#also! writing characters as being somewhat contradictory is a thing | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

kannra21 · 5 months

Text

Bc I "love" (lol) Gege so much, I gathered some info on him. Pls DM me to add more if you remember anything

Pen name: Akutami Gege (芥見下々)

Birthday: 26th February 1992 (31yo)

Zodiac: Pisces

Born: Iwate Prefecture, Japan

he went to all boy's private school

Akutami has an older brother who's married. Yuji is strongly inspired by his brother who is Akutami's opposite. He is someone who succeeds in everything he undertakes: sports, studies etc.

he was never really interested in drawing or manga until 4th grade when his older brother bought Weekly Shōnen Jump. The Jump that he read had Bleach on it and that's how Akutami's love for Bleach developed. When he was in the 5th grade and moved from Iwate Prefecture to Sendai in Miyagi Prefecture, he was surprised to see that the kids at his new school drew manga

he started drawing manga by imitating his friends' work

so his Bleach obsession started in elementary school and his Evangelion and Hunter x Hunter obsession started in middle school

he wrote a poetry analogy called "Giant From The Clouds" in middle school, inspired by the Bleach mangaka

His previous works are Kamishiro Sōsa, No.9, Nikai Bongai Barabarjura and jjk 0

Yuji was named after his childhood classmate

Geto was named after the "Geto Korean Ski Resort", located near Akutami's hometown of Tohoku

he's slightly colorblind

he's a fan of occult, mystical practices and horror

he wears glasses

he cooks somewhat

he loves hot springs and scalp massages, he goes to dermatologist to maintain healthy skin

he exercises and he's trying to get in shape despite the busy schedule, workout is not as painful as it is boring

he's very grateful for his chiropractor bc of his stiff neck, he said that if he ever time-travels and meets his younger self he's gonna tell him "get in shape, seriously", he craves afternoon naps but tries to resist by eating sweets like Pikmin gummies (why's he so contradictory haha)

when Nakamura first debuted with the jjk cast and got to meet Gege, he was surprised by how young he looked. He also said that Gege has a calming voice

hobbies: he reads a bunch of novels and watches a bunch of movies whenever he can, he's busy with work most of the time

his favorite food is crispy thai pandan chicken

his favorite onigiri flavor is mentaiko, he loves Umaibo snacks, Schau Essen, potatoes, hayashi rice, ramen and seedless grapes

He's usually not a fan of name brands but he likes Balenciaga. He also wants to support Royal Host restaurant

he likes comedy podcasts like Arabikidan group

the first manga he submitted to Jump was a gag manga

when he was a student he found studying boring but he likes doing research on things that actually interest him (like engineering facts he needed for the manga)

when he was an art student, he didn't really like making drawings where the model stayed for hours in a specific pose. He preferred to sketch in 3-4 minutes

he relies too much on sketches, rough drafts and his editors (he says he's like a dog for the editors)

he has a habit of forgetting how to draw his characters sometimes

he's self-deprecating and he's sorry that he sometimes makes people feel awkward by being overly critical of himself *hugs him*

he finds it difficult to write Yuji bc Yuji and Akutami are fairly different, Akutami doesn't consider himself particularly athletic but he can relate to Yuji for being an "airhead" sometimes and does things when people tell him not to

he thinks he's clumsy and fucks up honorifics sometimes, he talks casually with his editor Yamanaka whom he has a beef with till this day, he reminds him to "respect his elders" (he's so Gojo coded lol)

He's so funny asdfghjhgfd

he's in good relationship with his parents, he respects them and they're very supportive of him

he cares about his mom's opinion on his manga

Toji's and Yuta's personalities are somewhat based on Akutami's dad, dad also reads the manga

according to Gege, jjk should've been a lot darker but editor didn't allow it

he's an otaku, he's a fan of Marvel, has Hunter x Hunter posters on the wall and enjoys Pokémon wii games, he collected Yu-Gi-Oh cards when he was younger, he's from the generation when Gintama was popular

He never felt hatred for Thanos from Avengers: Endgame (explains why he likes Sukuna so much lol)

his favorite Haikyuu character is Tendo and his favorite BNHA characters are Overhaul and Stain

he saw Brad Pitt in person wow

Idea for the pen name: Gege worked a part time job at the cleaners and learned what it's like to be humble in the world. "Gege" translates to a "person of lower status" or a "commoner"

he claims to be socially awkward with people he's not familiar with, he's not used to public speech but when he gets drunk he does a 180 and is blabbering a lot

people call him a genius with a great sense of humor, his editor Katayama says that he's a cheery and a cool person, much like Gojo

he bought a black mountain parka (like Gojo's) that's supposed to last for six years but he put it in storage after one week

he thought about dying his hair white (Gege stop with the Gojo cosplay)

he's a procrastinator, he's mentally preparing for hours to draw a manga chapter that would otherwise take him 30min. The truth is, he's getting tired of jjk and can't wait to finish it

he chose the cyclop cat avatar because drawing one eye is easier and no one hates cats

he said that he used to have a "type of girl" in high school but the more he grew up he realized that every woman is a good woman, he likes well-groomed women (although I think he likes girls with thick tights? he's a Hwasa fan)

he thinks that world can't be divided into black and white and that it's always a blur. Villains and heroes are treated the same because each of them have their own beliefs and ideologies that are valid

he isn't emotionally bound to any of his characters, he will kill whoever, as long as the story is interesting

he's deliberately not trying to sexualize his female characters, not just because of his parents, but also because he wants to leave a respectable impression. Mangaka profession is very looked down upon. He wants to change that

his net worth is somewhere around $12 million

he wants to stay anonymous bc he enjoys his commoner life, there's a certain freedom to being a normal person, he can go in public spaces without anyone recognizing his face. For instance: he secretly went watching the jjk 0 movie in theater along with the opening comments on the first day. A fan accidentally met him but he pretended to be a staff member

182 notes · View notes

raayllum · 10 months

Note

In regards to the post about people occasionally misunderstanding Callum and Viren's flaws, what have you seen people do with there characters that stood out to you as wrong? I only ask cause I'm very much a pantser of stories and write based of what vibes, so I want to know what kind of things to look out for.

Disclaimer: I am by no means an expert but I have been writing/analyzing for a long time, and now in a somewhat professional capacity, so here's just how I personally think of it / what I've personally seen in fandom. I also don't think pantsers are more inclined (from the writing friends I know, they tend to be more intuition based, which can serve you very very well) even if I am definitely a planner.

With all that out of the way, it basically boils down to ignoring all of Viren's virtues / good intentions, and modifying or ignoring Callum's vices and 'bad' intentions i.e. assuming that Viren's motivations are nothing more than being power hungry and selfish, and that Callum's motivations are always pure and good.

One of the things that I think that's really elevated my writing and analysis is digging my heels into like, examining things from a pyschological basis. What this means is looking not only at how a character's flaws or strengths manifest, but figuring out why and where they're stemming from. This is important for like, you can only write a character if you understand where they're coming from, as this process forms the basis for knowing character motivation (and therefore justification).

Because yes, Viren is power hungry and selfish, and we see in 4x02 he kind of knows that, but he's not admitting that or thinking that way for the bulk of the series. That may be how other characters / the audience sees his actions, but how does he see his actions? Understanding how a character can justify/rationalize things to themselves is important if you want to portray them as well rounded. Viren can say something contradictory like "We must be ready to sacrifice, even the things we love" about his family and "I have always been ready to do anything to protect my family, however dangerous, however vile" and have them both be simultaneously true, because most people — or at least, compelling characters — have contradictory notions or conflicts, and it's the war between opposing wants and desires that causes their internal arcs to well, happen.

Same thing for Callum. He doesn't mean to be a jerk to Ezran in either the beginning or ending of S1, we already know how much his little brother means to him and how nurturing he is, usually. But loving someone deeply isn't the same thing as always treating them kindly, as I'm sure most of us know. So Callum blows up, immediately regretting it in 1x02, and remaining far more of a jerk about it in 1x09 until he apologizes. If the takeaway is just that one of Callum's flaws is his temper, that's all well and good (and it very much is) but it fails to consider when and why his temper comes out. (Which, if you're interested on something more in depth, meta on that here.)

For example, for me, a lot (if not the bulk) of Callum's characterization comes back to a Core of wanting to protect/help his loved ones. Which sounds vague, but that's why the specificities are what matters. Callum's temper tends to come out, specifically, when he's frustrated that he can't do anything to help someone he loves, and he either lashes out at the person getting in his way or someone who is (unintentionally) reminding him of that helplessness. Callum's curiosity / ambitious pursuit of magic is also, to me, tied to that same core. He wants magic because he wants agency, and he wants agency because he wants to be helpful / useful.

If you understand why a character is doing something, it leads to being to extrapolate and place them in different / more intense scenarios, but still retain that main core.

For example, Claudia's primary core is to keep her family together. That's not a main motivation in S1, but it's shown in the way she takes care of her family (being Viren's listening ear and trusted with the more important task; trying to cheer up Soren and giving him hot brown morning potion) in ways that they don't really do for her (Soren goes along and helps out with her plans, but there's never an instance of him taking care of her in the same way, even if we still see that he cares and wants to protect her, i.e. doesn't tell her the truth about Viren). Then in S2 it becomes clear that Claudia's main motivation is to keep her family together, and that Core Want stays true even in increasingly insane or worrisome circumstances (S3, S4, S5) as well as explaining some of her more contradictory behaviour. Of course she's going to believe Viren over Soren with the gaslighting the second she's given an option to, because believing her father lets her keep them all together, and believing her brother means losing Viren.

Which is to say, maybe, that most of the mages we've seen in show (with the exception of Lujanne, perhaps, who's built a life among literal solitary ruins for the express purpose of leaving them as ruins) have a Fixer tendency. Magic allows them to fix the issues they see in the world - that's why they chase it.

Viren believes he has to fix the issue of an empty throne and the knife held at humanity's throat, and he's uniquely suited to know how to fix it (hence why he should be king); Claudia leans on her preparedness and perfectionist tendencies because if she's good enough, nothing bad ever has to happen to her family again, right? She can keep them together, she can fix this; Karim wants to fix the issue of humans and losing their way of life, "I will banish that darkness [...] We will be whole again"; and Callum wants to fix issues for his family (the assassination, the fake coup, Rayla's binding, Rayla's family, etc); "And he's my father. It's my duty to help him".

But what fixing looks like, of course, is also a matter of perspective, and that's where you get variety.

But if you look at Viren's desire to fix things - in his case, to ward off weakness - you can understand the through line of his actions. He wants to fix the danger they're in of killing Avizandum and leaving an heir; his desire for more power and knowledge (tools he can use to create solutions and thereby inflate his self importance) tempt him away from killing Zym; he holds onto the egg so that elves and dragons can't 'use it' the way he would. "An empty throne is a beacon of weakness" "[A child king] will make weak choices!" And Viren is man of strength; a man who can get a grip and compartmentalize and repress and do whatever needs to be done to protect humanity. To fix the magical inequality and banish the Xadian threat.

Whereas when you look at our non-mage characters, they tend to have different cores. Rayla and Soren are clear cut Protectors, for better or for worse. Ezran and Janai both continually seek Change and healing. And often times these goals can go hand in hand! Wanting to protect someone can be a Fixer urge (Claudia, Viren, Callum); wanting to fix your mistakes by Protecting someone can also work (3x09 with Soren; Rayla with Zym). But that could be a whole dissection/analysis for another day.

Back to Callum and Viren.

I think sometimes stripping them down to more monstrous or angelic forms comes from people thinking only one thing can motivate a character at a time, even though we as humans obviously have multiple motivations or responses at a time, particularly for villainous characters.

Viren can turn back to help the Queens of Duren because he feels guilty (this was his plan), he wants to help and knows he can make a difference, and because he wants to feel like a hero. Callum can be accepting Rayla unconditionally and be hurt about it and still trying to protect himself a bit in 4x09 by saying "I know" while not going after her; the same action can be growth and regression simultaneously.

When you write a character, you have to approach them from an interior to exterior process - the old phrase "everyone is a hero in their own mind" is certainly true, or rather, "everyone justifies their actions some way or another" - which is largely the opposite of how you view a character as an audience member. Not that the two can't be conflated or overlap, they certainly do (and you do want to be aware of how your characters may or may not come off to well, your audience) but it is a different kind of process.

For example, for Viren, he genuinely believes that what he's doing is what's best for humanity > his own gain. And while he's clearly lying and doing a lot of things out of self importance / convenience, the fact that he Believes the lie means that the lie doesn't really matter, internally, because it's something he either dismisses or doesn't think about at all. And Viren does have admirable traits: loyalty (and I would say most people have conditional loyalty anyway), cleverness/intelligence, ambition, hardworking, globally minded, etc. But a lot of this stems from Wanting To Be Special/Important (his core, arguably, and one I think a lot of people would relate to) and when that doesn't often pan out, he crumbles. Him having an inflated sense of self importance means that he's used to thinking he probably knows better than other people (and gets very frustrated when they don't listen and/or agree with him) and thinking you know better than other people also bodes very well with, if taken to extremes, blatantly dehumanizing them (omg dark magic ideology hi!). He presents as being confident and smooth and knowledgeable, but every time we see him alone/internal he's almost always a hot mess or wracked with guilt/doubt, and he's not very good at adapting to shit, like at all, even if he's great at being cruel/brutal and pragmatic. He's also often times awkward when presented with openly joking/teasing affection, is a guy who waves to little kids, makes dorky jokes with his best friend, and genuinely loved (loves?) his kids once upon a time.

For Callum, a lot of his traits are a double edged sword as well. His attention to detail is born from his curious and observant nature. This allows him to be incredibly nurturing and considerate, but also lets him go for the jugular and what would hurt the most in a fight when his temper gets going. He wants to make his loved ones lives better/easier, but this can sometimes be at the expense of what they need or being overprotective. This can sometimes tie a bit into Viren's own "I know better than you" even if Callum doesn't usually go that far, as he has more self awareness. He has a strong sense of right and wrong but is willing to bend without defense if he thinks the ends justify the means (i.e. never defending his dark magic use, and unlike Claudia, believing/knowing that dark magic is wrong - whereas she doesn't think anything of the sort - but using it and being tempted by it anyway, even if he rejects it in 2x08). His determination is great but can lead to him being obsessive, even if he's also good at knowing his limits / when to yield and fold on things, and will often fold first. While this is great in his relationships and doing relationship repair, it's not so good for his goal setting, as it means he can have a defeatist attitude and then grow frustrated when that "I can't do the thing I want to do / do anything" comes in full swing. This makes him lash out because he hates feeling helpless, particularly when it comes to the people he loves, and all of that circles back to what I've said above, in that he loves his self proclaimed "inner circle" more than "anyone or anything". Just cause he's sweet and goofy and caring doesn't mean he doesn't have teeth (a temper, a ruthless side, etc).

TLDR; characters contain multitudes in their internal psychology and if you can figure out what a character's psychological core is, you'll have a much larger but more cohesive range to write from, emotion / action(s) wise. Feel free to give your happier, more sunshiney characters an edge / claws and fangs (just because someone is nice doesn't mean they're good; external presented attitude is not everything and certainly not necessarily morality) and your edgier, evil characters some redeeming and/or admirable qualities.

#tdp viren #tdp callum #characterization #thanks for asking #pedanticseal #writing advice #tdp claudia #requests #analysis series #analysis #this got so long i'm sorry #did this make sense? hopefully the bulk of it makes sense #that said u (or anyone else) feel free to ask for expansion and/or clarification on anything #callum #viren

92 notes · View notes

27thfirefly · 1 month

Note

hi. i just read the last chapter of your fic went blind last year and HOLY FUCK it is so good. i get it if you don’t want to like spoil things about your fic but i have many many questions and thoughts so im just gonna write a bunch of them.

the whole thing with like. dirk tapping into ultimate dirk and part of canon and then being shoved out? and then kind of realizing that he is a small part of something very big and wanting to be a bigger part of it, and then getting orange eyes representing a stronger connection to dirk-ness? fascinating. and is daves eyes turning red then symbolic of him becoming closer to dave-ness? and speaking of that- dante??? great character, very interesting. is he like somehow a version of dave? and what was he talking about on the swings? is he also in some sort of a loop? and what was it that dirk did at the end of chapter four? he did something with the sword, right, did he make dante decapitate him and then somehow come back to life?

and hal. and cal! holy shit, i can’t believe it but you kind of made me LIKE cal somehow? in the sense that he can be violent and outrageous and insane and vengeful when dirk can’t and its kind of cathartic.

its interesting to see where things stay the same as in canon and where they dont. like dave has chat logs with rose in 2014 and 2015? but hes only fourteen. so he’s technically both older and younger than he is at the beginning of homestuck. and dirk was like 13 in 1997, which is about when daves meteor should have dropped? but did they come with the meteors at all, in this world? dirk came with lil cal on his meteor in canon, but here he got him when he was 12. but dave still seems to be somewhat in touch with his time powers, and dirk with his heart powers, so some things carried over from the game?

god. this is all so fascinating and good. i will be probably rereading the fic and eating drywall until a new chapter comes out. you are an amazing writer.

wahhh thank you very much! for what it's worth i too have been thinking a lot about went blind last year. glances at the +50k word txt document of story notes and wip chapters. so i do love getting to talk about it even if working on it is very slow at the moment! i will put this under a readmore cos i got carried away but

there's a lot of things i don't want to spoil yet yes... but i think i've laid enough of the groundwork that these things won't feel terribly out of place within the story.

one thing i do feel comfortable in divulging is that any connections to canon are deliberately tenuous... how far can a character diverge from canon while still being understood as fitting the mold for that character? when a character is deliberately obscured, how much does fanon interpretation impact what feels in-character?

when you read fanfiction or fancomics or whatever kind of work about a specific character, your mind creates a superposition of the character as they exist in the original work and the character as they exist in the fanwork. as long as the "shape" of the character in the fanwork doesn't stick out too much from your perception of the canon "shape", you can accept that character--as written by someone else--as the same as in canon. some of the choices i have made are deliberately contradictory to the text of homestuck the webcomic. i have made these choices in order to tell the story i want to tell. even so, the basis for the characters in wbly are understood to be the same as in homestuck, creating an expectation for what these characters will act like, what their baseline is, and how you as a reader approach them. your feelings about cal changing within the context of wbly is an interesting case of this in my mind--the cal within wbly is presumably still close enough to canon that you can call it the same character, but the role of cal is changed enough that your impression of him is changed. that kind of thing is FASCINATING to me.

the reason wbly would not work as an independent work is the same as why the homestuck epilogues do not work without the pre-existing fandom of homestuck: there need to be expectations for these characters and relationships in order for me to challenge those expectations.

another thing i will divulge is that went blind last year is not the full title of the story in my mind--i won't tell the full one, but it does tie into just about every conflict in the story.

thank you again for reading my overly complicated fanfic! hopefully you'll stick around even if it'll take me a lot longer than expected to complete. if not, that's fine too.

also every time i send updates to my friend i get lamentations so you know stuffs going great

#dirteater69 #ive been reading umineko and its seeping into my vocabulary and way of talking #but to be fair if you read wbly i think you should already be primed for the amount of bullshit i can spew #I HAVE MOST OF THIS FIC PLANNED OUT I JUST NEED TO GET IT DOWN...#this answered nothing but how i think about this work #which might be interesting! i spose #if you dont already know me that well lol #kris.txt #wbly

17 notes · View notes

arkus-rhapsode · 6 months

Text

I want to talk about Crimson Flower and 3H as a narrative

So... after FE3H discourse makes the round every other week, I end up thinking about it for a bit until I realize, hey maybe its better to not focus on a 4 year old game at this point and occupy your time with something else. Everything has basically been said about it at this point and you know where you land.

But this time my thoughts were just getting too strong for me to ignore, so that's why I'm writing this both get it out of my system and maybe just be another voice in the crowd that some people might want to listen to on the divisive topic that is Crimson Flower route.

Now I really hate that I have to put this disclaimer up front, but I feel like the well of this discussion has become so poisoned that I have to before I make my piece. I want to say that if you enjoy Crimson Flower, if you love Edelgard and believe she did nothing wrong and this is the right route, if you are a Black Eagles stan and you genuinely do not have any issues with Crimson Flower route as a whole-that is perfectly fine.

This will be a somewhat critical examination of the narrative choices about the execution of CF, which I feel like whenever 3H, specifically Edelgard is discussed, there is often very disingenuous arguments people make. Which I believe can create more defensive fans of a particular aspect of a story that we should be able to criticize freely. Which perpetuates this never ending cycle of discourse of legit criticism and defense against that criticism becomes drowned out by trying to decouple these very disingenuous claims from legitimate flaws. So I at least want to make it known that I am going to try my best to be in good faith with this post about this tricky subject.

I also want to just say, this is also going to be mostly an examination of narrative. The thing that I personally enjoy the most in an FE game, but we need to genuinely acknowledge that narrative isn't the only reason why people may like Fire Emblem. The ability to form parasocial relationships with fictional characters and being able to experience something the genuinely brings you emotional fulfillment is not invalid. Being able to enjoy fighting against establishments or ideologies you in the real world disagree with through the experience of a video game is not invalid. The same way someone who plays this game for the experience of gameplay isn't invalid when their primary enjoyment stems from the actual mechanics rather than the "logistics" of the story. The point I'm trying to make is that everyone will engage in media in different ways and will enjoy it other ways and that you don't want to invalidate those feelings someone had with their personal experience. So this is going to be about me and my experience as someone who primarily enjoys narrative.

I am just one guy with opinions who is going to layout what I had an issue with and how I think for me that could've been improved upon. You don't have to agree with me on that, and I'm not saying my way is legitimately better. This is all opinionated.

Buckle this is a long one

First things first Im gonna say Im not going to be using any information given in Three Hopes that may contradict what Im about to say. As in my opinion Three Houses came first and does not include the content from Three Hopes so I should think that Three Houses can stand on its own merits and the content that was provided.

Next thing is I want to catch people up on what in my opinion are the points I think CF did for me that ultimately left me unsatisfied

The post time skip Fodlan was too different and felt contradictory to Byleth's role

Edelgard's Characterization in CF in comparison to the other lord's in their respected routes

The role of Rhea

The role of Those who Slither in the Dark

SO the first thing is probably the thing I'm mostly going to have to defend if I haven't lost you already, but Fire Emblem Three Houses as a narrative provides us with a five year time skip in the game that depending on the route will change who is control of the monastery at this point in the war, with each route providing a lord the chance the forge their campaign. However, something I don't think is brought up enough is talking about the liberties that CF takes with their time skip vs the other three routes. Azure Moon, Verdant Wind, and Silver snow all paint a post five years Fodlan as one where the monastery territory has been abandoned, Rhea has been captured, the Alliance territory is split between an imperialist faction and an anti imperialism faction, and the Kingdom has been split with Cornelia making an alliance with the Empire to create the Dukedom of Faerghus as the houses of Gautier and Faldarius hold up the Kingdom.

There are obviously minor changes like Dimitri camping out in the monastery in Azure Moon rather than in the care of Kingdom Allies, but for the most part there is a consistently defined world between the three routes. However, Crimson Flower's post Fodlan is much different. With a grid locked Fodlan after five years with just the church territory falling under the control of Adrestia, Rhea wasn't captured and instead made it to Faerghus, The Alliance is still feuding amongst itself, but most importantly than all, Faerghus is a complete kingdom with Dimitri as King and no Cornelia's Dukedom.

So there are two main reasons why this bothers me.

The first is that Three Houses as a game wants to present you with three options at first, with the idea that your choices will effect the outcome of the war when Byleth returns, however there's enough consistency to imply that this is what Fodlan would be like regardless of whose House you would join, with the primary effect being your class making it to the church for the festival which in turn will make the monastery your new territory for which route. However, Crimson Flower decides to do away with the consistency, implying that the effect Byleth had on the situation is far greater than that of any other route resulting in a drastically shifted Fodlan. So this is more of a problem with FE3H as a whole with the consistency of choice. Fire Emblem has never really had a BioWare style choose your own adventure type of game. There's only one real choice you're given in the case of 3H and that's which house you side with, which you are essentially locked into. Black Eagles is really the only route that offers a choice beyond that with choosing to side with Edelgard or Rhea which will effect who the class sides with in the time skip. The reason I bring this up is that it essentially means that you the player are for the most part on rails for a predetermined plot where all the choices for the series have already been made. So the Fodlan post five years being consistent makes some sense as essentially mostly everything that happened in White Clouds was the same with the acceptation of the class. However, the Crimson Flower one not being consistent and being so radically different based on a game with so minimal choice feels more like an act of narrative convenience. That this is what happened because of a writer fully independent from me the player had decided that this is how Fodlan shall be for this story because it fits what they want to tell.

Somewhere I had once read that FE3H shouldn't be treated as one story, but since its a bunch of routes they're all a different universe. Everything might look the same but everything is fundamentally altered that you should accept it as an independent universe. And I can't necessarily say that's wrong as the concept of multiverses is to create a world/scenario that allows to explore familiar characters in unfamiliar settings and you could say that Byleth effect on Edelgard in picking this universe was just so much greater that it would result in such a different universe.

I personally disagree with that which brings me to my second point as I believe this one is going to be a more philosophical point on game design. But I feel like the effort to make three routes so consistent with each other with one so different seems to deliberately undercut the core themes of the game. Offering you a choice that this is who you get to spend your happy schools days with and it is what is going to result in them returning to the monastery one the day of your return. That is the true effect of Byleth on the characters. But as you play through white clouds you can't change what happens to other characters which will result in a brand new scenario. Byleth's presence can never stop Dimitri from going blood mad, Byleth's presence can't stop Claude from discovering the Immaculate One research, and Byleths presence can't stop Edelgard from declaring war. And that is a good thing for this type of on rails route story. Byleth while a player insert who can help their lord in the future, right now everyone is on a path that Byleth can only lightly change. With the characters acting independently of what Byleth and the player desire. And the post time skip Fodlan is a sign of that. Its Five Years without Byleth. This is what these characters would do, that they were always capable of doing and that is why Byleth's return and effect on them is important. This also gives us the ability to observe what a lord is like now after the war, and Byleth's effect on them but also see what a character could be like without that Byleth effect on them. Without Byleth Dimitri stays mad, without Byleth Claude always flees Fodlan, without Byeth Edelgard... well lets put a pin in that.

The only other true choice the player can make beyond the initial one is the side with Edelgard or Rhea which radically alters her. Which honestly feels kinda defeating in a game that has locked Byleth so much on a path and the one time it can deviate actively alters everything. It just feels very hollow as there are parts that make you realize how great the effect Byleth could have on people's lives could be if the game actively wanted to integrate choice with the plot. But it didn't. It wants to make one early choice then lock you in that route for several chapters then remove Byleth and then have their return effect real change on the future of Fodlan. Except for this one route. Its why Crimson Flower feels so much like an asterisk compared to the other route. And I don't just mean the lack of chapters, but this feels like a route that can only exist because it was the one that the developers bothered to create something overly deviating from everything else.

Which brings us to Edelgard's role in Crimson Flower as a whole. Now lets just get this out of the way. Im not going to be talking at all on the morality/realistic implications of what Edelgard is doing. I feel like the "Is she a fascist/authoritarian" conversation is not really helpful to talking about FE3H as a work of narrative and mostly exists to create a bunch of petty beef. This is also not going to be a deconstruction of ever minute detail of Edelgard as a character. This is an examination of her as a character in the narrative that we are presented. This will also involve comparison's to Edelgard and other series lords and I want it to be known that this is not a talking down to the only female lord in the game as being something "lesser" than her male contemporaries. I believe there is genuinely sexism when discussing Edelgard as a character, so I want to say that I am approaching Crimson Flower and Three Houses as a whole in a good conscious that there is not a "right route." That this is a game that where all choices have their pros and their cons. Because that's why we like this entry, right? That 3H would provide us some genuinely complex lords who were all capable of doing great and terrible things regardless of gender?

That's why I had such a long winded discussion about why the change in the post time skip Fodlan is so important both for narrative consistency, but also just generally keeping with the tone, but also it reinforced that Fodlan and its lords while all righteous in their own way can be dangers in their own way. Well that's when I return to the pin about Edelgard. So first I want to go through how the lords are characterized in non devoted routes.

Dimitri in non AZ routes is portrayed as someone so damaged by loss that his who response is to avenge and fight. To never stop making those pay for the damage it has brought on his kingdom as well as any lives lost during the tragedies in places like Duscar and Remire.

Claude in non VW routes is portrayed as a brilliant individual with a lot of charm but seems to be hiding something from everyone. He's a lot smarter than one could assume and that he has some mysterious tie to the kingdom of Almyra that he departs after leaving his land to the stronger kingdom that has come so far, be it Dimitri or Edelgard or the Church.

Edelgard in non CF routes is portrayed as a conspirator to overthrow not only the church but all rule in Fodlan as she believes the Crest based system is flawed and that the only way to enact systemic change is through a single rule. And while she is aware her ideals have costs, she believes that those costs are worth it when weighed against perpetuity of the crest system.

Now I want to talk about what happens to those lords as you play them in their routes.

Dimitri in AZ is portrayed as someone burdened by loss and his quest for vengeance has led to a neglect for his own health and his own actions. That his kill everyone attitude will perpetuate more loss of those he loves and that he needs to learn to rely upon others. That is his true responsibility as king.

Claude in VW is portrayed as an individual who is outside of Fodlan's system who has observed it more as a third party and believes it can be a great place if people work through diplomatically. He too is not a fan of inequality and racism and wishes to make a Fodlan that is more accepting and able to work through negotiation. While he still leaves Fodlan at the end, this time he has been able to implement real systemic change and make one that is sustainable beyond that of a ruler.

In CF we find out that Edelgard is a traumatized girl who was experimented on for the purposes of Crest Research. This makes her a conspirator to overthrow not only the church but all rule in Fodlan as she believes the Crest based system is flawed and that the only way to enact systemic change is through a single rule. And while she is aware her ideals have costs, she believes that those costs are worth it when weighed against perpetuity of the crest system.

Hey wait a minute, that's the same?

So this is where I get to the most glaring flaw for me in this case of narrative and why I think altering the post time skip so much did a lot of damage. Edelgard is a good character and a fascinating one, but in the practice of her narrative, her character journey in her own route isn't like the other lords. Rather she is "right" from the start of the time skip and with the world altering in ways to justify why she is that way.

Now look, I know right now someone could be saying I can't read, that its clearly stated in the text that Edelgard says without Byleth she may have turned into a complete monster to see her goals through to the end. This is referring to how in non CF routes she is on the backfoot getting beaten back and forced to take more drastic measures as whoever Byleth comes closer to ending her ideals. Unlike Dimitri or Claude there's not really a psychological arc she is working through with her sociological arc. Dimitri's arc is almost entirely hinged on him as a character changing in his route. And while Claude the character is also mostly the same, you get an understanding of how his continued participation in Fodlan's politics is so important as he effects sociological change. Claude also does the less stuff that could be considered questionable in Fodlan. He neither initiates the war nor does he intimate greater conflict that is tied into a character arc like Dimitri. Claude action's through the war are mostly to keep the Alliance fighting against each other with avoids giving one side a greater advantage. The truth is Claude real "flaw" is that by being an Almyra he is from a race outside of Fodlan that is inherently untrustworthy in society so his continued prescience in his expanded campaign is done with changing that mentality.

Now one could look at everything I said about Claude and say "well isn't that Edelgard though? She's not the one who needs to change but rather society needs to and this is you making it a fruition?" And I would agree however, then why did post time skip need to change and not Edelgard? So going back to the altered Fodlan, the Fodlan post time skip we see in non CF routes has what can be argued Edelgard's biggest moment of political conquest, making an alliance with Cornelia inside of Faerghus using her authority and influence to expand and bring over a chunk of the kingdom underneath Edelgard's wing. And this makes sense with what has been proposed before us-Edelgard had released a manifesto to lords that would side with her and become her allies in the war to come. This act of subversion is something that benefits her goals for conquering all of Fodlan. However, this is one of the key alterations in CF's time skip. Faerghus is not broken in half, with Edelgard having not empowered Cornelia over the five years. In fact, you do battle with Cornelia with her as a kingdom general.

So if Edelgard isn't a character who is subject to change, why did the world change? Well there is speculation in universe that perhaps Rhea fleeing to Faerghus didn't give her the ability. But I do believe the most likely reason is that narratively the writers of 3H wanted to avoid a scenario where while Byleth was gone Edlegard may have empowered and individual like Cornelia. One of the most objectively evil characters in the game. Now I won't go into to detail if I believe Edelgard knew Cornelia was a TWSITD or not, but as it is presented to us, she seems unaware. Instead I'll focus on the primary point is where they don't want to discuss that while in her route Edelgard was capable of doing something that would potentially cast her in such a negative light. After all, the point of her campaign is the while the bloodshed is worth it to make a new Fodlan free of crests, she's willing to show lenency to those who bend the knee. Again, an action not unreasonable for her character. However, I feel like this not happening in CF genuinely robs us from exploring the flaws of Edelgard's path/showing us what Byleth's effect on her truly is.

This is compounded by my issues with how CF is the only route in which you have an active choice beyond class. That by choosing to side with Edelgard when given the option in the tomb would result in this much radical history alteration. But also all of Byleth's effect on her not being as much conqueror over the last 5 years was all done pre time skip. That all that change was done at that moment rather than being something that prompted her to return to Garreg Mach where they'd remeet Byleth and then that would get them to claim it as a base of oppositions in their future war. In CF, Garreg Mach is already claimed rather than the formation of the Dukedom with no real progress. So it makes it seem as though Byleth's real effect on altering this lord's path was always possible in the short time they knew them before disappearing over five years. Of course this is again a bit miffling given that CF is the only route this is a possibility. We can't Change how Dimitri will act in the pre time skip. That he will make choices without Byleth even if they feel urged to remeet at Garreg Mach. But in the case of CF, Edelgard has apparently been changed despite the only real difference in white clouds fighting beside her in the tomb and against the church pre timeskip. But that has sociologically altered so much of Fodlan.

And maybe you genuinely believe that one extra change is enough. Perhaps that one extra choice is enough justification for such a radically new scenario. For me personally, I find that unsatisfying and feels more like the writers traded in a level of consistency for this new scenario that greater justified being on the side of someone who is portrayed as a more active antagonistic force in other routes (Reminder this not me saying the Empire route is an antagonist route. All routes are antagonistic relative to which side you are on).

This is where we get my first what I would've done to make it more narratively satisfying for me. Keep the same post time skip Fodlan as the other routes. Keep Edelgard having brokered a deal with Cornelia to establish the Dukedom and have Byleth find out about it. Be some that either Byleth or another character close to Edelgard questions the extremity of. Then have Cornelia do something evil like she's experimenting on people for TWSITD or maybe she's just abusing the power. Then have Edelgard clean it up. Have Edelgard realize that while she still wants to make her dream of a crestless Fodlan a reality she can't just back lords or nobles that are willing to go along with her for more power. She can still keep the Dukedom territory, but instead she'd be now more understanding what it means for there to be a ruler with a noble soul. So she continues her campaign of conquest but has realized that if she's going to be emperor, she can't just empower people arbitrarily.

In my opinion this not only would tie together some more TWSITD plot while also paralleling it to Edelgard's past and how there was no authority figure to step in and help her all those years ago. But now she is that authority figure. And while it doesn't call her method in question and like Dimitri and Claude she can continue her expanded influence over Fodlan, but now we actively see that Byleth has helped show her that her allies aren't just those pledging loyalty, she actually needs to empower those who are good. She gets to have her fight with Cornelia level and this won't stop her from killing Dimitri in the future.

Like I said, this is what I'd do. And in my opinion it would give Byleth's presence in CF more purpose beyond the bond with Edelgard is nice and fun. But also stay consistent with each route. Showing that there are flaws in Edelgard's sociological plan, but not undercutting what her actual goal is. You can still believe her quest is just and the only right one with her taking an active role in not making the mistakes she perceives Rhea as doing.

And if you are still with me up to my third point, lets talk about Rhea.

So Rhea as a character can best be described as a neutral evil throughout White Clouds. She doesn't really do anything but there is a lot of ominous foreshowing and presentation that Rhea may be up to something or at the very least complicit with many of her policies and tendencies. And when I say "evil" I don't mean she's bad (please don't skewer me Rhea fans). I mean that if the crest system is flawed and the church is emblematic of the systems maintenance of that flawed system. Then Rhea as the face/founder/head of that church bares some responsibility even if all she does is passive.

In all other routes, Rhea is captured by the Empire. Imprisoned in their capital. Anytime she is seen after she is characterized as somewhat docile or defeated, having been imprisoned for so long. VW goes a step farther to reveal what she did as Seiros and all of her actions leading to this point presumably all thanks to be imprisoned and rethinking her life over. CF is the only one Rhea is allowed to be an active player, she is now portrayed a ranting self righteous warrior priest who swears vengeance upon Byleth for being the reincarnation of her mother but not being a proper vessel as she intended and fighting against her. Naturally, if Byleth being the potential for the reincarnation of Sothis siding against her is what her drives her mad, that is believable, however much like the altered Fodlan Rhea in this version is not captured. This is now for Rhea to serve as Edelgard's true climatic opponent. With her symbolically killing the representation of the church and the power of crests being slain by Byleth and Edelgard. Its very poetic. But once again we reach my issue of the time skip altering so much in CF.

As stated before, Rhea was presented as a neutral evil, in doing so she's not really a direct antagonist in any route. Except of course Silver Snow. Where she is deployed as a weapon against Byleth. In this case killing the immaculate one symbolically is cleansing the church of Rhea and allowing it to pass into the hands of the new archbishop. However, Rhea in that fight is under control. Rather than be conscious as an opponent, they make her more of a beast without choice. Thus making this less a flawed character meeting their end and rather a forced confrontation by the evil cult of evil. Now Rhea I think being kept a neutral party was ultimately a good choice. We are given enough about her to understand she has done things questionable and should possibly not hold the authority she has. But she also has not instigated any open any hostility. As such Rhea is more a symbolic player. By making her an active player, CF has to make Rhea more domino and more a threat. She can't portray constant neutrality in a war. But by making her the active antagonist, it makes her less of a symbol and more if just a rotten character who Edelgard is justified in wanting dead. And much like Cornelia and the Dukedom, this alteration comes off as an attempt by the writers to never truly challenge Edelgard's plans for Fodlan. That Edelgard has no flaws in her plan and the bloodshed is beyond justified more than just philosophically. Had Edelgard captured Rhea in CF this would lead to some genuinely uncomfortable questions of keeping her a prisoner. And to 3H's credit they were actually willing to make the player uncomfortable already in Dimitri's route showing him as a mass murderer. Once again, I want to express this isn't me saying Edelgard's quest or goals are wrong and the plot should undermine it. This is me saying that for a game that wants to genuinely have nuanced and uncomfortable political choices made by their character, this is the route where they opt to alter the scenario so that Edelgard is the most justified and does less things that one could find objectionable. Flattening a lot of interesting implications this would raise and what Byleth as a force in this route could possibly able to influence.

Now one could again say, well the reason Rhea wasn't captured because Edelgard didn't use crest beasts this time. Edelgard not using crest beasts is a sign Byleth is changing her and thus that greatly alters the future. Once again, I can see that as understandable justification, but again, my issue off only ever being able to effect this lord pre time skip comes in again. If it was possible to get Edelgard to not use crest beasts, then how come it wasn't possible for me to get Claude to have Almyra support? How come I couldn't stop Dimitri before the war? The answer is again as a game the only other narrative choice that could possibly alter the story happens in CF which is the side with Edelgard in tombs choice. And while I'm not against the idea of angry pope Rhea, but I feel making her CF's full on antagonist was almost making a straw man antagonist for your opposition.

As an aside we also know Arundel is still on Edelgard's side and he is Thales so while she might not know his entire deal, I hesitate to imagine he'd stop using crest beasts in the war over the two years Byleth was gone.

If I was going to once again alter CF to be something I would personally find more satisfying. Have Rhea captured and then have Arundel use the same rage stuff he uses on her Silver Snow. This way you can facilitate an Edelgard vs TWSITD conflict AND you still get your symbolic victory of Edelgard and Byleth killing the symbol of the crests and church. Again, Edelgard is able to do what she wanted to originally, but now we are also confronted with the role TWSITD did play in her life and allowing her to rectify it as well as truly killing the old world by getting rid of Rhea and Thales.

And final point TWSITD. TWSITD are bad. They've always been bad. And they genuinely damage the overall story of CF because this is beyond just a narrative choice, its very clear CF as a story wasn't complete. I feel confident in saying that given the numerous chapters missing compared to the other routes, but also the epilogue needs to say "Oh yeah there was totally a bunch of war against them. Totally." I know this point is probably the least controversial when talking about CF, but I still think its a glaring flaw.

So what's the tl;dr?

This is not an "I hate Crimson Flower or Edelgard post" I genuinely have no interest in debating people about characters that like or enjoy. Nor did I want to turn this into a moral argument about the implication CF. I feel like these topics do real damage to any real criticisms one can have for CF as a narrative.

Which for me, CF as a route fails to really mesh with the rest of 3H as a whole. It feels like it takes a lot of narrative ways out to avoid potentially making their lord seem objectionable, despite much of this game wanting to be about how tragically flawed everyone is. Im not saying Edelgard needed a come to Jesus moment of "Are we the bad guys?" No absolutely not. In my opinion we just lack seeing Edelgard change the same way post time skip as others have due to creating an entirely brand new setting that keeping her as a mostly the same character is not questionable. Nor does she have to do anything that could truly be seen as flawed. Things that Byleth's influence may overcome.

Edelgard is a good character and her goals are understandable. I just personally find the narrative bending to accommodate her in ways so different from the other time skips genuinely make it a weaker narrative for me.

If you enjoy CF as it it. More power to you. Please keep loving CF. This isn't supposed to be a dissuading post. This is merely me as one guy who likes a lot of FE because of the stories it can tell sharing why he personally didn't enjoy this one. Maybe I helped put it words for some who might feel similar. But this is just my opinion

If you have something you'd like to add or reply in the replies or tags please flee free, but for the love god, please be cordial about it. There is so much toxicity and disingenuous takes around Fire Emblem Crimson Flower and Edelgard and Rhea in general, that I would like for us to please be able to talk about this in good faith.

#fire emblem #fire emblem three houses #fe3h #black eagles #edelgard von hresvelg #crimson flower #rhea #dimitri alexandre blaiddyd #claude von riegan #rhapsode rambles

38 notes · View notes

sonnet-of-anarchy · 4 months

Text

Had a think about it, and I believe the finale was going to cause issues regardless because, really, we’re never going to be satisfied with an ending we didn’t truly want to happen & that’s ok. It’s ok that it’s divisive because people process differently and we’d all an alternative ideology as to how ghosts should conclude.

Essentially, I’m glad the team could end the show on their terms & write a finale they were happy with, but I equally understand people’s dissatisfaction. For me, there were parts I enjoyed and parts that felt off.

I enjoyed the chess husbands, naturally - Julian’s compulsion to make Robin happy really touched me because he’s never really cared about anyone like that before. Unlike s4 he wasn’t doing it to prove a point - it just came naturally. I thought it was interesting to utilise the ghost’s powers in a situation that ‘made them known’ - I know a similar thing happened in the grey lady but I still enjoyed the irony of Julian finally making an impact on the world but, even in death, it wasn’t with a positive outcome. Some things never change (a point I’ll get to later).

The humour landed in places for me too, like Robin being called a pet and his ‘no’s at feeling Christmassy. I also loved the orgy cut & Cap’s baby noises.

What didn’t work for me, like most people, was their leaving after the last resort’s conclusion. It felt a little contradictory - but half of me feels this episode was written/planned quite some time ago hence some characters regressing to their roots (Thomas and Alison, Kitty’s Jealousy).

I thought Robin’s end speech, for a Robin speech, lacked its usual profundity. Yeah, it had the tear-jerking quality because it was finale but substance-wise it felt quite generic and flat? Idk. Like, we know Christmas isn’t about commercialised commodities, every piece of Christmas media on the planet had told us this.

Equally, the ambiguity of the ending/lack of faces (for me) missed the usual friendliness and domestic quality of ghosts (like the s3 finale, for example). As much as knowing all the ghosts were there it felt odd not to see them as throughout the show the charm came from sharing Alison’s gift, as an audience.

There were a few plot points that to me didn’t quite work for me too. Robin said the ever since Alison he’d enjoyed Christmas yet he doesn’t feel the spirit until she decides to leave? The focus on Mike’s Mum was interesting, but as stated her lone, ‘overbearing’ trope had been utilised previously and took the attention away from the MCs somewhat. Personally, I was never a massive fan of the baby plot so I knew that wouldn’t appeal to me so much. The characters regressing to pre-development felt a little frustrating but I sort of understand why they chose to?

Quintessentially, you stays how you dies for better or worse - and I think they were trying to prove that nothing really changes for the ghosts, nothing ever truly moves on and that juxtaposes with Alison and Mike’s new chapter? Like, the ghosts have grown as a result of her influence but there’s only so much Alison could offer? She’s alive and changing and they sort-of realised that - which is character development in itself, I suppose.

They love her and want her to be happy - the show reached a sort-of cycle in that they wanted her to go because they hate her, wanted her to stay because they need her, then let her go because they love her.

Maybe that’s too generic or cheap for a show like ghosts - maybe the ending lacked substance or sense and, to an extent, I agree. But that’s what I think they were trying to do and in part it worked, in part it didn’t. But I’m glad nobody moved on because it embodies the ‘core’ of ghosts that they’re always there just the same in limbo and the world keeps on spinning.

Anyway, those are my thoughts :)

#bbc ghosts spoilers #bbc ghosts #bbc ghosts Christmas special spoilers #bbc ghosts christmas special

23 notes · View notes

milfclaren · 2 months

Note

So intrigued what your version of the correct fic Lando is... (and if you have any examples of ones you like!)

howdy partner!! i probably have to write him myself to feel fully satisfied but. here are my thoughts anyways. i’m sorry i typed you a fucking Book in response.

i wanna start by saying i give a lot of leeway with how lando is written by others because his perspective is one i find Very Hard to write. for one, he leaves a lot of room for misinterpretation (i’ll expand) and for two, we’re very different people with very different experiences and i’ve never met him. alas, fic exists as the perfect space to explore your own interpretation of someone else’s personality — both inside and outside of their normal circumstances — and as a writer, you get a lot of creative choice within that. my usual complaint is that he’s cut to the bare bits of the public personality (sillygoofy, a bit bothersome, sometimes demanding and persnickety) OR he’s solely earnest and one-dimensional, in a way that reads as a subservient self-insert.

the version of lando in fic that feels correct for me balances all of these things — his goofier front, his prickly, cautionary act and his more sensitive side (and i do think he is Sensitive). this version acknowledges that his sensitivity is where his prickliness stems from at all. maybe that’s because he resents that about himself, maybe it’s something else entirely; that’s up for the author to decide. anyways, the most correct version of fic lando, to Me, also reconciles his dedication to honesty with his necessity to lie. for being so honest, lando is also a fucking liar, and i do think that. from what i have gathered, lando feels more at ease protected when he has some control over how you misunderstand him, because (from his perspective) no matter what he says or does, you are going to misunderstand him. i don’t think fic acknowledges/explores this Nearly enough. (astrology does, but his birth chart is another rant entirely)

he has said before he thinks it’s funny when people are wrong about him, but once again to me that says being misunderstood is the status quo. on some level he likes to mislead you. on some other level, it’s comfortable to maintain. i don’t blame him, i’m not judging him. in all regards, vulnerability is fucking terrifying. especially if you’re dismissed no matter how much genuine vulnerability you’re showing.

all this is not to say he isn’t headstrong or firm in the things he believes to be true about himself. but can you imagine how he might gain a stronger sense of control by playing with your perception of him? he gets to control what you dislike by controlling the version of him you see. if you dislike what you’re presented with, it doesn’t matter because it was an exaggerated facade anyways. there is a distance from that immediate rejection, because at best, it is a somewhat-false acceptance. that is not more satisfying, really. so maybe if you like that version, he plays into it harder. or maybe he starts to peel back his layers and show you a more authentic (or perhaps even more contradictory) version of himself.

tl:dr — a well fleshed out character showcases all their contradictions. the best landos in fic manage to capture his total aversion to being truly known and the way he needs it so furiously you can see him fighting it.

here are a few landos that stuck out to me, and since the og post was about porn, there’s lots of porn here:

[Explicit! heed all AO3 tags and warnings!] all of these are dando, landoscar or mando. there is no carlando, sorry, i know that’s crazy, because it is the most popular lando ship, but i only really like carlando in very specific circumstances <3

this is very short, but for some reason this lando interpretation kinda sticks out in my brain

fun landoscar here, i liked this exploration of lando a lot

pacrim fusion lando i think about so much

rule 63!dando - an interesting exploration, i liked it

another really good landoscar - this is a different lando than i usually see i think

this lando yearns so much, and he’s a little freak. no notes, that all seems plausible to me

i know what i said about carlando but this series is about dando. carlos is more of a lingering concept.

this little love sick lando lingering in the space of best friends to lovers

i would give you my life for more lando/george fic

some people who write or interpret his voice well in general

#sorry 4 being crazy and never shutting up i will never improve #f1 rpf #rpf//#lando norris #dando #mando #landoscar #blossom.asks #f1

17 notes · View notes

incoherentbabblings · 2 years

Note

What do you think of Bruce as a father? I understand that he’s not perfect, but I’m incredibly uncomfortable with the way he’s written as a parent. A lot of reproachful, unkind behavior gets brushed aside as “that’s just the way he is” or “he was under a lot of stress”. I don’t know, I wish the writers would take a lot more care in writing this part of him because it honestly makes me somewhat dislike his character as a whole 😔

Abuse discussion content warning below.

I have a lot of contradictory feelings towards Bruce. I think he loves his kids more than anything. I think he loves Dick more than anything. I think he has moments where he goes above and beyond the duty of any parent for their child. I think his reasoning for helping his kids is genuinely alturistic.

I also think Bruce is abusive, and I don't think it's one off tone deaf writers 'getting it wrong'. It's a consistent part of his character and goes back decades. And just as in real life, it's hard to reconcile the idea of a parent loving their child whilst also being abusive. It's not an easy thing to write about, so if I'm crass here, or get things wrong, I am sorry.

But I think the best example I can give is that Lemire's Robin and Batman is my favourite depiction of Bruce and Dick's relationship in years. It unequivocally writes that Bruce: A) Loves Dick very much. B) Is abusive. I'm very grateful for the fact that the book never side steps this fact.

I don't know. There's a lot of uncomfortable and difficult to explain things regarding Bruce's behaviour. It's all well and good to say the abuse stems from ptsd and trauma but then, is that just stigmatising mental illness, which is something that Bat comics (or superhero comics in general) do all the time? Do we really want to perpetuate that? And I'm not sure about the answers to any of that! I think the writers intent matters in these cases, and the thing that kills me is that there is no intent. Most of his writers genuinely have no clue what they've done, creating such a realistic cyclical depiction of an abusive parent. And a lot of the time, I really don't know how to feel about it all.

And yeah sure there's a lot of contradictions in his approach to his kids, but things that crop up again and again is denying them agency, unrealistic expecations, and a resulting coldness for when they fail to match them. I have seen, and I agree I think, that the very concept of Robin is abuse, and no not in the vigilante dodging bullets way, but in the Fear needs Hope Batman needs a Robin way. Placing the emotional stability of an adult as a responsibility of a child.

It's not just the hitting - of which there is plenty over the last fifty years to see - its the lack of communication, the financial control he exerts, the rejection and withdrawl of affection based on the kids having to hit impossible targets, the lying and manipulation... it goes on and on. Bruce ticks every box when it comes to parenting his kids. I don't blame people for wanting to scrub it, and they will have very sympathetic reasons for doing so. I get a little antsy however as that doesn't mean the actions and words are actually gone. Bruce smacking Tim was awful. I've seen arguments about its ooc nature and how it should be ignored and forgotten etc... but Bruce still hit Tim. I can open a book and look at it right now. Ignoring it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I don't mind reading or writing fics where Bruce is decidedly not abusive, I do it all the time certainly, but in canon, I think the whole #NotMyBruce is well intentioned but also a bit dangerous. People seeing their own abuse reflected back at them, and how in many ways that can actually be quite affirming, only to have someone come along and be like 'that's not the real him' or whatever long essays they write about BtAS (which... he's still abusive in that I'm sorry but he is) being the 'their' Batman doesn't really help.

Abuse survivors don't want to read an iteration of such things versus those who in one way or another take comfort from it. The needs of one don't cancel out the needs of the other? I hope that makes sense. It's a very complicated thing to try and put into words. Many blogs have written about it much better than I.

I just think, the abuse is still there on the page, saying it 'doesn't count' because it was ooc (it's not) doesn't make it go away, and I think its dangerous to ignore it. I think it's important to draw a distinction between looking at what is shown on the page, and how that fits into a pattern of other instances, versus what you want Bruce to be, and how there may be contradictions about the abuse portrayed in other pages.

#dc #ask and i'll babble #abuse cw #this is why I've gotten so angry at wfa in recent months in case its not clear #and why i stopped reading it a while ago #batfam meta

152 notes · View notes

ihopesocomic · 1 year

Note

Even though Quickmane cared about his cubs, he clearly didn’t care enough to put a hunting assessment on hold to look for them when they went missing.

What also makes it clear that we are meant to feel sympathy for Quickmane is almost every character has something nice to say about him like when Powerstrike said he accepted Hover despite knowing her relationship with Nothing and Feather crying over his death. Which is something that was brought up earlier on this Tumblr- it doesn’t really count as it’s confusing on whether or not Feather likes him, his favorite story is literally how his dad lost his eye. Also, we see Quickmane being loving and comforting to Powerstrike- he killed two of her family.

It’s okay to like villains, Anon. I like some villain characters myself and some of them are sympathetic villains far better written than Quickmane. But trying to defend a villain’s actions or like RJ & Cat said, say he’s not that bad since he’s better than another villain when he literally does the same things said other villain does? Killed cubs, abuse another character, tries to kill the disabled protagonist, and verbally insults protagonist. The only difference being Proud is homophobic. It’s not just Quickmane we are supposed to feel sorry for- Powerstrike, who also abused the protagonist who is her daughter and even stood by to watch the lion who caused the disability to kill her. Also leaving her other daughter to be in a relationship with a lion who was quick to attack and insult his lionesses when they dare talk back? Farleap, who takes part in the abuse before saying she felt somewhat neglected by her sister because suddenly Powerstrike ‘cared about Nothing more than her other two daughters’. Lite, who literally started a war and killed his crush’s girlfriend because she didn’t love him back. The show also writes their supposed heroes in horrible lights with Hover simply watching her girlfriend get threatened by Quickmane then left her to deal with him on her own then Feather trying to justify why Nothing should keep her ableist name.

This show does a horrible job to make their characters sympathetic- they put him showing concern for his cubs in a situation where by default people will side with him, him getting angry at Nothing for leaving his daughters alone and taking his son out of his territory with no-manes running around.

Sympathetic villains can and do exist, not everything is black and white, but Quickmane isn’t one of them.

All of this. Thanks, anon I still like how much of an oversight that whole deal with the ceremony was. I mean, they're all dragging Nothing for ditching the cubs and yet they were partying down during Hover's ceremony in the meantime. What the fuck. lmao

And yeah, you can have your own feelings on how Quickmane was presented ultimately but we will always feel that it was super weird and contradictory to how we were actually supposed to feel about him. He is the cause of every wrong in Nothing's life and yet we're also supposed to root for him because he supposedly accepted her relationship with Hover?

Like it's painted like he did her a huge solid and he's therefore sympathetic and redeemable. Honestly, fuck that. And fuck all of the other scenarios you listed as well. Especially considering none of it came around until they believed Nothing was dead and/or until she was out of sight, out of mind. - RJ

#ask #ask us stuff

15 notes · View notes

juniperhillpatient · 1 year

Note

I have been toying with idea of Azutara enemies to lovers postcanon AU. Where two months or so after Agni Kai Azula organises breakout from Comics "mental hospital" but is caught when giving time for everyone else to escape. People don't know it is Azula so Katara hears about it and decides to save or avenge that girl. Surprise Azula.

What I'm winding up to ask is how do you manage to write conflict so well and if you would share some pointers? my own takes at enemies to lovers phase are waay too friendly even at the start and I have been struggling and I think this AU is interesting enough to warrant an ask.

Nice, we always need more Azutara enemies-to-lovers stories, & that concept is certainly interesting. I've always found it completely unbelievable that the gaang, especially Katara, would be fine with an abusive mental hospital holding anyone, Azula or not. Katara making a plan to rescue this girl & getting surprised that it's Azula could certainly be fun!

Thank you for saying that I write conflict well! It's something I'm always trying to improve at, & something I really enjoy writing.

In terms of advice, here are some things that I keep in mind when writing enemies to lovers, & interpersonal conflict:

You said that you feel like your issue is that things feel too friendly, even at the start. My guess is - & I could be wrong - this is because you want the characters to have that romantic spark, & you're writing something you ship so of course it can be hard to write them being cruel to each other. Something that helps me write characters that are ultimately going to be romantically entangled during the "we hate each other" phase is remembering that emotions aren't black & white. Hate can be mixed with attraction. Anger can be mixed with pity. If you don't want to write the characters flat-out hating each other, don't. Let there be some confused & contradictory feelings in there. In real life, people have contradictory feelings all the time, & it's okay for your characters to as well.

Also, in terms of writing disagreements & conflicts between the characters - I think keeping in mind the motivating factors of everyone involved is helpful to avoid mischaracterizations or contrived drama that feels unsatisfactory. Why is this character behaving this way? What's driving them? How would this other character react to it? It can be extremely tempting to just have your characters come to an agreement because that's what you want AND at other times it can be tempting to force the characters into situations that escalate the drama. Really think about the characters almost as if they're real people & ask how they would act in a given situation.

Anyway, hopefully, that advice, which feels kinda rambly, is at least somewhat helpful! <3

#asks #answered #jotender-blog #writing

17 notes · View notes

gorey · 7 months

Text

why didn't I get the meticulous worldbuilding autism well. I did. Technically. except I'm also Insane so it's more like. I Have A Vision It Colors My Every Waking Moment I channel it into my stories and my poetry and my music and my art and my photography. The world I am trying to depict exists as a collection of motifs that alarm and allure me. To create a piece of art or writing that captures this Place (that actually exists and sometimes I'm there) is my greatest goal. However the details of what this place is, what its rules are, who lives there, what happens there, what narrative tension I can create within it, how you get there, what society is like, what the magic system is etc etc - idk dude last time I was there all I did was stand in an intersection at 3am staring at the red light reflect off the asphalt

I think it translates better to visual mediums honestly which is why I'm excited to hopefully borrow our neighbor's camera but we're trying to write an actual story involving this world with a legitimate plotline (the character stuff comes much more easily) and it's frustrating bc it's like. This extant thing born of my psychosis that I'm trying to wrangle into fictional terms when it's very contradictory and inconsistent in my experience and I'm somewhat reluctant to even fictionalize it at all because that involves applying limitations to it derived purely from my authorial choices and not from something I Learned by encountering it and having some kind of transformative experience. It's a mythologization of my own surroundings and how I processed them while psychotic and on dissociatives. The Place transcends the plot but there needs to be a story things need to happen in sequence unless I wanted to go for a more abstract route which I'm also considering but I need to put words to it because I need other people to be able to witness it because it's beautiful and I'm lonely there. I love being a schizo

#a #s

3 notes · View notes

intoevernightfanfic · 2 years

Text

@antibunni sent me some emoji for the fanfic writer's ask: 🙋‍♀️💖🤗📚

🙋‍♀️ Do any irl people know you write fanfic?

Yes! Quite a few. My friends all know, and so does my whole family. Some of my IRL friends have read my fanfic, and my family has too! I once even had a former boss (who was a friend as well) ask to read Arranged Marriage because we both had a thing for "monsters" if you catch my drift LOL. So, yeah, a couple of old coworkers turned friends have read my fanfic too. They've told me to publish, but I'll get to that in another of these questions lol.

💖 What made you start writing?

I'm an extrovert, and I was homeschooled until 10th grade. It was a horribly isolating experience, and I was very lonely. I used to maladaptive daydream (aka astral project myself outta here!) to escape what felt like a prison to me. I had no friends and nothing to do, so I started disappearing inside myself and my characters, and eventually I felt compelled to write these stories down. I started writing on my mother's typewriter when I was very young (I think I was 6 or 7), but didn't start writing series until I was 9, and novels when I was 12. I wrote 6 novels before I was 15. I'd say I actually wrote my first fanfic when I was 9, which was a parody of Star Wars involving my dog as a Jedi lol. (And yes my parents read it.)

🤗 What advice would you give to new fanfic writers that are just getting started?

What I have to say is going to sound somewhat contradictory to the advice out there, but bear with me lol.

It's super helpful to get feedback about ideas and character traits (like a high level outline) before and during the first draft process! That's not always possible when you don't know anyone, but even a friend who isn't in the fandom can give feedback. Having an alpha reader to ensure the message comes across as intended and that the characters are well-rounded has helped me immensely. I like to bounce ideas off of them prior to writing / editing a fic so I can be sure the idea is solid and the execution will work. They help me catch logical fallacies and plot holes that I'd never see otherwise!

That being said, having an alpha reader can end up intimidating you if you're first diving into writing, because high level feedback can leave you grappling for how to fix issues. Still, I think it's good to get a feel for your voice and your own problem solving style before leaning on a beta reader too much. A huge chunk of writing is critical thinking and problem solving! And that comes with thought exercises and practice. That's not to say you want to live with your thoughts in a vacuum -- just that you'd want to attempt the puzzle before bringing the pieces to someone else. By knowing what you've already tried and how it did / didn't work with your goals, they can provide more tailored feedback.

Alpha readers work well because, to me, what's more important than "great fiction" is embracing your unique way of viewing the world and telling the story you want to tell. Personally, I think honing your storytelling (which you can do when you're passionate and engaged with the story!) is more important than attempting technical perfection. That's why it's important to attempt to get out of the sticky parts with your own solutions first. Only then do I go to someone else and ask what they think about the solutions I've come up with.

📚 Would you ever want to turn writing into a career?

No, I decided some time ago that it's not lucrative for me. I spent a couple of years as an entertainment columnist and music journalist for multiple publications, but I never got paid. No matter who I wrote for, I was told that they couldn't pay me, but that it was "good for my portfolio." I also did some ghostwriting, but again... Didn't get me much of anywhere. I finally decided I'd never capitalize on it, because of a combination of: oversaturation in the publishing industry, my lack of interest in my own OCs, and my experience with motivation dips when given writing assignments. I also don't think I'd be able to handle the kind of rejection that trad publishing doles out, and I don't want to lose rights over any of my work. I won't get into the self-publishing side of things right now. X)

Thanks for playing, AntiBunni! 😊💕

#asks #antibunni

5 notes · View notes

dextixer · 1 year

Text

RWBY fandoms rejection of the very concept of dialectic morality

Warning: Long thread

Original reddit post can be found - HERE

For a long time now many of us here have had multiple discussions over RWBY, be it its plotlines, character designs, writing choices and anything in-between. Arguably the most ardent discussions have always occured over characters and perceptions of them. After all, people see all characters differently, thus leading people to conflict. This can be especially seen with characters that are more controversial in how they are portrayed and received, like Adam Taurus and james Ironwood.

What i have noticed often happens in these discussions is that some people in the fandom tend to be extreme in their opinions about characters. If we can take the most popular examples of Adam and Ironwood it can easily be seen that there are people who think of them as extclusively villanous or our protagonists in team RWBY as being exlusively heroic.

What people often forget is that human beings are complicated and that they are capable of both bad and good at the same time. They can be both right and wrong, and they can have both positive and negative character qualities, and i would like to cover this.

The Concept of Dialectics

The concept of dialectics as it is has existed since ancient greece, it is a part of philosophy. Suffice to say, i myself am not the most knowledgeable of the many concepts related to it, nor am i capable of trying to have a discussion on philosophy. For the sake of easier understanding in this thread i will discuss the following concept of Dialectics.

A dialectic (In this case) - is the existance of two seemingly conflicting things at the same time. In terms of morality this means that people are complicated and as i have said previously are capable of being many contradictory things at the same time.

I will apologize if this is a bit clumsy, but i am no philosopher although i have heard of these concepts due to familiarity with some aspects of marxism. So take this concept as being valid for mostly this thread and in general concept, not as something that fully belongs to philosophy.

For simplicity sake, dialectic morality is the acknowledgment of people as complex and contradictory beings in their actions thoughts and their capability to change.

Why is it a problem?

Now one might ask, why is rejecting dialectic morality bad?

Well, first of all, it results in a lack of nuance in characters, making them extremelly one note and boring. If a character is just a wood plank with no complexities and just singular character traits, they are more often than not, simply not entertaining besides in rare cases. It is one thing for a writer to intend to write a boring character, it is quite another for the audience to decide to take a complex character and take away the things that make the more interesting, arguablly in defiance of the writers intentions to the character.

One can look no further than "character bashing" for that. There are many fanfictions in which people take characters from the piece of media they like, and then ruin them, more often than not intentionally just because they dislike them. Harry Potter is a key example in this. Characters that are at least somewhat complex or at the very least not unlikeable are changed to be the most horrible ever, just because the fanfiction writer holds a bias.

Rejecting of dialectic morality can also result in one track thinking. It can result in close-mindedness and refusal to accept that the person can be wrong. It can result in a person reinforcing a false image of a character over and over again. This example can be seen in the RWBY community, and not just with characters. Especially recently there have been parts of the fandom that very much seemingly believe that what they perceive is true, and that any disagreement is not just difference of opinion, it is outright falsity. The same applies to characters. If one reinforces an idea of a character in their head, they will refuse to see any different interpretations of even proof from the media itself of the contrary, they will isntead make all of it fit their own narrative, no matter what.

How is it rejected?

I am probably not going to be too off the mark by saying that the fandom has certain controversial characters that have been discussed to death now, such as Adam Taurus and James Ironwood, as i have stated in the introduction, during the discussions that i, and many critics of how these characters were handled have noticed how some parts of the RWBY community tend to make these characters very one-note and to take the end point of the character progression of these characters as being their "true selves" from the very start.

Often it can be seen by arguing that if a character is a villain, then he was always a monter, they were born as a monster, never capable of change and they deserve everything that happens to them. And if they ever did something good or neutral then it was all a lie or "doesnt count".

The same happens with heroes, they were always good, born pure, they never ever did anything wrong, and if they did, then they were justified or innocent, or that doesnt count and can be ignored.

Adam Taurus

Adam Taurus is the perfect example of that. At least during Volumes 1-2 he was seen as a revoliutonary fighter for faunus rights, or at least he could have been arguably seen that way. After volume 2 however Adam started going down a dark path towards extremism. After being forced to serve Cinder over time he seems to be comfortable with this role and eventually uses it to depose Sienna Kahn from her position as the leader of the White Fang, after which the White Fang becomes more extreme under his orders. It becomes not an organization for equality but rather for Faunus supremacy as tauted by Adam himself. During the battle of Haven his plans to destroy the Haven academy fail and the White Fang as an organization seems to fall apart, only for Adam to continue his journey of revenge against Blake to his own demise in Volume 6.

Despite what one thinks of how this story was writen, this is his story as told in Canon. It is a story of a freedom fighter slowly becoming more and more extreme until both his ideals and methods are twisted. It is a story of corruption unlike many others in media.

During the development of this story the writers of RWBY gave us more information on Adams past with both the DC comics and Adams short. The comic books show Adam in his youth while Adams short is focusing on the key momens of what causes Adam to accept extreme violence.

Many people appreciated this insight into Adam as both a character and a person. It gave more details to Adams fall and gave us a more complete story of how it happened... And yet... And yet the people who started to hate Adam over the course of his story seemingly refused to accept that Adam is a complicated person who got corrupted over time.

It wasnt long until the concept of Adam "the corruptor" was born. Some parts of the fandom started to seemingly twist what was shown. Adam no longer was a heroic youth who fell on his journey. No, some people started to take the character of Adam at the end of his journey, and arguing that this is who he has always been, thus retroactively changing their perception of scenes.

For example, Adam fighting and killing one person to save Ghira is no longer a good action. It is now seen as a bad action, as Adam being too agressive. Adam going on the first raid as indicated by his short is no longer him just joining the cause, its him corrupting it, intentionally. Child Adam in the comic books is no longer crying about his comrades when seen by Blake (And then hiding it when hes older through toxic masculinity), no he was definitely crying because they didnt kill more people, because hes evil.

Everything and anything that was writen by RT to show that Adam was once a good person is twisted to make him look as always being evil, that there was no change. That he was always evil and that he was not corrupted by his actions in the WF, but that he INTENTIONALLY joined WF to corrupt it.

It is not rare to see claims that Adam never cared about the WF cause, that he always wanted to use WF for its own ends. People who claim that are usually the ones rejecting Adam as a complex character. Instead, due to disliking him they want to very much eject any kind of nuance. He is simply evil, and if he ever did anything good, then it was all an act for him to hide his evilness.

To reject dialectic morality.

General James Ironwood

General Ironwood has sadly also experienced the same fate. Ironwood has always been a character that is very much shown to be agressive in his defence of people. He is shown to be impulsive and not entirely cognizant or fully caring of those around him. Note that these character traits are not absolute and that while he is all of those things, they can all be overcome.

We first see him as a somewhat antagonistic character in Ozpins secret group. He comes with 3 airships during the Vytal festival due to wanting to be protected against actions of Salem/Cinder. After the Breach in Volume 2, during which his forces assist stoping it, he is made into the security chief of the Vytal festival. During the fall of Beacon his robotic forces get hacked and turned against Vale, during this time he fights against the Grimm invasion. Of course, i dont think i need to recount his entire story further. After V3 Ironwood becomes increasingly tough on the security of Atlas, this can also be seen in Volume 7, he also is given more power and uses it specifically for the Amity Project, to rebuild the CCT communications network, despite his tough approach his motives and actions can be understood and he can be seen as an antagonist to team RWBY by the end of the volume

In Volume 8 however, his character shifts heavily and he becomes a villanous dictator.

Regardless of ones thoughts of how Ironwood is writen, it is clear to many that Ironwood underwent changes between his V7 and V8 self. He is not entirely seen as the same character.

The problem is that many people upon seeing what Ironwood becomes in Volume 8. Then started applying their view of his V8 version to all of his appearances beforehand. Just like with Adam. Ironwood taking 3 airships to the Vytal festival is described as a "military occupation", it is described as "Ironwood takes an entire fleet into a festival celebrating peace". Ironwood being given the position of security in V2 is now described as "backstabbing Ozpin in the back", the fall of Beacon is partially blamed on him.

Just like with Adam, any kind of action that Ironwood has ever taken, is now given a new meaning. A negative meaning. The same applies to his actions later down the line. Him pulling his forces to defend Atlas is now a "betrayal of Mistral", he "intentionally leaves Mistral to Salem". The language and how it changes his actions can easily be seen, no?

So what we have is that instead of an interesting and heroic but flawed character, he gets simlified and turned into a villanous idiot who has never understood that he was not the hero or something along these lines.

The protagonists

The same applies to the protagonists of the show aswell. Or at least the characters that are seen positively by parts of the fandom. For example, Robyn Hill.

Regardless of how one perceives her character, one should at least be able to acknowledge that her agression and starting a fight in the airship was definitely not a smart move. And yet, because some people like her character very much, excuses are made as to why that was actually the best decision. Despite the framing of the entire situation it is all ignored to excuse her actions.

The protagonists fall into the same category. The protagonists had a lot of problems with Ozpin lying to them about Salem, yet they turn around and do the same thing to Ironwood. Instead of acknowledging that the protagonists arent perfect and are hypocritical in acting this way, many people chose to instead make excuses for this action. Funnily enough, those same excuses of "Team RWBY just wanted to see if they can trust Ironwood" are the same that people who defended Ozpins decision used. In this regard i should also mention that people did not care about Ozpins reasons for lying, because he lied to the protagonists, any complexity over why he did it was also rejected, all that mattered is that he was in the wrong for lying to the protagonists.

I could go on and on about this but i think we would be stuck here all day to cover each and every time this kind of thing happened. This thread is already veering too much into the "Things that have been discussed too many times" as it is.

Conclussion

At the end of the day, i think that the wider fandom should stop allowing their biases to change how the characters in the show are writen. V8 Ironwood is not V3 Ironwood. V6 Adam is not the comic book Adam. These are complex characters that should not be for all intents and purposes flanderized just because of a personal dislike or like. Because it can often turn into either bashing or unearned praise of characters. People should be more ready to acknowledge information that might not fit their conclussions of characters instead of dismissing or changing them to MAKE them fit.

Regardless, thats all i had to say about it.

Now, i remember that i said yesterday that i wanted to cover RWBY: Arowfell and its problems with canonicity in regards to Volumes 7-8 and Atlas in general, however i felt that i could not do that topic justice today, i need to do more in-depth research on the topic as i dont want to go off on it half-cocked. So instead i chose to cover this topic which was basically existing as an idea for a long time now, despite the fact that it does touch upon somewhat tired topics.

Anyways, any feedback, agreements, disagreements are welcome. Or additional examples and the like.

#rwby #rwde #adam taurus #general ironwood #james ironwood #team rwby

3 notes · View notes