholeheartedly believe that, if this is made the case, it'll be well written and compelling. My issue is not that it's going to be bad, or even that it'll be worse than the current lore. My main issue is that I don't think it lines up well with the established aspects of Orianna's character and simplifies her relationship with her father in a way I don't love, while also harming the worldbuilding of Runeterra and of Piltover specifically.

Something that has always intrigued me about Orianna's lore is her relationship with her father Corin. Part of why is because that relationship is so poorly explored in her original lore. Her father doesn't let her go anywhere without him, and only lets her leave home to go to the theater, which becomes her only understanding of the outside world. When she escapes for Zaun to help people after a mining explosion and ends up getting terminally sick, her father DOES make her a set of prosthetic lungs - shout out to him for that one - but he makes it so they only work when wound up with a key that he keeps behind a locked door. And still, in spite of the obviously poor treatment she received, Orianna gives her heart to her father once his own health starts failing.

There's like. SO much interesting stuff here. I kinda like that Corin is mostly just a guy? He's a not great father in a way that feels really resonant and grounded in a fantasy setting, whereas Singed being her father means she has a dad who's shitty in a grounded way and also makes nukes to destroy Ionia with and manufactured the drug crisis of a millennia in Zaun, one of which he's already done in Arcane lol. This choice inexorably ties Orianna to the larger narrative, when honestly I'm not sold on the need for that? It might just be my love of smaller slice-of-life storytelling, but it's hard to imagine how Orianna's journey toward regaining her humanity and understanding her new self ties into the current plot of Arcane. There are ties to Viktor there that could have their plots sort of opposed to one another, with Viktor getting further from humanity while Orianna aspires to it, and there are a million other ideas they could go with which could be compelling and exciting, but again, the quality of the storytelling isn't my concern.

I feel that the relationship she has with Corin is an essential part of Orianna's character. It is something which contributes to her feelings of isolation and her love of the outside world, as well as speaking to her nature as a fundamentally caring person. It's also something that to this day has never been resolved; for all we know, Orianna is still just out there, not understanding herself or her relationships and thinking her isolation is permanent. And that's not a satisfying ending for a character who is completely capable of self-love and in a world where her isolation is genuinely fabricated. And I like these aspects of her character! She's complex, she's grounded, and there's already such a great base for her character that I think would be hurt with this relationship with Singed.

There's also a couple issues I have with how it impacts the worldbuilding, and what the implications of Arcane's story as it stands has on Orianna as a character. Orianna's dad, in base canon, runs a shop where he designs sells prosthetics. He's not a huge scholar, he's not insanely wealthy, he has no access to special tech. Orianna doesn't gain hextech until she manages to get some from a chembaron. I really like this choice! It tells us a little something more about Piltover to know that there is some weirdo in his shop in the city turning his daughter into a robot, showing off a little bit more about the culture of the city and attitudes toward augmentation at the time Orianna was needing new parts. This isn't necessarily lost if Singed is her father, but Zaun has a different attitude toward mods, and it's harder to consider Singed's opinion on anything to represent the common people considering his... everything.

I'm also very interested to see how they would manage to conflict of hextech that she presents; in order for her to exist as her current self in Arcane, she would've had to be built before or during season 1, which was before the discovery of hextech. I have some thoughts about how they could do this with respect to her Old Lore, but that's gonna have to be a separate post, as this one is long enough as it is already XD

Basically, I like the Orianna we have now. I think there's so much of her left unexplored, and the changes to her character this represents would leave her original story incomplete and also change her to a significant capacity. The new Orianna that could be made from that totally has the ability to be as interesting or more than the one of base lore, but I'm not sure it's the Orianna I know.

#league of legends #orianna lol #singed lol #arcane #arcane league of legends #league of legends lore #I cannot believe how many thoughts I have about her to put here but. I will continue lol #feel bad for suddenly becoming the “literally just talks about Orianna” blog so #Might end up making a sideblog for this kind of thing? Haven't decided yet

13 notes · View notes

katyspersonal · 1 year

Note

ALRIGHT LET’S TALK ABOUT BLUBBORNE!!

Here are a list of things to choose from <3

Chat about Logarius or Alfred!!

Ideas for Bloodborne 2 👀

What do you think about Hemwick being connected to Cainhurst?

Talk about Gilbert!! I never get to see you chat about him! Lil guy!

Ideas on Arianna’s backstory!

Ideas on Adella’s backstory!

What would a Discord with the original Byrgenwerth scholar gang look like?? xD

—

Choose one or all! It’s up to you!! <3

Oh my GOSH fjdhfds Good to know you all headed my warning to never give me a choice because I answer EVERYTHING, huh -_- xD But in all seriousness though, these topics just happen to be those I do not have 20 pages essay ready for, so my answers will be short(ish) and I think I can discuss all this stuff in compact manner!

Chat about Logarius or Alfred!!

Well, they're complicated characters for me. You know I am physically unable to 'hate' a fictional character because no matter what they did, they aren't real and can't hurt me and if all else fails they exist to make the story better. But because of some events and reflection on life and society, these two in particular put a pit in my stomach on the notion of being trademark catholic-coded purists. There are so many things that can be speculated about complexity of Laurence's or Adrich's situations, but these guys feel pretty plain for me? The black-white thinking bastards that got so tempted with the idea of abolishing all evil that it made them ruthless, blind to nuances and purist that can't see how they become the REAL evil in the end.

I think Logarius/Rogeriusz is fairly underrated though and it cannot be blamed on him being unlikeable from moral standpoint, because we've all seen how popular Alfred is despite graphically killing a defenceless woman! But Logarius has a lot to like as a villain - he is noticeably tall and menacing, he was a powerful leader figure in Healing Church like Ludwig, he has a lot of mystery to his character as to why he uses Pthumerian magic and shares theme with Queen Yharnam (and as follows, why would he turn against a kindred clan/bloodline?), and what he discovered that made him gatekeep it? Besides, there is a translation mistake calling an item 'Skull of a Saint' something else - 'Sage's Hair', and when I discovered the proper description ( x ), I realised there is a big implication that following Healing Church's saints were wearing crowns after his raid on Cainhurst - both to honor him and to boast about having thrown the local monarchy!

This is just very odd that Logarius was a pioneer of the delusion about exterminating 'impurity', and managed to hit da briks before he became hated and showed true nature of his pursuit - unlike poor Ludwig that presumably had better intentions and less freedom to see through WHAT was guiding him, yet fought long enough to become accursed by everyone. It is UNFAIR. But Logarius is such an important element in the system, as a trend-setter rather than people brainwashed into following Church's agenda! Willem is never addressed for messing with unknown too, Logarius is never addressed for being ideal inspirer of hate and murder... Guess the REAL martyr here is Laurence every time! xD

Alfred is also a hard one for me, as for someone from the country that actively fabricates history facts, encourages distrust to outer information and ignorance, and just straight up lies with agenda. Like, sure, I am familiar with how easy average person can fall for a narrative - and how easy it is to discourage any skepticism and critical thinking before it formed. If anything, I pity him.

But I've grown to feel even more tense about this character when I reflected on the fact that he is SO eager to exterminate the 'enemy' that he goes after ones who can't even CAUSE any harm (he wants to kill Annalise who is absolutely defeated and defenceless, and he is the only summon in Old Yharnam where beasts that won't go outside live). There is a difference between trying to protect people from the possible threats (since whether vilebloods DO have cursed magic effect is up to interpretation) and "cleansing" the world from anyone affiliated Just Because. I've been doing Adella dirty for a long time calling her 'female Alfred' and I had since took it back because she at least gives Arianna a 'chance' as long as she doesn't share her blood that Adella's religion forbids. Not even one - she did the "three strikes and you're out"! Alfred is ruthless tho, in a very uncomfortable way, but it took me some unpleasant experiences to SEE truth about him. I think that no matter how far up you are in a religion, but whether you have a braincell to extend minimal reasoning about WHY you are fighting the 'bad guys' is on the individual and not on the source of this brainwashing, and Alfred fails this test.

That being said, he is still an interesting character, and I really love his unique appearance! His nose is a whole BEAK xD /pos I also headcanon that Alfred never met Logarius in person and his bond with him is parasocial, based on admiring the great person of the past upon feeling like he 'knows' him! The same applies for my versions of Amelia/Emilia and Laurence!

The rest of the topics are going under cut!

Ideas for Bloodborne 2 👀

Honestly, I think the best one I've seen executing the concept was HollarityArt in their contribution for Vaati's Bloodborne 2 concepts contest! Here is the link on Twit with their concepts: ( x ).

I have very little ideas on this but I agree that part 2 would be the best placed in sea/ocean setting! But the MOST tricky thing about the sequel would be that one of the potential Bloodborne endings is our Hunter becoming the new Great One that governs the cycle, instead of Flora. And another one is them replacing Gehrman. So the sequel must deal with addressing how no matter WHICH ending player had in Bloodborne, it didn't matter! Basically, something should happen with Hunter's Dream or the current Moon Presence that would leave any ending still palatable. So, addressing the current 'queen' Great One would result in the cycle still ongoing (aka our Hunter as Great One inflicting the same cycle, so it is not possible to pin whether Flora is still active or Hunter is). And, sure, for some reason, the Hunter's Dream is broken, just so we could not see our Hunter from previous game. This is extremely depressing, but feels in the spirit of From's games.

What From would need to do with Bloodborne 2 is to add information that doesn't quite confirm or deny exist fan theories, but instead adds more to WORK with! And creates MORE questions. So, reveal extra details about what we see in Bloodborne, but in a way that didn't answer the question. As in 'yeah there was a Great One counterpart for Flora', 'yeah there was someone in Isz that did birth Ebrietas as little celestial larvae many centuries ago, here is her statue and nothing else', 'yeah look at the ruins of the waking world version of Fishing Hamlet' etc. Some characters I think should reappear but in a way that feels expected while also not REALLY telling us anything new. So, Queen Yharnam not in the wedding dress, Gehrman functioning like his hunter self (like I said, Hunter's Dream should get broken), Maria having her recollected memory from when she was a caretaker of Research Hall, Adeline in a Kin form somewhere in a secret nook of Sea location (presume she ascended with or without Paleblood Hunter).

I like the idea that Yharnam in the sequel is a ghost town that has no messenger lamps or huntsmen, only rare NPCs and enemies who are largely people and/or Kin of the type we haven't seen before. Yharnam would have a bigger layout that makes much more sense geographically, some buildings and areas would look notably different if not more civilised. So that'd return the question whether Yharnam we play in even WAS real or this sequel Yharnam simply the same but changed from the last time, so people can argue whether this Yharnam is "real" and not "dreamed" one or developers simply improved their mapping and designing skills xD Maria would be able to travel there with us by waking up in the body of the Doll that still stayed in Old Workshop, and many people in Yharnam would act hostile towards both her and the player; later in the plot turns out that Hunter's Dream breaking was the result of external powers, and roaming people and unfamiliar Kin work together and target to remove the traces of influence from Stars and Moon! They'd be more alien Kin that urged to help with grasp of Flora and Fauna had on the Earth and its mortals, but in reality more or less want to establish their order. But protesting them would restart the cycle of vices of humanity, so... yeah, again, the game would be depressing and point out how there is no choice, only diverse ways to suck.

I also think the next game should extend beyond Yharnam, and using a ship to travel between locations would be a cool idea! Maybe getting to visit Valtr's home, or whatever Loran is now. @val-of-the-north had an idea that there is a legit country known as New Loran, but it would reveal more about history and heritage than just a bunch of electric beasts and sand. If I try to describe more concepts I might get really sucked into this swamp, so I'll leave it be here, but meeting relatives of some characters we've known would be great too! I always have this image in my head about Valtr's niece that heard he chased some monster and never came back, so we meet her when she is an adult that wanted to investigate on the mystery of her uncle. Also learning more about the fuckery Micolash and Laurence did do in the past through item descriptions; again, in a way that actually doesn't disrupt anything, more like 'well we already knew they had to commit a lot of crimes, we just now know the details'. The war criminals are still here in spirit! xD

What do you think about Hemwick being connected to Cainhurst?

Well, I said that sometime before, but I do think that both Cainhurst nobles and Hemwick are mixed human+pthumerian (and sometimes just human) descendants that preserved a lot of practices from ancient Pthumerian civilisations... and matriarchal traditions, too. They have different practices, as Vilebloods use blood magic and consume blood for power, whereas Witches use magical binding rituals, necromancy and disturbing tools as well. Ironic that they had 'Blood vs Eyes' conflict of Blood vs Arcane Healing Church factions before it was cool, don't you think?

Yharnam used to be monarchy but so many foreigners and neighbouring cities rubbed in on the area, that they became practically equal with higher class Yharnam citizens, and had to count people like Willem as equal. Maybe if Healing Church didn't form so swiftly, Yharnam would never have a mayor. But yeah, basically, Witches were something of peasants in relation to Cainhurst nobles. But they cooperated enough, and Witches would often offer medical help to the nobles who entered trouble with the curse living within their blood, or struggled to control pyromancy upon first periods. Witches maybe lived in poverty and dirt without much convenience, down to having to pay taxes TO Cainhurst, but they have unspoken knowledge within themselves that they are, in fact, superior to the nobles, as they have better grasp on the arcane secrets and are waaaaay less helpless before supernatural. I believe Iosefka and Fauxsefka are from Cainhurst, and Witches were how Iosefka studied ways to purify the blood from Frenzy + Beasthood inducing effects. Why that practice never picked up? Because we live in a society, indeed.

Talk about Gilbert!! I never get to see you chat about him! Lil guy!

Ahhhh right! I just didn't have much reason I guess? I do have a face design for him, that features some facial skewing like many Yharnamites have!

Like his beasthood form suggests, he was afflicted with Ashen Blood, which I believe was not a planned action but an honest mistake by using the blood of a poisoned beast (Blood-Starved Beast crucified in Old Yharnam). However, back in the day where Yharnam was not quarantined away from the rest of the world (to the point you are not supposed to SURVIVE being there if you never had holy blood transfusion), there were plenty of people picking stuff up and illegally selling it abroad. @val-of-the-north has an idea that Valtr and his friends caught one of such groups, just when one of them transformed into a beast upon getting too much of his own "medicine" and I stealeded it xD

But Gilbert I think was a victim of one of such things, contracting Ashen Blood by consuming a poisoned "medicine". He never was able to connect the dots between getting worse after it as someone who already had his own illnesses. The more I learn about Victorian era, the more I realise how shockingly ignorant they were about medicine. I mean, they were having mercury pills for god knows how long! So, yeah, he saught Yharnam, and naturally had his strange sympthomes sustained by consuming the blood as someone who got beasthood 'activated'.

I like to think that he used to be a hatter, and it WAS what made him sick initially; they were number 1 victims for mercury poisoning, because of the materials used in their craft. However, it were not just hats that he could do well, and after arriving in Yharnam, he gladly worked to produce more clothes, sewing mostly Yharnam Hunter garbs obsessively! And is one of the rarest people who met Ludwig in person and is still around AND sane! Hence how he had his Flamethrower - the Healing Church shared one with him to help him to self-defend. But, he was out of use and got too sick before he got to kill even one. Being bedridden, he used to read books a lot, until his eyesight got afflicted too (apparently beasthood attacks the eyes the most), so he mostly entertains himself with fantasies and reciting memories.

Ideas on Arianna’s backstory!

Heh, like I said already, I love the idea that her mother ran with her from Cainhurst when Arianna was still a baby, so she never GOT to know the noble life. But, she did inherit her mother's noble dress, and vague idea about their blood being special enough to offer to the hunters. I entertain the idea that Alfred was Arianna's brother but had to be abandoned since he was older and their mother could only care for one child in the hard situation, but it is up in the air.

In either case, Arianna's mother died soon(ish), most likely from violent death. But instead of some Church fanatic killing her in "righteous" wrath, it was that her mother went insane unable to consume queen's blood or find any management for it, so she, like... had Vileblood version of becoming blood-drunk and was shot before she transformed into a bloodlicker completely. When she was about to turn on her own daughter to drink her blood dry, no less! The hunter that saved Arianna was Henryk, who picked every other orphaned child under his protection because he was aware Choir takes orphans and they are never seen again. I swear, at least once Choir had to confront him about whether his children are all 'really' his, and Valtr had to wear a dress and pretend to be their biological bother dsjfhdsfdsh

But for the most part he was not able to properly care for his adopted babies; Viola was exceptional case that stayed close enough. Most of the orphans under his protection were wandering around looking for their purpose, and Arianna was like this. She clinged to Crow of Cainhurst, trusting him as the only remaining hook with her Cainhurst past, but he did not feel qualified or interested enough to play a dad for her - something he regretted upon meeting Arianna again years later and seeing WHAT she has to do to survive.

I also think that Arianna reacting on female Hunter differently is not a homophobia (?) internalised in Yharnam, but remains of her mom teaching her that women are "superior"; she speaks from the standpoint that she doesn't pity men all that much, but would dread to 'dirty' a woman with something as questionable as a loveless sex. It is not something beyond her that men will be like animals, but she feels inferior compared to other women, and it really gets to her.

Ideas on Adella’s backstory!

Likewise an orphaned person. When she reached puberty, she was this 👌 close to attempting to sell her body, like Arianna, before she managed to get herself a place in the Healing Church. It happened on the rift when Choir fell from uhhh... "grace"?, as well as the daughter of the current Vicar, Norbert/Herbert, turned into a celestial kin together with the children she was overseeing there. As result, he was compensating by picking up every other child/teenager and raising them within the Healing Church's walls like an actually good dad figure. He saw how Adella was doing and basically dragged her in (punching the old bastard that did want to use her on the way).

The decision to become a Blood Saint and not just part of the staff was her own, though; she bought the narrative about hunters being brave and protecting people while it was choking out its dying breaths but still existing. So, she wanted to help people.

Localisation slightly messed this up, by making it sound as though Adella has severe insecurities regarding the quality of her blood, but that's not quite the case:

Whereas the religious 'we all must admit we are sinful by nature and should bash ourselves all of our lives' vibe might apply, within the original context it seems to be that she is insecure about having to do it in 'battlefield' conditions rather than in the setting of great religious reverence it SHOULD be. Like, all she does is extracts her own blood in a vial. She only talks with us in Yahar'gul if we convince her we are Healing Church staff too; so, she still thinks we ARE one of their hunters. It seems like internal Healing Church rules about 'proper' blood sharing are what makes her feel "vulgar", not her blood overall.

Adella mentions a friend she could possibly turn to during the night of the hunt if we refuse to tell her of the safe place, and I made it be a person you pick black church garb from in the alley where Arianna is. It is a shrodinger character, of course, because it is a gendered set, but I default all sets to 'male' because default Paleblood Hunter is some guy with grey hair and I love using this as "official" option! The window NPCs in this area mention "thanking" the Church in a rather passive-aggressive and fake manner, that makes me feel like the guy was killed here out of spite. I think he is Adella's EX that she still keeps clinging to, and... well, he was in this area because he wanted to help Arianna by telling her of a safe place, as he had a bad feeling about this night. Again, irony.

What would a Discord with the original Byrgenwerth scholar gang look like?? xD

Pfffft you mean if they made a small group Discord server for familiar people only? Laurence would be a moderator, that nobody asked for, because it is a small (mostly) closed Discord group and not an official server... But he'd insist on bringing some discipline and civility anyway.

Server would have expected standard channels for drawings, research notes, general chat, jokes/memes, debates, Rom's (daily) pictures of the bugs and spiders, vent and announcements... Except, they would have to create more and more debate channels all the time, because every time it'd be either Caryll and Laurence, or Micolash and Julie cluttering the debate channel so much and refusing to stop. xD Like, they'd have to spawn new debate channels just so other people could have a talk too sdfhhdfds

Damian would share health / self-care advices regularly, like "don't forget to hydrate!" or "10 advices to avoid studying burn out!" and tell others to stay safe and not overwork. Unfortunately, nobody follows his advices. He also always answers everyone in vent channel.

Rom tends to overwhelm any channel when she is online by spamming whatever she is thinking about, but nobody tries to stop her because she tends to accidentally drop something useful, like a solution to the homework, or a significant breakthrough. They have a locked channel accessible for everyone except for Rom and Yurie/Julie, where they discuss Rom's ramblings as they happen and decide what to take from her without credit :(

Micolash sometimes has mad ramblings, similar to Rom but HIS are unhinged and genuinely creepy and disturbing. They have a locked channel accessible for everyone except for Micolash, Damian and Rom, where they laugh at his wording or mock how weird he is :(

Patches is only active in the server to promote the shit he's selling or questionable links, but if anyone gets scammed and calls him out on the server, he gaslights them that he did them all a favour and showed with a concrete example how important it is to know basics of the internet safety xD And might accept their apology for getting mad at him, if he's feeling nice fhshfdhsfds

Thank you for asking! It was a trip dshfhds

#bloodborne #ask replies #bloodborne headcanons #multi character post #i don't even know what else to say ahahahah #you probably know the root of what really made me feel uneasy about alfred so #yet again the point proven that the more bad experiences you had the better you can understand bloodborne lore #but yeah logarius is always ignored like willem #let laurence share guilt with willem and logarius you cowards!!!!!#damn i got some insight about adella during answering it though.... good for her #points of interest about adella when???#fun fact: tho i described the sequel as barebones i actually base it off the impression i had in a dream once #also in that dream maria had somewhat of a grudge towards gehrman #like he was stalking her from around the corner anime yandere style and i was like hey who is following you #and she was like 'probably nobody important'#the same dream where rom was pregnant from SIMON for SOME fucking reason #but i would never recommend the sequel to face reveal previously mysterious characters so yeah....#ironic that my brain paired protector of the secrets and seeker of the secrets ahahaha

23 notes · View notes

sacrificethemtothesquid · 1 year

Note

Hi! You always reblog really nice posts about mental health and writing, and I wanted to ask for advice! I’m struggling to focus on my writing. I spend the day thinking about scenes I want to improve etc, and when I can finally write I start doing something else, and then I waste my time with stupid shit on social media instead of doing what I wanted so badly! Do you have any tips that help concentrating? I turn off my Wi-Fi at times but my brain just keeps telling me to go check twitter or whatever, and I fall for it every time. :/ I write so slowly I lose a lot of nice stuff I make up in my head, I really wanted to get better at this. I love your blog, hope I’m not being annoying!!! Xxx

I am so sorry for the late response to this. I've been wrapped up in offline things and wanted to give you the proper consideration you deserve. You are absolutely not annoying - I'm sorry I've left you hanging for so long!

In terms of concentration, I don't know that I'm the best person to ask. I have an ADHD diagnosis and my meds help me focus. That's the simple answer, which I don't think is what you're hoping for.

BUT that being said, even with my meds, I also do the social-media-instead-of-writing thing and I completely understand how frustrating it is. I have ideas! They're good ones! But they evaporate the second I open the document, and to console myself, I seek out the instant dopamine of tumblr and pinterest, feeling guilty the entire time.

My question for you: are you trying to write everything in a straight line, or are you making notes for whichever scene is currently in your head? If I love a scene but I'm not there yet in terms of the overall story arc, I'll write that as it comes. I think of it as quilting: I come up with scenes like fabric squares, and then I can arrange and stitch them together as the narrative dictates. Sometimes they don't fit, and that's okay. Not all the fabric gets used in the quilt, but the simple act of writing benefits the whole. No writing is wasted.

There was a post here on tumblr that changed my entire outlook on living with ADHD, and it also applies to writing. I can't find the post right now, but it had to do with "junebugging": instead of forcing yourself to do a specific task, ie the dishes, you put yourself in the vicinity of the task, ie the kitchen, and putter around until you eventually get your hands in the sink. In the past, I would have been vicious to myself, cursing myself for my failure to just do the fucking thing, but if I'm a junebug - big and striped and a little dumb - I can bob around the lightbulb, occasionally harmlessly bonking against the glass in my single-minded pursuit of light. It's not my fault my executive function is fucked. It's just the way my brain is wired. Might as well embrace it.

It works for my writing too. If I'm not feeling particularly linear, I'll open the document and poke at what I've already written, or I'll brainstorm new stuff, or stitch some scenes together. I'd love to say I do this without judgement, because my therapist would be proud of me, but although I've gotten much better, I am still working on the whole "radical acceptance" thing.

And radical acceptance: it's hard. It's really hard, but it's so, so necessary. It can be true that you desperately want to write while also being true that you would much rather check twitter. These are not mutually exclusive. I want you to let go of that guilt, if you can. Like we say in my support group, if being hard on yourself worked, it would have worked by now.

Look at your writing. Ask yourself what is stopping you, what's got you snagged like a sleeve on a doorknob. Are you not sure how to proceed? Does the scene in your head not fit with what you've already written? A piece of advice I got years ago: if you're having a hard time writing a scene, the problem doesn't exist with the scene itself, it exists three pages back. It's like trying to solve a maze: sometimes if you get stuck in a corner, you have to backtrack and find a new path. This might mean getting rid of something you've written - don't delete it. Don't delete anything. Open a blank document and copy/paste it in there. Label this document "bits and pieces". You might be able to use those bits - those quilt squares - later. Another piece of advice: what exactly is the story you're trying to tell? I'm having issues with my novel. It's ostensibly a murder mystery, but the mystery part wasn't coming together until I admitted it wasn't really a murder mystery, but a love story between the protagonists. Admitting that let me change my focus from the whodunit - which I hadn't connected with and felt forced to continue - to the developing relationship, with the whodunit as the vehicle. Now it's working a lot better.

The last thing I'll say is that you might be burnt out. That's okay. Muscles can push against a weight for only so long, and creativity is the same. Are you dreading opening that document? Take a break from it. Junebug. Work on something else. Take a shower. Clean the sink. Read something else you've written. Read something written by someone else. A farmer can't work the same field all the time without the soil getting depleted. It needs some fallow time and maybe a nice cover crop to recover. This is part of the process.

Be kind to yourself, my friend. I hear a lot of pain in your voice and I want you to know that it's all right. It's going to be all right. Even if you're not writing right at this second, you are still a writer. You will always be. Every writer that ever lived has gone through what you're going through. You're never, ever alone.

Take care, and let me know how it goes.

#sorry this is so late #I hope by the time I wrote this #things are better for you #writing

20 notes · View notes

pochapal · 2 years

Text

Umineko Liveblog: Thoughts/Theories [Episode 1 Chapter 9 Edition]

Umineko Episode 1 Chapter 9 was a single short scene. What this means is that I can almost certainly guarantee that this writeup will not be as long as the previous ones – there were only a few things that happened, and therefore only a few new thoughts to share.

So! Today’s Umineko topics include the following: bizarre narrative presentation, whatever the hell is going on with Shannon/Sayo, what it means to witness the Golden Witch’s presence, and puzzling out where people are and what that means.

Umineko 1-9 is the world’s tiniest chapter, consisting of one uninterrupted scene. And yet, we get not one but two instances of weird narrative happenings in such a tiny space. I think it’s safe to say, then, that the weird narrative stuff is not only deliberate, but it is also purposeful.

The first weird narrative thing isn’t exactly to do with the narration but is close enough to group it together anyway. At the start of this chapter, we don’t get a timestamp along with the chapter title as we have been. The chapter’s title is “the night of the storm” so maybe there’s some sense in withholding a specific timeframe given that it could cover the whole night, but it doesn’t just not have a timestamp. It has a deliberately blank timestamp.

It’s easy to figure out that Chapter 9 takes place at some point between 23:00 and midnight, given that Chapter 8 ends at 11pm and this chapter concludes with the clock striking twelve. So, given that the timeframe is so overwhelmingly obvious, why format it as –:--? Why use a timeframe that doesn’t exist?

A couple theories.

One, that this scene doesn’t take place when the story says it does. Shannon meets with Gohda and patrols the manor at a point after midnight instead of before midnight. I fail to see what exactly the point of that would be, though; even if the timing of Shannon and Gohda’s actions are off, it does little to change the existing positions/alibis of everyone. Depending on what goes down vis a vis overnight murdering, that could change. If, for instance, somebody is killed at midnight, and Shannon/Gohda are doing things at 1am, this places suspicion on them. But I don’t think Shannon’s actually going to be responsible for anything that goes down on Rokkenjima even if she is close to the epicentre.

Gohda, I’m less sure of. He could, hypothetically, be persuaded to act as an accessory to murder provided the right person gives him the right commands. However, the only real person who is in a position to use him as an accomplice is Krauss, who I am fairly certain has to die early on so that we aren’t spoiled on whatever secrets he can spill. Could it be that Krauss orders Gohda to try and kill his siblings, and then that backfires, spiralling into the slaughter demanded by the epitaph? It’s possible, but relies on a lot of shaky assumptions.

The second theory about the concealed time is that this scene is a kind of fabrication by the narrative. What we are seeing is a deliberately constructed plausible series of events to conceal a deeper secret. Maybe Shannon and Gohda discuss something that would give away the game regarding the upcoming murders. Or maybe Shannon overhears something on patrol that would equally spoil the mystery. So, like how Battler’s POV is controlled to prevent such slippages, the same thing happens here, too.

So then the timestamp for this scene is blank because the events of this chapter technically “don’t exist” in reality. This is not happening at 11pm on Rokkenjima. This is happening within a narrative made by someone outside of that time and space. Or something. I don’t know, really. I just know it’s very conspicuous and very weird to have a blank timestamp when every other chapter has had one attached to it.

Chapter 9’s other weird narration moment comes when Shannon spots a golden butterfly, or thinks she spots a golden butterfly, in the hallway. Similar to Natsuhi, we get a brief flash into Shannon’s first person viewpoint (interesting how both scenes occur in hallways, transient spaces. Might be nothing though). Also similarly to Natsuhi, no present-time narration occurs while we are inside Shannon’s head. This seems to confirm the “any first person POV that isn’t Battler doesn’t advance the plot” theory I have going on.

However, unlike Natsuhi, Shannon’s POV shift doesn’t seem to happen for an emotive reason. It seems to behave like a mirrored inverse to Battler’s POV – at a crucial moment featuring a very relevant plot detail, we enter a less reliable mode of narration.

We don’t get Shannon describing the butterfly. We get Shannon thinking about the ghost story of Beatrice told by the servants. We get Shannon thinking about the time Kanon confessed to seeing something weird at night. We get Shannon feeling bad that she doubted Kanon’s story at the time.

(Interesting that in the time since, Shannon seems to be much more in the Believe In Beatrice camp, going by her earlier interactions with the cousins.)

The result of this is that we are locked out from getting a definitive answer on just what it was Shannon saw, other than it was a flash of something bright that scared her. This could be a manifestation of the Golden Witch in butterfly form, which Shannon speculates might be the case (also relevant is that while there is a CG of a butterfly in the darkness, the narrative never confirms the existence of the butterfly). This could be a hastily-concealed light carried by someone who doesn’t want to be seen. This could be the glint of a knife carried by a killer, seen one moment and gone the next.

There is no way of knowing, because the story refuses to let us know. Personally I think it’s probably something like the Golden Witch toying with Shannon by kind of hinting her to a potential threat, but not giving her enough time or knowledge to do anything about it. That feels like something an evil murderwitch summoned by dark blood magic would do with her intended vessel for possession, assuming that the latter has any possibility of happening.

Honestly, if Umineko could do me a solid and stop obfuscating Shannon-related plot critical information I’d really appreciate it! Like this is probably the last time we see her alive there is no reason to do her this dirty. Sure, enough Shannon introspection may reveal that Kanon’s setting up the “Beatrice” stuff, but come on. She already is dealing with enough. Give her a little narrative honesty. As a treat. I promise it won’t ruin your mystery.

While we’re here though, let’s think about a person who is Shannon but also isn’t: Sayo. Because with one scene, I think we get the answer as to why Shannon/Sayo did not get her inner thoughts read out during the proposal scene. Because wow does Sayo have one or two issues.

There was an impression given in Chapter 8 that the reason why George’s proposal fell flat is because he was trying to propose to Sayo while speaking entirely to the Shannon mask. I previously thought that it was a case of Sayo had been effectively killed in order to embody the Shannon persona which is less hurt by the never-ending abuse and torment. George’s cringe proposal sucked because the girl he was declaring his love to doesn’t exist.

However, now it seems more likely that Sayo does exist, even if Shannon would rather she didn’t. And Sayo has a lot of things to think and feel, very few of them pretty.

Twice in this chapter Shannon nearly loses control of her emotions: the first is a weird kind of belated joy towards the proposal, and the second is a barely-contained fury directed towards Gohda for being a dick to her. Both instances are very telling of her deep inner psychology.

In the first instance, Shannon is overcome by an intense elation as she enters the mansion – so overwhelmed with an indeterminate joy that she needs to take a minute to compose herself. In the narrative’s own words, what she feels is “exaltation and uncertainty” which are definitely appropriate emotions to have, but it’s interesting that she doesn’t feel them until after she’s left the scene. It is also interesting that these emotions are never directly attributed to the proposal; we are left to assume that, but it isn’t confirmed. It would be no sweat of the narrative’s back to say something like “George’s proposal left her overwhelmed with exaltation and uncertainty” and yet we are denied that clarification.

As such, let’s think about what else could be causing those emotions other than “the boy she loves has expressed one of the deepest forms of commitment”. The first thing that comes to mind is to consider Sayo’s circumstances, and what I assume Kanon is planning. Sayo is deeply unhappy, trapped in an unreasonably extended servitude for the Ushiromiya family. She endures layer upon layer of abuse so foul that she has all but squared her heart away and embraced the degrading label of “furniture” wholeheartedly. It is so miserable that Kanon is fully willing to risk it all to break the two of them out of there. Also, it is becoming apparent that beneath the layers upon layers of masks and false personas, Sayo is still in fact a fully alive and real person.

Shannon could be in love with George and the romance of it all, but Sayo may not be. Sayo may be at her wit’s end, completely and totally overcome now that a genuinely viable escape route has been offered to her for the first time. There would be disbelief, elation, and fear that it may all be for nothing. In other words, exaltation and uncertainty. Sayo is overjoyed at the prospect of escape, not the prospect of marriage with George. At this point, George could be any man saying anything, and as long as he offered her a chance to live outside of Rokkenjima, I believe she would leap at it.

Of course, even though her Sayo-shaped beating heart is desperate for a better outcome, it is still Shannon that is in control, so to speak. It is Shannon who “calms her heart” and buries that feeling deep. In other words, any emotion that would be too much for Shannon the furniture to feel is dumped into the recesses of her psyche, onto Sayo the human still capable of feeling deeply human things, festering in turmoil and despair.

And then to further reinforce that the Shannon-Sayo identity splintering thing is the world’s coping mechanism of all time, we get Shannon Emotional Suppression Scene #2: Gohda edition. Shannon, who needs to justify her presence in the mansion despite going against protocol, makes her way to the servant room, where she offers to assist Gohda in any way she can.

Gohda, being dick of the century, commands Shannon to do the rounds of the mansion by herself, without a shred of acknowledgement or gratitude. He treats her like an inferior beneath his heel, another piece of furniture to move around. She is second only to Kanon in terms of his disrespect, and that’s only because Gohda still acknowledges her physical existence around him.

And what Shannon feels in response is seething, blistering rage. It is an anger so strong that the attempts to label it “irritation” by the narrative last all of one paragraph. Shannon takes Gohda’s offer and retreats into the solitude of the mansion because if she were to be around him for one more second she would be in genuine danger of snapping.

Besides, in her words, walking by herself will let her continue to calm her heart, and let her keep the face that she “cannot show to Kanon and Genji” to herself. Which is. Uh. An incredibly interesting response to what is meant to be a self-described twinge of annoyance.

So Shannon chooses solitude, and Shannon does the mental exercise of dumping all this incandescent rage onto Sayo who is too locked up to do anything about it. Implied in this whole exchange is that this is not the first time Shannon has had to do this. Also implied is that this is something Shannon does on a regular basis.

So there is Shannon, the ideal furniture who pretends like this is the only person she is. And then there is Sayo, the ugly thing beneath layers upon layers of denial and suppression, fed a steady diet of all her own worst emotions, something ghastly that Shannon likes to think dead.

Except Sayo is not dead. Sayo is alive, and Sayo is hurting, and Sayo could, at any time, let those years of bottled rage and injustice explode out. But because of the fear of the abuse, because of Shannon’s conditioning, that doesn’t happen. And so instead Shannon has to contend with this ugly, suppressed side of herself that expresses in secrecy and shame how she really feels. She can only accept what she gets put through because she dumps her reactions onto a hidden side of herself, a person that she refuses to allow manifest.

I think, genuinely, that if Sayo were ever allowed to be unleashed so to speak, her bottled fury would make Kanon’s righteous outrage look like tame complicity. I think if Sayo snapped she would genuinely kill someone. Or at the very least, if Sayo snapped she would be able to body the Golden Witch with ease.

But none of this is able to happen, because Shannon is a tragic character, and her revelations of selfhood can only come too little too late. In an ideal world she would be better in touch with her inner Sayo and that person would be able to survive what is to come more easily. But it won’t happen, because Shannon is furniture and Shannon won’t let herself be anything but furniture, even when such a path leads her directly to her demise.

Poor girl. :(

Moving on from the sad things that await Shannon, let’s instead examine the bizarre things that have already happened to her instead. Namely, her sighting of what may or may not be a manifestation of the Golden Witch Beatrice, and what that could mean.

As I mentioned before, the final narrated scene of Chapter 9 is Shannon encountering something that flashes and flickers while she is closing up the mansion’s windows. In a narratively dubious moment, her thoughts return to the story of the Golden Witch appearing in the form of a butterfly, and to what Kanon said about his sighting. And then she looks again, and whatever it is she saw is gone.

The exact nature of what Shannon saw is left obscured, in mystery. But what we can talk about is the Golden Witch, and the power of stories, metaphor, and narrative.

Several times so far, Umineko has gone out of its way to associate magic with metaphor, with storytelling, with the idea of a collective suspension of disbelief. It has even gone so far as to argue that the Ushiromiya siblings’ faith in the economic power of Kinzo’s wealth is the exact same thing as Maria believing that Beatrice is real and that a plastic toy imbued with the power of love can protect you from the Witch’s wrath. Of course, we all know that Maria is objectively correct and that the adults are all greedy loser idiots, but that isn’t really the point I’m making.

What I am getting at is that Beatrice only “exists” through these layers of obfuscation. She is an enigmatic figure in a portrait. She is a story used to disguise the origin of dubiously-acquired gold. She is a mythological figure to both be revered and feared by children willing to believe in their hearts. She is a ghost stalking the servants’ word-of-mouth. She is the ruler of the night. She is Rokkenjima’s other master. She is the immaterial, the fantastical.

Considering this using a metafictional framework, it is interesting that one way of framing the Golden Witch is that she’s a story made manifest. A fiction bleeding into the physical realm. Up until now, her presence has been through dubious depictions, tall tales and abstractions without concrete proof. Beatrice’s “existence” is wholly dependent upon belief in her.

But both Shannon and Kanon see, or think they see, a glimpse of the Golden Witch. No stories, no obfuscations, a straight-up sighting. Even among her believers, nobody else has seen Beatrice in the physical world. This is a trait shared only between Shannon and Kanon.

This is weird and must mean something. Given the nature of her “existence”, why would Beatrice choose Shannon and Kanon of all people to be the ones to have the most concrete proof of her presence? Why not someone like Maria, the most devout believer, or even the other servants, all of whom at the very least don’t take the story of the Golden Witch for granted?

What is it about Shannon and Kanon that makes the Golden Witch choose to depart from a fictitious existence to a more concrete one?

Their belief in Beatrice is no more or less strong than anyone else on Rokkenjima who believes. They take no actions to engage with the magic and the omens. And yet they are the ones the Witch presents herself to. Why is this?

I think there may be two answer to this. The first is the metafictional one: Kanon and Shannon are both originators of specific stories about Beatrice (Kanon’s first sighting, and Shannon’s relaying of the ghost story to the kids). Since Beatrice is in essence a fiction that can become real, you could argue that telling plausible narratives about Beatrice has the power to summon her just as Kinzo’s ritual does. Beatrice’s appearance to Shannon and Kanon reinforces to any readers of their narratives (both within and without the text) that she is real and an active presence within Umineko. Shannon and Kanon are just the most convenient messengers of this truth.

(Aside: there is an option that Kanon was lying about his sighting in order to build up the legitimacy of the Beatrice myth from the start, but I don’t think that’s the case. Given the whole rose scenario, I think it more likely that Kanon’s plans and the real omens happen to intersect.)

And as to why Shannon and Kanon are Beatrice’s messengers over anyone else, I think this has to do more literally with the actions they’ve been taking. Both of them have been courting the Golden Witch’s presence above anyone else: Shannon is the ideal vessel for possession, and Kanon is actively assuming the role of Beatrice for his own ends. One passive, one active.

You couldn’t get a more perfect set of people to attract an all-powerful entity. Two people engaging with Beatrice in mirror parallel roles. Shannon’s self is surrendered. Kanon’s self is abundant. Shannon was dragged into this through no choice she ever made. Kanon stepped into this entirely of his own volition. Ideal embodiments of the Golden Witch. Just as Beatrice will “become” Shannon, Kanon is “becoming” Beatrice.

In essence, Shannon and Kanon are the components that facilitate Beatrice’s “existence”. Their presence is allowing Beatrice to have a presence. In a metafictional sense, they both lie closest to the fourth wall of Beatrice’s narrative; Kanon the active agent and Shannon the passive recipient. The writer and the reader of the tale of the Golden Witch, to put it another way.

Mortals toying with witchhood. There is no way that this would not attract a great and vengeful being’s interest.

To think deeper about this, it’s worth speculating on what exactly went down between Kinzo and the Golden Witch. The official story is that Kinzo summoned her once decades ago and made a bargain for her to alchemise gold to secure the Ushiromiya fortune for all eternity. Except for the clause that, apparently, at the instant of Kinzo’s death, Beatrice will come and reclaim all the wealth of the Ushiromiya family.

There are a few details about Kinzo’s bargain that I don’t know yet that I think would illuminate whatever Beatrice’s game is. The first is if the “relinquish all wealth the minute Kinzo dies” clause was a stipulation of Kinzo or Beatrice. With present-day Kinzo, who hates his family and would see them all starve before he gives them an inch, this makes sense. But how does this line up with a younger Kinzo, one who does not yet have any offspring to loathe?

One thing that needs clearing is if Kinzo ever actually cared about the Ushiromiya fortune, or if he was always in it for his own personal gain. But if that is the case, and he never intended to pass the gold on, why even bother having children in the first place? It might just be the innate contradiction of a greedy fascist patriarch, but the two facts seem particularly incongruent, somehow, if Kinzo proposed “I shall have the riches for so long as I live”.

And beyond that, assuming Kanon’s “Beatrice” letter has a basis in the truth behind the myth, then why would Kinzo also go to the trouble of the epitaph headship wealth riddle? Would he be so spiteful as to fabricate an elaborate puzzle for anyone on Rokkenjima to solve with the explicit knowledge that there is a good chance they will be rewarded with nothing but Beatrice’s wrath? Why bother with all the effort?

In actuality, it seems Kinzo is very interested in having his cake and eating it; he gets to see Beatrice again, and he also gets to have the gold and accrued fortune remain in the mortal world. Hence the summoning ritual. Hence the riddle of the epitaph. He may not care who gets the gold in the end (as seen by that weird conversation with Kanon where he emphatically states “anyone is welcome to challenge the epitaph and seek its rewards”) but what seems to matter to him is that someone other than him can claim ownership of it.

(Aside that I want to talk about but there’s never a good time: Kinzo’s insistence that anyone, Ushiromiya or no, can challenge the epitaph. As a paranoid rich man, who in principle does this extend the pool of “contestants” to? Nanjo? Genji? Kumasawa? Gohda? Shannon? Kanon? Is there someone specifically he wants to bequeath the wealth and headship to? Someone who is not related to him by blood and thus wouldn’t naturally think to partake in any of this? A piece of groomed furniture with no free will? Is successor Shannon actually real? Who knows, because I sure don’t!)

Perhaps the epitaph is the one loophole in Beatrice’s contract?

Which, if this is true, leads us to consider a few more things: if Beatrice stipulated this from the start, what happened to make Kinzo fall in love with her, and Kinzo’s attempts to cheat her out of her own deal.

The best explanation here is that either a) Kinzo tried to establish some kind of relationship with her that backfired on him or b) Kinzo betrayed her. I’m not sure he was working against her from the start, or much at all, because despite everything, his motive for the resurrection is to gaze upon Beatrice’s smiling face once more and seek absolution.

Kinzo committed some kind of sin. Kinzo is utterly enamoured with Beatrice. I think one potential outcome is glaringly visible already. Regardless of the methodology, Kinzo did something foul and vile to Beatrice.

As such, the Golden Witch will be seeking revenge on him and his entire family, all of whom have viciously profited off of her gift.

So we have an entity-turned-story, incensed and betrayed and desperate to seek vengeance. An entity who cannot interact with the physical world without direct invitation and acknowledgement.

And then there are two humans so wrapped up as further victims of the Ushiromiya sin, one the intended vessel of the Golden Witch, one assuming her identity to seek revenge.

I think Beatrice would be greatly interested in Shannon and Kanon. Shannon as a kindred victim of Ushiromiya Kinzo, Kanon as a fellow rival in the revenge game.

As an acknowledgement of Kanon’s challenge for revenge on the Ushiromiya family, she sends him a butterfly to let him know she’s watching with interest and amusement. No more, no less.

As a token gesture of pity for Shannon’s fate, she sends her a butterfly as a heads-up that she will soon be descending on Rokkenjima seeking blood. No more, no less.

Everything else, she will leave to the Demon’s Roulette.

And to understand this roulette, it is worth examining everybody’s final positions before the clock strikes twelve and all are ushered into the hour of the witch.

Battler, Jessica, George, Kanon, Genji, and Kumasawa remain safe in the guesthouse.

Krauss, Eva, Hideyoshi, Rudolf, Kyrie, and Rosa remain bitterly arguing over the inheritance in the dining room.

Gohda sits in the mansion’s servant room.

Shannon wanders the halls, surrounded by omens of Beatrice.

Kinzo is holed up in his fortified study, hoping again to cheat the Golden Witch’s will.

Maria and Natsuhi, we do not see. We are left to infer their positions: Natushi has retired to her room early with Jessica’s talisman. Maria sleeps in the guesthouse bedroom, unacknowledged.

Nanjo is in darkness.

I think I’m fairly confident in saying that Maria and Natsuhi’s uncertain whereabouts are not suspect. They are likely exactly where the narrative has led us to think they are. It would not fit in with the trajectory of the story for that to be a lie.

But Nanjo. It is not that he is hidden, but that he is shown as present, but somewhere we are not permitted to see. The question, then, has to be: where is he?

He was last seen at dinner with the rest of the family, when Maria read out the letter. He confirmed to all of them that during his chess game with Kinzo earlier, the Ushiromiya head’s ring had vanished. He argues, therefore, it is likely that an imposter could have taken this ring and used it to authenticate this letter.

Then we do not see or hear from him again. Weird.

Which is not a surprise, because Nanjo’s position in the Rokkenjima social dynamic is weird top to bottom. He is not a family member, not a servant. In the family tree tips page, he is separated from all. An independent entity latched onto the Ushiromiya household.

He is invited to dinner with the rest of the family. He is one of Kinzo’s trusted confidants. The family trusts him. The family doesn’t trust him. He is a huge non-presence, only there to declare to all that Kinzo is truly not long for this world.

And then he reappears at midnight, in darkness.

Why would the story seek to keep his location a secret? Is he somewhere with someone we shouldn’t know of? An undisclosed secret location we do not know about? Is he up to something?

If he is up to something, what is he up to?

I don’t think there’s any way to know at this junction. It’s all too obscured. There is nothing you can get out of a three-second frame of Nanjo against a black background while everyone’s locations are detailed as last-minute alibis.

The only thing it does confirm is that he is separate to the rest of the cast, and that the space he occupies is similarly separate.

However, this does in itself reveal a few things, maybe, if you’re willing to go absolutely insane in assuming everything possible about a single jpeg.

Nanjo is in his own location. As such, Nanjo is not associated with the group in the mansion. Therefore, Nanjo is not a sacrifice chosen by the key. Nanjo is also not grouped with anyone. Therefore, he has no hard and fast allegiance to anybody.

Further, Nanjo is in shadow. He is obscured by darkness. A literal darkness, in that we are deprived of information, but also perhaps a metaphorical one? Could Nanjo have a shady ulterior motive? Is Nanjo actually the Sus One I have been seeking?

If he is in the dark, or entering the darkness at midnight, this could mean that he’s either always been a sussy operator, or it could also mean that only at this moment is he slipping into darkness. At this moment in time, Nanjo chooses to compromise his morals. Is he planning a crime? Planning to side with one of the nefarious parties? Kanon? Kinzo? Beatrice herself?

Also, what benefit would there be if Nanjo was sus?

He’s the only one on the island that we know of with medical knowledge. If the narrator is committed to a true complicated murder mystery, one of three things should probably die happen: either Nanjo needs to die early, Nanjo needs to be incompetent, or Nanjo needs to be compromised in some way.

I’ve already stated I think Nanjo’s surviving the first twilight. Of the other two, it’s a toss-up. Perhaps it’s the case that he’s actually really useless as a doctor (would fit in with the fact the siblings point out that they’ve been promised Kinzo’s imminent demise for almost a year now) and will serve no use in being the designated coroner of the narrative. Or he could be a deeply untrustworthy individual (if he’s competent but deceptive, what does he gain from misleading people about the immediacy of Kinzo’s death?) who is acting from a place that runs counter to the “solve the mystery” imperative.

I think Nanjo Sus is likely, but I am struggling to see why exactly. He seems to have a decent level of loyalty to the Ushiromiyas and to Kinzo in particular. He willingly volunteered information during dinner. Nothing about him seems to indicate hostility towards this family. He is pretty much a regular guy.

But if he is a regular guy, could that also preclude regular weaknesses? Regular greed? Could a potential culprit, say, approach Nanjo and buy his cooperation with the promise of Kinzo’s gold? To what end though? He could falsify a cause of death, but how much would that kind of thing really matter, given that at least half the murders should be required to follow the epitaph’s methodology precisely? Could he instead provide an alibi for an opportunistic sibling willing to get their hands bloody? Could he be willing to conspire with Kanon, the unofficial-official Ushiromiya master with the headship ring? Or Kinzo, to help manipulate the deaths into fitting the ritual?

I don’t know. I honestly totally forgot about Nanjo until this writeup, so I’m struggling to fit him into any of my theory frameworks. I can’t see him colluding with a culprit. I can’t see him dying early. I can’t see him doing much of anything. He could be a major wrench in everything, or he could not. He could be sincere in his intentions, or he could not.

In essence, Nanjo remains in the dark. An unknown element that should not be ignored.

Or perhaps he’s a red herring, so obviously weird that you look at him instead of someone else. Someone who is more logically suspicious. It could be anything. It could mean anything.

Everything is up in the air. The coin before it lands. The Demon’s Roulette before it stops.

If there are answers, they are not here.

They exist beyond the first twilight, if they exist at all.

#umineko #umineko liveblog #umineko spoilers #wake up babe time for another 5000+ word demented umineko theorypost #umineko writeup

41 notes · View notes

telomeke-bbs · 2 years

Text

BAD BUDDY – OH, THE ALLEGORY OF IT ALL

This write-up was inspired by something that the ever-incisive @miscellar posted on 27 Sept 2022 regarding Bad Buddy's lack of homophobia (linked here), by the resurfacing of Pran's guitar during my rewatch of Ep.3, and also by a post from the thought-provoking @faillen (which unfortunately I can't track down and link to – my apologies!).

I really wasn't planning to do another write-up of this kind for some time, since we're now in the Bad Buddy rerun season and for the next few months I was only planning to list observations (not any kind of analysis) while going through the episodes in chronological order. Just a bit of light (if long-winded) reporting, avoiding (what amounts to, for me at least) any kind of heavy lifting to do with the messaging behind the media.

I'm actually far more interested in the social, cultural and linguistic aspects of any media I consume, and Bad Buddy is so rich in these it's possible to ignore its weightier content. My preference is for entertainment media to be lighter on the political front, since real life can be heavy enough to deal with. And I've been actively avoiding the heavier stuff in Bad Buddy, for these and other reasons.

But now I think it's time. 😉

It should be clear to everyone by this point that Bad Buddy is very much an allegory for the experience of growing up queer in queer-hostile environments.

The series is fronted by the out, proud and wise Khun Noppharnach Chaiwimol after all, so some aspect of queer messaging was always going to be inevitable in the mix.

(above) Aof Noppharnach Chaiwimol

And part of the genius of Bad Buddy is that its queer themes are interleaved within layers of fulfilling (and sometimes even exquisite) TV drama craftsmanship from all those involved, from the crew, to the writers, to the directors and of course to the actors (with a couple of exceptions perhaps, and I think we can/should forgive the inexperienced newbies among the cast). The queer themes are there, but they're not the eyewhacking coat-of-arms in the center of the tapestry – they're woven unobtrusively into the main fabric instead.

As homophobia is basically absent from their fictional universe, the fact that PatPran's relationship is (eventually) a gay one is – on the surface at least – totally immaterial compared to the other issues dealt out by the narrative.

For example, they have to hide their friendship behind a fake rivalry at university, because their faculties are at war. And then they have to face the hostility of family members – their parents – because their relationship (romantic or otherwise) is forbidden due to the enmity between Ming and Dissaya.

We see Pat trying to live his life as a do-over of Ming's, according to the rules set by Ming himself, rather than on his own terms. And Pran fights to contain the expression of his musical talent, as symbolized by his guitar-playing, because of Dissaya's displeasure with it (I've written-up Pran's side-story in greater detail in my previous post, linked here).

To deal with the pressures that their families and social circles put on them, Pat and Pran are forced to be a certain way, to act a certain way, and to conform to established norms or the needs/wants of others. They deny their authentic selves and their illicit relationship, burying their true natures, in order for there to be peace in their lives and so that they can go about the basics of just living.

But that comes with always looking over your shoulder (that's Pran at the wonton noodle stall in Ep.3!), and resorting to lies and subterfuge in order to get things done (Let's build the bus-stop together! It's for a good cause! But we can't let them know the whole truth, that we're really friends!).

There are so many examples. It's everywhere in Bad Buddy. And if any of this sounds familiar to LGBTQ+ viewers, well of course it's intentional. Because Pat and Pran's lives basically depict – metaphorically – the hostility, hiding, self-denial and performative deception that so many LGBTQ+ people have to grapple with on a daily basis.

But the strife in Bad Buddy from the warring faculties and families, Pat re-living Ming's glory days for him, and Pran's side-story with the guitar, are all allegorical in their messaging of the queer experience – none of the drama or conflict springs from anybody actually being LGBTQ+.

So in the end, making the trauma queer-adjacent rather than queer-centric, all while cloaked in the comfortable fleece-lined coverlet of a Thai BL rom-com, means that even non-LGBTQ+ viewers will be able to identify with Bad Buddy's themes of alienation and othering, as it applies to their own lives.

If you've ever had to face familial, social, religious, or any other kind of pressure because you are different in some way, even if you're not LGBTQ+, it wouldn't be difficult to be empathetic about PatPran's predicament. The fact that the queer aspect is right there embedded in the fabric of the show, without being the cause or focus of the angst, still alerts any viewer to the issues faced by the community, simply by osmosis.

And that's a gentle, yet powerful way of getting the message across, that everyone deserves to be treated with respect, including members of the LGBTQ+ community of course, but really it includes anybody who's disenfranchised, marginalized, or discriminated against for arbitrary, unjustifiable reasons.

I've said it before, and I think it bears repeating, that perhaps Bad Buddy's greatest gift is its normalization of the LGBTQ+ experience, while demonstrating that so many struggles of the human experience are common to us all.

For in looking past our differences to the commonalities that bind us, we take the first step toward creating a world that allows for differences to exist, without the discrimination that harms so many.

Pat and Pran found a way to surmount the opposition in their lives and live their own truth, and in doing so found their way to a very satisfying ending for their love story.

The message to us is that we can live our own truth too – and not only that, but also that we should live our own truth. Because ultimately it's what we deserve – just like everybody else. 💖

#bad buddy #bad buddy analysis #bad buddy allegory #bad buddy queer allegory #aof noppharnach chaiwimol #lgbtqia+#telomeke #patpran

43 notes · View notes

lemonthepotato · 5 months

Text

Debunking The Crow’s Amazing Defence Video: How I Learnt Not To Trust A Leo Sun

Please see my previous post for context.

The fact that Crow begins the video with mocking their old video and saying that the accused’s fans are crazy really speaks volumes. Just because they didn’t like Carousel. Already starting off with confidence, which is good. I can’t wait to see it proven without a shadow of a doubt that the accused is innocent.

First off, I am not making this because Brad Taste In Music made a video about the subject. I have always disliked that video by The Crow. I just didn’t want to express it because I know how delirious the accused’s fandom is. However, feeling like more people are wising up has given me confidence to revisit the video and give my own criticisms. Just to prove that, here is a rant I sent to a discord server mere months before I discovered his. It was a vent, so it’s not cohesive.

“Heavily redacted vent. I never mention the allegations by name, but I do mention the Kwite allegations, which may be triggering to some people because of the subject matter.

Okay, so… I need to vent about- or rant about something. I want to state something first of all. I am aware many people here [in that server I posted this to] are fans of this artist. And I was too. From 2014-2017. Though I still listened to their music till 2020, then I stopped because I began feeling gross. Separating artist from art became impossible because of the amount of people who supported them as a person. If you are a fan, or you believe she is innocent, okay. That’s fine. Just don’t be mean to me if you figure out who I’m talking about, and actually listen to what I have to say. This is a vent.

So, what I want to go over is this… in 2017, this artist was accused of something awful. People immediately jumped to conclusions, burning their merch, insulting them, harassing them. And then, a few people began to poke holes in their accusers story, even the tiniest details. Then, people started harassing HER.

In 2018, I think the video most people watched was by a commentary artist. I have seen that video. When I watched it, even then I felt off about it. Why? Because it’s poking holes into every little detail. The fact that she doesn’t remember things perfectly, that she wasn’t the perfect victim, that she forget details. And then ‘body analysis’ experts came along, which is a pseudoscience, and continued to push that narrative. The accuser got harassed daily to the point where she had to delete her social media.

Not only that, but that person? They are not a reliable source. In one video they made, they said that the accuser admitted she lied. However, the ‘evidence’ is a tiktok screenshot. The accuser actually DEBUNKED this herself. However, tiktok user /alexmster has evidence that she *said on video, she did not admit to lying.*

The allegations weren’t ‘debunked.’ Were they proven? Obviously not, because you can’t prove that easy. But the way the internet responded to this is *disgusting.*, and I’m still pissed about it to this day. I’m not saying the accused is guilty. I’m saying that there isn’t enough evidence that the accuser was lying. And the fact people were to eager to continue supporting them that they fabricated evidence- *no*. That’s ridiculous. The fact is that at the end of the day- music artists we like can be bad people. “Stanning” celebrities is dangerous because it makes you do stuff like this. I understand there are some situations where accusers lie. The Kwite situation for example. Orion, I was suspicious of from the start. But I remained neutral. Kwite came out with mountains of evidence against Orion, proving that he was 100% lying. Did the accused in this case? Well, no… and it’s a tricky situation, because it’s not a clear-cut answer of who the burden of proof is on. Is it on the victim? To a degree. But should we really live in a world where a victims validity is based on how accurately they can remember events? How much evidence they have? Why can’t we live in a world that remains impartial? Is it on the accused? Well, no, not that either. Because if someone accuses you of something, and let’s say they’re a complete stranger, and that you don’t know them. How can you even disprove that? You can’t really. So it’s a tricky situation.

Again, I want to re-iterate. I avoid this topic usually, because well… people have been mean to me about it. And well, this is what has piled up. A lot of anger. But, I just can’t hide that anger anymore. It’s gotten to the point where it’s almost triggering me to hear about that artist. I really just think the internet needs to revisit these allegations. I’m not saying listening to the accused in this cases music is bad, I’m just saying that we can’t just assume they are innocent because it’s the popular consensus.

I don’t want to be attacked for this. There’s a reason I didn’t mention directly who I’m talking about. I have been before. The fans of this artist are ruthless bullies sometimes. It’s why I stopped listening to them entirely. How can you take pride in ruining a potential victims life? Does it make these people happy? Why do they feel the need to do this? I don’t get it. I don’t. No one in this situation deserves harassment. Not the accuser, not the accused. No one. The internet wants to act like a courtroom, but the only people who truly know what happened that day is the accused and the accuser. And I don’t know. 2017 was a very different time in internet history, and I’d like to think people handle these situations with more maturity nowadays. But still… and the worst part? I can’t even post this outside of a server, because if I posted this to tumblr for example, I’d get harassed. It’s ridiculous. They are the kind of fans who assume anyone who doesn’t fully support their idol is an idiot. It’s critical thinking that led me to this rant. It’s acknowledging the faults of people. It’s understanding that led me here. Not hate. Not ignorance. Not lies.

Again, I know some people are a fan of this artist here. I’m sorry. This isn’t me saying you’re a bad person. I just needed to get this out.

The people in there were very respectful of my opinion. I don’t know if they knew who I was talking about, but I ended up leaving that server because I got my OCD triggered. Also, other reasons. Like an alleged… really bad and toxic person… being in the server. But I didn’t know how to bring it up ahh… But that’s neither here nor there. Out of all the accused’s fans, they were the least unhinged. They were actually pretty alright people. Maybe because they were adults.

Anyway, back to the video. Are they discussing Edwin’s Generation? I vaguely remember he made a video about the situation.

“I didn’t even watch the vids, but let me critique my strawman arguments.” How could you possibly know what he said if you didn’t watch the video? Yep, I remember him making a Mars Argo video too.

The fact that they say “I already know the way he thinks” is very concerning. I also support Mars Argo, because she was victimised. This isn’t really a debate. Even the woman who defended the initial alleged came out and spoke against him. I haven’t been keeping up with any updates lately, but they seem to have a very condescending nature about believing victims. It doesn’t help that in a recent video they call supporters of the victim of the accused “naive.” Ironic, considering the echo chamber that is the accused’s fanbase.

“It’s likely he’s lying about not being close with the victim” where’s your proof? You can’t just claim things with no proof.

“Liars often try to convince you they’re telling the truth, while people who aren’t just expect you to believe them.” Ah, yes. Very logical argument.

“Edwin is biased.” Ad hominem. It doesn’t matter if he’s biased. That doesn’t debunk his argument. Also, rich coming from you.

“The fact that his interview takes place in the victims home strikes me as odd if they aren’t friends.” Then I suppose Vogue interns must be besties with every celebrity they interview. This isn’t an argument, and even if it was, you are attacking his character, not his argumenting skills.

“Would you invite a man you didn’t know well to your home?” Different strokes for different folks. Some people have their guard down more.

Ah, BPD. Unlike Crow, I actually think I found a source for the victim having BPD, so maybe they didn’t pull that out of their ass. (Disclaimer: this isn’t true, and I later state this.) Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean the rest of what they say here isn’t vile and disgusting. And no, I don’t care if they have BPD themselves. It is an attack of the victims CHARACTER without any solid evidence. It. Is. CONJECTURE.

Forgive me for believing that an interviewer with a following online murking the person they wanted to interview is a ridiculous assumption, even if the victim had trust issues. Which, by the way, is an assumption, and not a fact.

Argument by authority. Proceeding to dismiss something you’re doing (demonising BPD) by claiming that your argument doesn’t hinge on it. So far, it does. We are 8 minutes into the video.

“I am not a liar.” Proceeds to argue that “yes, you are.” because you are borderline. Literally shows a clip of the victim saying they have never struggled with lying, and then says they know that she is lying about never lying because “note symptoms and diagnostic criteria aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, but this still bothers me a lot. Like, what, it's typical for borderlines to lie and she's the only one who's honest Imao.” The fuck you mean it’s typical? You don’t speak for every person with BPD. Lying is not a diagnostic criteria for BPD.

“She says that being malicious and revengeful is a sign of BPD.” No she didn’t. She said “I don’t have to fit every symptom of BPD.” because her therapist said that being malicious and revengeful is a sign of BPD. They are blaming her for what her THERAPIST said.

Oh my god. Just because someone looks over the evidence and believes the victim doesn’t make them stupid. In your words, he might’ve used logic to come to his conclusions. Not everyone thinks exactly like you. False Dichotomy.

Had to take a break from this video because of how repulsive it is. How did anyone take this seriously? Even I didn’t, and I was a kid!

Seriously? Going after his girlfriend? First of all, she doesn’t dress like a teenager and pretend to have her period. She is just dressing in short skirts. What is this weird body shaming? It’s disgusting. You’re going after someone’s relationship just because you don’t agree with him. What the hell is wrong with you people?

“Body language experts” are full of shit. Anyone can google that much to find that out. Not even going to address this ‘point.’ Crow, aren’t you autistic? You should know damn well how harmful this is for people like us. Guys if body language worked, why the hell do police interrogations exist? They can just look at the persons face and figure out their exact motive. That’s a fair and just way of justice. So far, zero substantial arguments. I was expecting a full breakdown, but instead I got this.

“His odds of not knowing about the believe me look are low.” Wow, nice opinion. Back it up with a source. I didn’t know what it was until I re-watched this.

Hey, considering how much we love logical fallacies here, why isn’t The Crow showing his face? Hmmm?

The logical conclusion is that Reagan realised that the video was bullshit, but TCFKAPS doesn’t do logical here.

Are you kidding me? Astrology? What’s next, MBTI? Omg Timothy is such an ISFP, she must be lying. You can’t use pseudoscience in a case like this. And I love typology like MBTI and enneagram, and I don’t hate astrology, but do you see the problem here?

I genuinely don’t get it. HOW did anyone take this seriously? Even if the accused was innocent, this video would still not be even mediocre. It’s terrible.

“Her music flopped so she made the allegations.” Conjecture. Anyway, stream Sleep and Self-Titled. I first listened to the entirety of it in 2019, and I’ve gotten back into listening to it. Pretty decent music. My favourite track is Not Even For You. Sorry, if Crow can go on tangents about random things, so can I. Also I’ve heard the accused fell off. Idk I only listened to her EP, first and second album. Unfortunately, unlike other musicians I like, I cannot even listen to her music, because her fanbase blew the allegations under the rug and the consensus isn’t “separate the art from the artist” it’s “stan the art and artist” which makes it difficult for me to.

You made this when you were 26? Older? The god complex shit is really annoying. Edwin isn’t your arch nemesis. delulu. Sorry, I probably shouldn’t use that word lightly- I know it’s kinda offensive- but I’m pissed. We need like. A word for people like this. Grandiose.

We are a quarter of the way through the first hour of the video and there is NOTHING. Nothing but conjecture, pseudoscience and astrology. Did the people who flood others DM’s with “SHE’S INNOCENT WATCH THIS VIDEO” even watch the video? Yeah, there’s a reason I’m only talking about this subject on my account now. Even though I’ve held this opinion that the video sucks for years. I’m just glad someone with a platform called this out. Ugh.

So, Timothy got 773 streams on Sleep (stream sleep :)) which is a decent amount for a song in 2 days when you’re small, and she seemed grateful, but she’s doing this for clout? She says that she’s scared to post her story in case she’s not believed… which is reasonable, and that’s ‘evidence’? Also, if accused (btw, I keep calling her the accused because her fans are fucking weirdos who name-search her solely to target people who dislike her. I don’t want bratty teenagers harassing me; I want civil discussion from ADULTS only or people with brains in general. Eh, I’ll call her Leilani from now on.) really contacted Timothy after she made her tweet, isn’t that suspicious? Why would you contact her if you were innocent? Oh, I’m just using Crow’s logic.

By the way, if Timothy wanted clout, Leilani allegations wouldn’t be the best way to do that. There was a high risk of turning the internet against her. She could’ve just begged Leilani to be friends again. Literally would’ve been easier, or said “I will release this statement if you don’t.” Something like that. If she really is this villain you make her out to be, there are easier ways to get clout.

I’m genuinely angry. She was scared to post this. And people ended up confirming her worst nightmares. People harassed her for years on end. I admit, when I first heard the allegations and saw someone say “it’s fake,” I was young, so I immediately posted a Snapchat story agreeing with it. My friend at the time contacted me saying “hey what the fuck, she could be telling the truth.” It humbled me. My brain hadn’t really developed, and I didn’t develop critical thinking skills back then. But I remained neutral from then on. I think I realised I made a mistake. You don’t even know how old I was back then, but the fact that being that young and able to own up to the fact I fucked up, meanwhile these people who were older than I was then, TO THIS DAY shame Timothy is SICKENING. How can you read that statement and not feel anything? If you ever harassed Timothy, you are disgusting. If there is a hell… well there isn’t but… still.

I’m reading so many heartbreaking statements about people who believed this video, downplaying their own SA experiences. History repeats itself, I know this will happen again and again. All you can do, and I beg you, if you realised how bullshit the video is, to not fall for such bullshit again. Back in 2018, when the Spoctor allegations came out, I immediately believed it. I think that situation is what caused me to re-evaluate the Leilani situation. Before 2019 I was neutral, but the 2 hour hit piece really selled it to me that the internet was wrong. Because the internet can be wrong. The majority can be wrong. Think for yourselves.

But I want the internet to grow. It happens time and time again. Remember the Hopeless Peaches situation? That was after the Spoctor situation. People never learn. If you aren’t online 24/7, you probably don’t know who either of those people are. And no, I don’t care if Spoctor was found doing weird shit. There was still a lot of fabrications back THEN.

The only time I’ve ever seen the internet treat SA allegations seriously was with Kwite and Orion. Even then, some people acted like it was a fucking battle between their two favourite kpop groups, acting like it’s a competition of who’s right. Place your bets; who’s right wins moral superiority. How self-righteous and ridiculous. Sure, I was skeptical of Orion, but I didn’t immediately say “OR HA GOD KWITE IS INNOCENT” or “OH MA GOD ORION IS INNOCENT.” Like literally be fucking normal.

I’m sorry? The allegation is too long?

What is Timothy meant to put subway surfers footage and family guy funny moments over her FUCKING SA ALLEGATION? You are THIRTY.

“She never said no to what we chose to do together” is still suspicious. First of all, consent is a consistent thing. Not saying no doesn’t mean yes. And she didn’t say no because she got so worn down the night before. And before you say “what we CHOSE to do together.” Sorry, but someone who says “she never said no” might not have the best idea of what a choice is. Also, Leilani was so sympathetic that she wrote a whole song shitting on Timothy.

I know they will bring it up; “Why would you dress up as your abuser?” I’ve struggled with co-dependency many times, and regardless of who was right/wrong in those situations, when you put someone on a pedestal, it’s hard to take them down.

So, remember how Crow said the chance that Leilani saw that psychic is low? Well, considering they make their opinions based on conjecture, let me do the same. The song piggyback mentions how she ‘knows her destiny.’ Hmmm, a spiritual person would say that. Isn’t her new album spiritual? Seems like solid proof by your standards.

Remember Crow saying “the easiest solution is usually the correct one?” Well, apparently “Timothy and Leilani were friends because they got along” isn’t the truth, but rather “Timothy was trying to leach from the accused from the very start” is.

“Only liars have to convince you they’re telling the whole story.” Ah yes, you sound like a cop. This sounds like ‘only guilty people talk like this.’ Don’t be ridiculous. It’s one woman against a band of stans, and I mean that in the most literal sense of the word. Obsessed, unwilling to admit their idol isn’t perfect, defensive.

So if you can’t tell a story backwards, you’re lying? You know some people just have shit memories, like myself? Also, this is a hypothetical. Dismissed.

Why are they promoting their own book? Let me look this book up, I’m a writer myself…. that book cover… sorry, I know this is an ad hominem; Crow loves those, but this book cover is an… interesting choice. It feels kinda off. Looking at it, I couldn’t tell it was a dark comedy. If anything, I’d assume it was something spicy. The book has positive reviews, so you know what? Good for you. Keep writing, Crow. I’m hoping to self-publish by the end of the year. Apparently he regrets it because he rushed it. It’s a common mistake, I wouldn’t beat myself up over something like that, so don’t. And that’s the nicest thing I’ll probably say about him.

But seriously, this isn’t the time. How self-absorbed do you have to be to promote your own book? This is a video about SA. Do you not realise how serious this is- shaking my head!

Making your first chapter 24 pages probably isn’t the best idea, and the first half of a chapter worse. Trust me, I know splitting chapters causes issues, it’s a fucking pain to format when the amount of chapters bleeds into the next page in the table of contents, but still. I don’t even know why KDP mandates a table of contents. It’s so silly.

Hey guys, you want some anti-sa charities to donate to instead of spending your money on someone’s book? Here, here. Also, fuck it, we’re doing good things here, and I’m very passionate about ending animal cruelty, so here, here. I’ve contributed more good in this post than I guarantee he has in his video.

Even if Timothy was using the allegations to promote her music? And? You’re using this situation to promote your book and you aren’t even directly involved. Also, is a victim just not allowed to promote her music after she comes out with allegations? Is she mandated to go into the shadows until like a year?

So anyone who likes Timothy’s music is doing it out of pity? Okkkk. I don’t see how me streaming a song is going to support her in any way. Most musicians don’t make that much, so why would anyone pity stream music? I guess numbers? But like- if you pity supported someone and didn’t actually like their music, you could just say “thox and prayers mate” and pretend you actually did something good, like a lot of people do. Anyway, this is an ad hominem towards people who like Timothy’s music. Do you really think being pity listened to would be a good thing anyway?

“If it’s the truth, why is the whole thing set up to have you believe it?” BECAUSE. VICTIMS. DON’T. GET. BELIEVED. Because of people like you. And yes, I know the person who Mae this video is a victim. Not an excuse.

“Things don’t move that fast in the publishing world.” Yes? Yes they do? Unfortunately, big celebrity allegations = money for these companies. Why do you think Lil Tay got reported as dead when she wasn’t? It didn’t matter that it wasn’t true, jUsT aS lOng aS iTs EnTeRtAInG tO yOu. (Colleen reference moment) (sorry that video just. it’s still funny.) (also unpopular opinion but I think toxic gossip train is catchy- it shouldn’t be but- then again it has the most generic track) lmao.

She asked Newsweek to promote her story? Proof? You can’t just say shit.

“Liars often use passive voice.” Found no study on that, so I’m assuming this is bullshit. This is reading way too far into a statement. This doesn’t even seem logical. Sentence structure is not a good determiner of guilty vs innocent. You, in a court, you would be laughed at for this. Please never become Leilani’s attorney.

Also, Timothy was in the chat of the reaction I’m watching to this video… god, imagine opening a stream and seeing your statement being torn apart because you… used passive voice?? Like that’s not a thing people do. Hey, to anyone reading this, have I used passive voice at all in this post? If so, mannnn, I am such a liar. You caught me.

But hey, seeing a chat full of supportive, respectful individuals for once who think with their brains is refreshing for once. Not enough to restore my faith in humanity.

What the FUCK? Okay, so now it’s Timothy’s fault for venting about her experiences. And not only that, she didn’t put in enough effort to ‘fix’ their friendship? Victim blaming 101.

So now Timothy is lying about being hurt, because she’s borderline? Imagined issues? This is ableism. Like sorry, this is plain ableism. There is no substance, no evidence, this is straight up defamatory. “It’s just my opinion” that she was a clingy friend who overreacted? Based on what?

Ok, so Timothy considered the accused closer than they were. So what? I have had dependency issues and that’s not an uncommon issue. Sometimes, people struggle with telling how close they really are with someone. Sometimes, someone cares about the other more than they care about them. It’s not a sign Timothy is lying.

ALSO TIMOTHY SAID IN BRAD’S CHAT “btw my therapist decided I never had bpd and it was more likely cptsd and autism haha” SO THAT MAKES THIS ARGUMENT EVEN WEAKER IN MODERN CONTEXT. Un

And before you say “she could be lying about bpd” did you know women are commonly misdiagnosed with bpd?

“You can only have one best friend.” Ladies and gentlemen, I have some news for you. This isn’t 2nd grade, you can have more than one best friend.

“Liars are more likely to use the word honestly.” Correlation doesn’t mean anything, plus there is no studies proving this. The closest I’ve seen is an article by simplypsychology, which states “Phrases like “honestly,” “I want to be honest with you,” or “here's the truth” can all be signs that the liar is trying too hard to convince the other person that they are telling the truth.” Key word: CAN BE. This is all conjecture man. In what court of law is this evidence?

“If that were really her plan Melanie wouldn’t have smoked we with her.” Are you kidding me?… do I even need to respond to this? Maybe she smoked it to quell her guilty conscience, maybe she was used to it so felt the effects less, maybe she didn’t care because SHE WASN’T BEING TARGETED BY TIMOTHY. It was the other way around.

I feel like I’m in Danganronpa, where no one except the protagonist and the sidekick detective had good arguments but everyone just blindly believes someone making a silly argument. That person isn’t even the culprit; it’s just someone like Ibuki with the gravel. If you don’t know that reference, good for you. Danganronpa is mid. What? I’m criticising a music artist with a rabid fandom, I might as well go all out.

“SA is violent, not influenced by hormones.” What? Are you seriously saying that someone desiring that intimacy has nothing to do with SA? Yes, it’s a disgusting act, but people do it to get a need felt. Sometimes that’s solely control, but most of the time it isn’t just control, it is related to their intimate needs. I say ‘needs’ loosely because you aren’t entitled to intimacy.

Oh my god. SA doesn’t always leave evidence. First of all, there are many forms of intimacy. Some don’t leave behind any evidence, some don’t involve direct acts. And the thing about SA kits is that not everyone will immediately get assault and think “ok, I need to get an SA kit.” They will be like “what the fuck just happened?” and might not process it. Timothy admitted she didn’t accept what happened, so why do you think she would have access to an SA kit?

“What happened to the toy” Leilani took it? It was washed? What the hell is this question? So weird?

‘Vejuices’ how did you think that was funny or okay to say? You aren’t taking this seriously at all. This is disgusting. Shame on anyone who takes this video seriously. You don’t joke about that. Not in a video about a serious situation. This is evil.

Victim blaming. Just straight up victim blaming. “If you were uncomfortable why did you return” rhetoric. Seriously. I am appalled that anyone took this video seriously. HOW.

You are not every SA victim. Get off your high horse.

“She said no to SA why couldn’t she just leave?” The lack of compassion is crazy.

She was SILENT during the act. What part of DURING do you not understand? “Why didn’t she say no during the act?” Type beat. She said no plenty of times, why can’t you comprehend someone breaking down after being pressured?

“All the hate would make victims doubt themselves” so getting defensive = guilty now? Do you know that in police interrogations, those who are innocent tend to act angrier and more defensive? That’s because criminals often act calm in interrogations to make themselves seem innocent, but it often backfires. I’m sure some do act defensive, but so what? People are allowed to defend themselves. If someone told me my trauma was made up, I’d tell them to suck an egg.

Unnecessary detailed? Yet you complained earlier that she couldn’t recall the toy used.

SUSPICIOUSLY SHORT SENTENCES?? WHAT?? Guys.

Finally, some actual arguments. OK, so Timothy misremembered the dates. And? You are expecting a victim to remember the EXACT DAY they were traumatised.

And Leilani confirmed the event happened. Why do you keep forgetting that? They were intimate, but whether it was consensual or not is the debate. Not whether it happened. Ah fuck it, Melanie. I don’t care anymore. Any of her fans that take this video as gospel ought to find a better source.

Are you seriously saying that a 19 year old celebrity has less power just because of age? This is- wha-

IT’S WEIRD TO BE SUBMISSIVE TO YOUR YOUNGER FRIENDS?? WHAT?? SHE WAS 3 YEARS YOUNGER-

So now outer appearance determines submissive vs dominant. Yeah, no. I-

So now Timothy influenced Melanie to smoke, because Timothy was older? It can never be the other way around? Dude, I’ve been shamed by 14 year olds online for not smoking. I think it’s disgusting.

I wish I had the confidence to debunk this video earlier. It wasn’t until a larger YouTuber called this out that I felt validated in my stances. And I should be ashamed of myself. But really, I’m not. I’m just ashamed at the people who made me and others feel like we couldn’t speak up in the first place. That this was a done deal. It’s not. It never has been. I swear- this is how I feel about these melanie stans online.

Wait… I’m a Leo rising… guys… holy shit… 💀 I’m a liar.

So, now her being comfortable with her body is being comfortable discussing intimate acts in her life? First of all, there are limits to what someone is comfortable talking about. Intimacy and suggestive behaviors are not necessarily the same. You people… seriously.

Seriously.

I want to state that the statement isn’t even detailed. It’s wordy, but not detailed. So complaining that she never mentioned the handcuffs isn’t in line with your other criticisms. Which is it?

Saying the timeline doesn’t match up is wrong. She says Melanie suggested they play the game together, then things got intimate. She never specified the time that happened. Point here?

She said it was her idea to BUY the game. She said it was Melanie’s idea to PLAY it. Different WORDS.

The person in handcuffs is not going to be dominant? Says who? Also, you know dominants can be SA’d, right? They’re people with feelings too.

Consent to a game is not consent to intimacy. And not every time, either.

So, Timothy deciding she doesn’t want Melanie to touch her, and quitting the game, is her fault? This is victim blaming 101. Where did Crow get their lessons from, Reit- different situation.

Also, Timothy said in the stream that they weren’t seriously playing the game, it was a joke. “The assumption that we were seriously playing this game has been overwhelmingly cringe since the start. Anyone who’s ever had [word tumblr won’t let me say because they’re overly strict] has not done that since 90’s.” Time stamp: 3:57:30

People still forget Melanie had other victims. People who stand by Timothy.

Also, love how the whole video is mental gymnastics yet says believing Timothy is mental gymnastics. There could be other victims of Melanie’s who were silenced because of videos like this.

Omfg is a weird way to caption your trauma? So which is it? Did the game happen before or during it? You keep contradicting yourself.

Scrutising every detail of someone’s SA is so evil. Like if someone told me “oh, that traumatic incident you say happened couldn’t have happened because X, so it had to have been on Y day, therefore you’re lying, and therefore X didn’t happen” I’d just feel so invalidated. Because I don’t remember. Truthfully? I can’t distinguish the years 2019-2021. I can’t. Even before then, I struggle. I have terrible memory issues, loss even, because I repressed those memories. It’s not uncommon. You aren’t the only one who has suffered trauma. You can remember the exact date of your SA? Great, good for you, amazing. So glad you can, not everyone can. Sometimes we make up dates because we can’t remember. For the record, I don’t think I’m an SA victim. There was a weird encounter, a couple actually, in my childhood, but I don’t remember enough to call that SA. The closest was being mildly harassed on two occasions. However, I have been traumatised. I know what trauma does. It ruins you. It makes you feel broken. You can’t remember things, you dissociate, you might even identify with your trauma because it’s the only stability. It’s really fucked up. This is so dismissive of real trauma symptoms. :/

Have you ever considered that the pool party photo was taken a day or two earlier? Even if it wasn’t, Melanie CONFIRMED the encounter happened so WHY DO YOU CARE?

So, not my argument, but Crow employs a lot of DARVO in this video. DARVO stands for Deny (“This didn’t happen”) Attack (“You’re a liar/did this for attention/have no alibi/you took a selfie shit) Reverse Victim and Offender (Melanie is the real victim)

My reaction to half of these arguments. Literally.

WAIT. IS IT A WIG NOW?? You said it wasn’t, and that any wig maker of their salt or whatever wouldn’t bleach a wig. But now Timothy is wearing Melanie’s wig?

WAIT. You do realise that she could’ve deleted the photos because it reminded her of her trauma? You know that’s actually very likely, right? People delete photos that give them bad memories. When my dog was diagnosed with cancer, I deleted all of my photos of her. I regret this, but at the time I was so distraught I couldn’t look at her. Did that mean I secretly gave my dog cancer and deleted the photos? No. Stop being silly.

Did you consider she deleted her CuriousCat? If she wanted to delete the tweet, she would’ve. What a silly argument.

ACT TRAUMATISED? Shit guy, I laugh in VC’s when my friends tell funny jokes. I’m not traumatised. Shit, I pretend I feel ok around the people who hurt me because I’m so scared of being taken advantage of and having my breakdowns used as evidence I am crazy and a liar, so I guess I mustn’t be traumatised. Shit, I enjoy spending time with my dog, I mustn’t be traumatised. Lmao.

Her FRIEND said “it’s not like Melanie fucking stabbed her.” Not Timothy. If your friend says something awkward about your trauma, what do you do? I mean, man, I’d be stumped. Probably laugh it off. Also, they’re kinda right. SA isn’t always in-your-face violent. Sometimes it’s more subtle. SA isn’t forcing someone to do something in a low mean voice with a knife to their throat. It can be manipulative, your best friend, most SA’ers know their victims. But sure, Timothy is lying.

Ah yes, “silence is consent” is an argument you want to make in a video about this topic. Sarcastic.

So Eve was mean to their violater? Oh no, what a tragedy.

You can tell she’s young? Idk, I’ve seen the interview and I didn’t think she was a minor.

All Timothy said about Billie was that she was hanging out with adult men and making comments about herself or smth when she was a minor.

Unfounded racism allegations. YIPEEE. When I think “rapper” I don’t think “black person.” Not to pull the “no u” carrd- I just find it suspicious that Crow immediately assumes rapper is a dog whistle for black person. I highly doubt that.

Wrong. Neurotypical means someone with a non-divergent brain. BPD IS neurodivergence. And by the way, I’m autistic, if you want to play the argument by authority game so badly.

So, I didn’t know this, but people in the stream were saying ADHD does cause withdrawal. I probably would’ve googled that anyway, but still. L argument.

Brb, I gotta do stuff. I actually have a life, crazy, right?

Back. Timothy didn’t claim that her doctor told her to take adderall. The opposite, in fact. And also, adderall is only used to treat ADHD? Bullshit. “It's most commonly used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). It's also used to treat narcolepsy.”

“I doubt she has ADHD.” Okay, and? Did she claim to have it? Also, you don’t get to fakeclaim people. You used the “I’m probably borderline” excuse so don’t go pretending that you care about the importance of diagnoses. Timothy didn’t even claim to have ADHD???

I won’t disagree with the ED stuff, and I won’t disagree about Amy Schumer. Liking Amy Schumer is an L. Still doesn’t prove she wasn’t assaulted. 3 good arguments so far. 1 of which is bad faith (the ED one; assuming Timothy was intentionally trying to trigger Eugenia’s ED)

Stop PROMOTING YOUR book in a video about SA.

Okay, Stockholm syndrome is a controversial topic and a highly debated diagnoses. Some say it’s used by police to justify brutality. However, these sort of reactions to ab/se DO exist. And shame on you for denying Timothy her right to feel how she feels.

I was pushed down a staircase, yet I’m not triggered by staircases. I was pinned against the wall, yet I’m not triggered by choking. I have triggers, but those aren’t them. And honestly, Timothy can be uncomfortable with talking about intimacy and still do suggestive things. Who cares? This feels like a weird form of gatekeeping. Have you ever considered taking back your power is a form of therapy? Also, seriously? Timothy saying “you can’t support my assaulter and me” is bad? It makes perfect sense, actually.

Wow, a victim took fanart mocking her trauma and made a joke. The horror!

So wanting to be famous means that you are a liar now? I have to pack my bags. Clearly every action I take is a desperate means to claim fame. And clearly this must be true also for Timothy, who made JOKE TWEETS about wanting to be famous. Anyway, let’s get all her songs to 100k streams.

“A true artist will create art no matter what.” Your experiences aren’t universal, and even if that’s true, so what? She makes music to be famous? If that’s true, who cares? I want my writing to be famous, is that a fucking crime? For artists to want to be recognised for their work? Did you release your book hoping it would fail? Actually, that cover makes me think s- bad joke. I’m not trying to be mean.

So, uninspired music wouldn’t get famous, huh? Oh the irony. Most popular music is uninspired.

If Timothy was only after attention, why would she leave Dresses?

Have you considered that Timothy probably DID come out about the situation because Melanie was famous, and someone of that fame would have a much easier time taking advantage of someone?

Excuse me…? Did you just call SA an accomplishment? That’s horrible.

THE SCREENSHOT ACCUSING TIMOTHY OF SA LITERALLY SAYS “UPDATE: IT’S FAKE.”

So Timothy knowing Melanie was dating means they had discussed consensual acts together prior? I know people who are dating, but last I checked I still have my cards in order. My alphabet-letter-22-card-in order that is.

So Timothy is wrong for cheating on her boyfriend, but not Melanie? Also, seriously? You sound so SA defendant, “women just say they were assaulted to avoid admitting they cheated.” is so disgusting. Shame on you. This misogynistic blame shit needs to stop.

Also, how do you know Timothy and Melanie weren’t in open-relationships? You don’t know their life. Plus, it doesn’t matter because I actually believe the victim and being ASSAULTED DOESN’T COUNT AS CHEATING.

AND HOW. COULD. SHE. PROVE THE ASSAULT? If she could prove the assault, do you not think she would’ve already?! It’s so difficult for victims to prove these kind of things! That’s why this is such a tricky subject. You can get stabbed and the police will believe you, take you seriously and you can find possibly who did it. Being SA’d is not that easy. Most victims are too scared to go to the police.

So Melanie not pressing charges is because she can’t afford it, but Timothy can? I think Melanie, the celebrity, makes more money.

I’ve had asthma attacks more fun than watching this video.

I literally had to drink the other day just to make it through the first hour of this video. It was pretty nice, made me feel less in pain.

“We don’t arrest people for being creepy oh but timothy being a leo and borderline is totally evidence.

“Why Timothy Heller fans remain loyal in spite of of basic logic: A lesson on cognitive dissonance and being manipulated.” Irony (ˈʌɪrəni) the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.

“Takes it personally when you don’t believe her.” Uh yeah? If someone told you your SA was fake that IS personal. Jfc.

Irish I wasn’t watching this video (you’ll only get the joke if you’ve seen the video and remember the art.) (I actually am Irish.)

I don’t feel guilty at all. Because unlike Melanie stans, I don’t go around harassing people.

THE ALLEGATIONS AREN’T ABOUT RACE. Isn’t Crow white?? Sit down. Seriously. It’s fucking repulsive to use the struggles of latina women as a gotcha card. Anyway.

If any of you actually want to donate to a charity for latino/latina people, here you go.

WAIT. HE JUST- THEY JUST SAID BELIEVING TIMOTHY REQUIRES NO MENTAL GYMNASTICS ON ACCIDENT. Rare Crow W 2.

Well that was the worst video I’ve ever seen, and I’ve watched Who Killed Captain Alex. At least that movie has ironic enjoyment and was made with love. This video is a toxic, harmful and disgusting video shaming a victim of SA into silence. Stop using this video as a source.

Also, they spread misinformation in their newer video when he said that Timothy retracted her statement. She did not. As I said earlier, Timothy has stated publicly she stands by it and that screenshot was FAKE. But Crow doesn’t care about evidence, but flawed logic. If you read my earlier rant, I talked about this.

I’m done with this video. I’m just going to link some stuff.

The Original Video (Be Civil)

BTIM’s 6 hour life stream response

A Different Perpsective

Resources For Victims

BTIM Follow Up / Part 2

Edit: This isn’t related, but I recently re-listened to A Million Men, a song I haven’t listened to since I was a kid, and I shed a tear because of how fucking horrible the lyrics are. It’s about a CHILD going through some of the most horrible shit imaginable, being murdered and- what the fuck? I was so disgusted. It’s so exploitative. The lack of tact

Oh, and as a response to someone else calling the song disgusting? One of Melanie Martinez’s amazing fans replies “cope, SA victim” which is fucking disgusting.

#anti melanie martinez #lemons random rants #tw sa #critiquing random shit #gaslighting: the movie

2 notes · View notes