When the misunderstanding is mutual but they’re both so sweet about it (coffee shop au edition)
Inspired by the tags below (originally on this post) from @blahblaheverythingisgay and @lovelyprincejehan accompanied by some thoughts:
thank you for bringing this GALAXY brain take to my attention 😂 this guy comes in, all cagey about his past and his scars, always wearing baggy clothes but complaining about compression clothes (being on the run does a number on your joints and muscles), picking out a name for himself??? OBVIOUSLY he’s trans right
They somehow manage to have like three separate conversations about it without realizing they’re talking about two very different scenarios. Andrew only was so wrong for so long because scars on their own (and even being a criminal lbr) are such non-issues that it didn’t even occur to him that Neil could be talking about anything less important than being trans lol
Andrew had his little crisis about it and landed pretty solid on yeah he’s still into Neil regardless, and yeah he’s still super gay. He’ll figure out the rest from there. The only thing he didn't prepare for was Neil being uh. Cis
1K notes
·
View notes
Absolutely reeling.
So I knew that the origin of "Hector was a great man, moral, noble, better than all of the Greeks" began as Roman propaganda that somehow has made it to now, the year 2023, and is still taught to high school students.
What I did not know was why scholars shit on Achilles as vehemently as they did (and still do).
My copy of Fagles' translation of the Iliad has a preface by a different scholar who I'm not going to bother to name because he's an idiot (and idk probably dead at this point). I read the entire thing, absolutely baffled, because he would cite a part of the text (that I admittedly had not read yet! at all!), quote it, and then come to the most batshit interpretation based on that quote I had ever seen in my life. His general take was that Achilles was a sociopath who had no feelings for anyone other than himself and his own pride, and every action he took (until welcoming Priam into his hut) was done in service of that pride. To support this, he decided that Achilles did not see Patroclus as a person, but rather as an extension of himself, and thus someone injuring Patroclus was them injuring Achilles, and so he did not care about Patroclus, he only cared about his wounded pride.
Yeah.
That sounded wrong before reading the book, and while reading the book all i could think was, "Did we read the same fucking thing???" Put in context, those quotations still did not support his conclusions whatsoever.
But i cracked open Caroline Alexander's "The War That Killed Achilles" last night, and she solves this mystery of "Hector good, Achilles bad" for me right out the gate (which is good because so far I've only read the preface).
Western Europeans by and large learned about the Trojan war from Roman stories, which became fairly popular, and not the Iliad, which was not translated into French or English until centuries later. As mentioned, these were propaganda that cast the Trojans in a much better light than the Greeks because the Romans believed they were descended from Trojan refugees. This starts a trend that is still going on in scholarly circles as casting the Iliad as a war between "barbaric Greeks living in a shitty, lawless camp" vs "civilized, educated, weaving, real-wife-having Trojans," making the Iliad a tragedy in which Homer for some reason skewers his own people and their warlike culture as barbaric while propping up a dead, foreign city-state. This interpretation is still extant and was the postscript to another copy of the Iliad I have.
According to Alexander, scholars closer to Homer's time saw the entire war as a tragedy--both the destruction of Troy AND the destruction of the Greek army. While this is not covered in the Iliad, very few Greeks actually made it home after Troy. Some that did were then outcast (Teucer for example), some were murdered (bye, Agamemnon), some went on to create new kingdoms in other places (Diomedes), but by and large, there was no going home from that war. There was no great victory with all their loot. The entire thing was a disaster for both sides, spurred on by fickle gods.
Back to the more recent European interpretations of this story, one reason Hector ended up cast in such a "good" light, despite being a dumbass who wants to dishonor dead people just as badly as Achilles ever did, was in order to make Achilles look worse. Why was it important that Achilles becomes a villain in this story in which he is very much not a villain? Because Europeans were involved in so much war with each other and the rest of the world that a young, insubordinate man who criticizes his idiot of a commander, decides his life isn't worth throwing away for this war, and refuses to fight to sack a city was an affront to their values. Young men were to be obedient, follow their commanding officers, and colonize the world for queen and country. Achilles suggesting losing his life is not worth it to prop up Agamemnon's war is a dangerous precedent for all the good little soldiers needed to make their nations wealthy.
It's almost funny that these analyses propping up Troy as a beacon of civilization were made by people living in countries so bent on colonizing the world. They identified with the city being sacked and not the greedy sackers of said city, who they were much closer to. And Achilles, educated, morally rigid, emotional Achilles, is recast as a sociopathic asshole who doesn't care about anyone other than himself, unlike all of those other beacons of selflessness among the Greek leadership.
The tragedy of the Iliad is that Achilles is right, the war is pointless, Agamemnon did dishonor the shit out of him, and it doesn't matter because he's going to die in it anyway.
Frankly, given how badly his character has been interpreted for so long, I think the muses owe him an apology.
2K notes
·
View notes
I understand not being a big fan of the appearance of past PCs, and I shared that earlier on, and even shared the argument that I wanted Bells Hells' story to be about them...but I feel like the time for that argument has passed. As we've gone on, that is in fact the story - that they're a bunch of level 8 adventurers who have fallen into an endgame scenario because of little peripheral threads and because of who one of their companions is. The story is, on some level, about not being about them. They've had so little time to drive their own destiny; it's been fetch quests and pursuit from the start, with little in the way of the odd jobs and proper stumblings one would usually expect.
And I hope that after the solstice they'll get to do that! But I think having Keyleth and the Ashari, Beau, and Caleb there hammer the above home: this is so much bigger than Bells Hells is prepared for, and they're here because a few weird things that happened in Jrusar (which is all that Eshteross ever wanted to look into, and all Treshi ever wanted to do) were unbeknownst to them part of a plot Ludinus Da'leth has likely been working on for several centuries; and because Imogen and Fearne are involved through accidents of birth. In many ways, it echoes Laudna's entire story. It's just people who were minding their own business in a town, and someone powerful and ruthless did things beneath it that affected the population at large because of a plan with cosmic ramifications, and they became involved out of an accident of location.
I'll admit - I do prefer a story where people are actively seeking something, or running from something, rather than caught up in bigger and bigger webs of conspiracy, but that's not the one being told right now, and the version in which far more powerful allies don't appear is a tragic and cynical one, whereas one with Keyleth, Beau, and Caleb says "yeah, this is fucked up, and it's not fair that you're here on your own to deal with this rip current of an event."
1K notes
·
View notes
Sidlink BOTW AU where Sidon WANTS to fancy Link, but thinks Link will only like a Hylian, so Sidon tries to act Hylian around Link... except Sidon doesn't know much about Hylians.
Sidon just squatting and trying to act shorter around Link. Attempting to hide his sharp toothy grin and stop his tail from wagging. He's starting fires when trying to cook Hylian meals. Sidon putting on pants... incorrectly. It's really weird. Everyone in the domain is thinking the Prince is having a midlife crisis.
Sidon IS having a crisis, but it's a gay panic one.
But unbeknownst to Sidon, Link has fallen for these Zora quips. The smile Sidon flashes makes Link lose his train of thought... the way Sidon's tail wags makes Link flustered. When Sidon shook Link's hand with his two smothering strong ones, Link felt dizzy. Link is missing these quirks Sidon would show, so Link is determined to see them again!
When Link and Sidon are alone in Zora's Domain, Link purposely tells a funny story to the Prince. One he KNOWS will get him to laugh. But when Sidon turns his face from Link to "keep cool", Link gets frustrated. He grabs onto the fishy prince's face, asking him WHY Sidon is acting so differently. Sidon tries to deflect such a notion, but Link calls Sidon out on all the weird things he's been noticing... especially the pants.
Sidon cracks under the gaze of this Hylian! Link not only sees right through Sidon's changes, but Link seems to DISLIKE them, too! Sidon is embarrassed, and he deflates from the realization that Link doesn't like the prince. Sidon refuses to look at Link as he tells Link half the truth, that he wanted to be Link's... FRIEND. That he thought Link wouldn't want to be with... well FRIENDS with... a Zora. Link pauses, as he KNOWS that Sidon knows about he and Mipha's friendship, so something STILL feels off. It isn't until he notices Sidon's blushing that he understands what is truly being said.
After Link makes sure Sidon looks into his eyes, Link reassures Sidon that the things he likes about Sidon are what are truly him. His heroic grin, his playful tail wags. His champion-like swimming abilities. That Link enjoys Sidon. That he wants to SEE Sidon... all of him. Quickly, though, after Sidon lets out a flustered wheeze, Link realizes how his words came across, stating he just meant for Sidon to take off the pants! Sidon wheezes louder. Link gets more embarrassed and tries to explain he just meant Zora don't wear pants, so he'd want to see Sidon without-
It's great. They're great. They're trying.
It takes a bit more time after this convo, cause clearly the two are terrible with communication, but they reveal their romantic interests.
And they burn that infamous pair of pants.
248 notes
·
View notes