I think the most amazing thing about Alhaitham's ironic question "How has realizing your ideals gone for you?" is that yes, on the surface, it pierced through the heart of Kaveh's feelings at the time and forced him to reflect on whether he still had enough belief to keep going, but--BUT--
This is also Alhaitham subtly asking: "Was your life better without me?"
Kaveh left their friendship because of his ideals.
Kaveh's attempts to realize his beliefs began in earnest during his argument with Alhaitham, who challenged him back then by suggesting that Kaveh didn't honestly believe in his ideals and was just pursuing them out of guilt and a desire to punish himself for his father's death.
Kaveh's attempt to "realize his ideals," therefore, spans the exact amount of time he and Alhaitham have been separated. When Alhaitham asks about Kaveh's attempts, he's asking very specifically about the course Kaveh's life took when he was no longer in it.
How did it go for you? Were you happier? Was it worth it?
I truly believe that Kaveh will be able resolve his conflict with Alhaitham--and come to understand Alhaitham's actual feelings--when he realizes that, in that exact moment, he should have turned the question around:
How did realizing your ideals go for you, Alhaitham?
Was your life better off without me?
No.
326 notes
·
View notes
how do you feel about the eyes being a window to the soul and Zhongli's eyes not being shown in flashback?
oh now we are getting into videogame analysis.
The first it could represent his "unchanging expression" during the Archon War. It is was rumored that during the war, Morax did not show emotion and was rather "cold and unfeeling" and his judgements were "rational and dispassionate". He wore an emotionless mask and his stone-cold expression did not change until the war ended and not seeing his eyes is a simple representation of Morax's behavior. There are no eyes, because there is no emotion, there is barely a face (he is blank as stone) so its just very clever visual symbolism.
On the other hand, it could suggest there is more to Zhongli than meets the eye. As you said eyes are windows to the soul, and from a narrative point eye symbolism is powerful tool in literature. The most common usage for eye symbolism is to represent wisdom, knowledge, truth, perception or control.
Not seeing Zhongli's eyes means there is something the writer's are deliberately hiding. It could mean his true nature, has not been revealed to us. It doesn't necessarily means his physical eyes have changed but rather the Morax of the past presented himself differently than the Morax of today.
Zhongli's true origins are unknown we have no idea where he came from, what he truly is and the truth of many of his contracts (the tsaritsa, celestia, khaenriah just to name a few). We have known Zhongli for so long, but do we actually know anything about him? Not seeing Zhongli's eyes means there is even more to his identity that has not been revealed to the traveler. His true soul, identity, or purpose have not been revealed, we have not seen him for all that he is.
I have my own theories about Zhongli's true origin (why is the third act of liyue archon quest a new star approaches hmmmm) but if you look through some of the Liyue books or character stories you will notice there is a lot of mention about Zhongli's eyes.
In Rex Incognito, Rex Lapis' disguises as a woman with "eyes shone a brilliant amber" or a rugged worker with "eyes shone like amber from the mountain mines in the light of the setting sun" and a noble young man with "his golden eyes smiling."
In Moonlit Bamboo Forest, the main character meets a woman that "didn't appear to be an adeptus, apart from the piercing gaze of her golden eyes."
Even Tubby, you know the teapot adeptus that takes care of your teapot? In the story quest for the teapot she mentions a "golden-eyed adeptus" explained the limits of adeptal power in teapot to her. First of all Ping mentions in part I of the same quest that Rex Lapis blessed the adepti with "illumination" that allows them perform sub-space creation and form teapots. So the adeptus is clearly him.
In the description for the Euphonium Unbound: Winding, the teapot furnishing that allows you to play music "According to Tubby, a certain adepti with black hair and golden eyes wanted to temporarily change the melody echoing in the Realm Within to match the aesthetic of the tea on the table when he was having a small gathering with his friends in the Realm Within."
These are just the descriptions I can remember off the top of my head. Like many characters have gold eyes but Zhongli alone has so many many references to his eyes. Whenever genshin wants to describe Zhongli without saying his name they just say a person with "golden/amber eyes". Hell there was literally some Millelith soldier that knew Rex Lapis wasn't dead because he saw some guy with golden eyes walk past him.
Like really long story short. Eye symbolism is super important to Zhongli and a key part of his characterization. It is clear that no matter what form he takes it seems his eyes stay the same. Which is super interesting for shapeshifter characters. Shapeshifters usually change everything about themselves unless it very important to them so for Zhongli to hold onto a part of himself could suggest so many things. It could also just be a limitation of his transformation.
ANYWAY to hide Zhongli's eyes in his flashbacks even though we have seen the eyes of all the other archons and then to make his signature description his "golden eyes" is so interesting. Why make his signature feature his eyes then not show us his eyes!! What is the reason!
And again the first answer isn't exclusive at the same time, because his eyes are so important Zhongli not showing his eyes in flashbacks could mean that back then he was hiding a part of himself. Now that he is free from the title of Rex Lapis he can show his eyes freely without care, he is free from the contract of protecting humanity he doesn't have to wear an emotionless mask anymore so his beautiful eyes are on display.
Though interestingly in his museum collaboration we got to see Morax's eyes and in his archon outfit and all. However that could've taken place after the war and is also a fun little collab so like *shrugs shoulder* who knows!
74 notes
·
View notes
I personally think its disgusting of what she posted yet again its all about her and she the reason why micheal keeps trending 4th day oh please he was trending for days before she came in the picture. And for someone who has no career and basically living off her parter who works so hard and been ill with virus the last few days and haven't been able to perform and she post this. Taking the credit for something that has nothing to do with her. He very grateful that she keep him grounded what that suppose to mean ? He was doing better before she came in the picture since he been with her his career have been slowed a little and she probably the reason for it
What do u say ?
Oh, boy. I saw this a little while ago, and all I could think was that the bar is so low at this point--like halfway between the fourth and fifth circles of Hell--and this still somehow falls short.
I know there has been a lot of talk about the t-shirt Anna is wearing (which was a gift from a fan at the stage door of Nye), but for me, the t-shirt is the least concerning part of all this. It's a reference to a quote from Staged (it's the title of a season 1 episode, in fact), and I am sure Michael found it funny. The only problem is that without the context of why it's a joke, it actually just isn't that funny. And it sets the stage for everything else that is happening.
Which brings me to the caption she wrote, which was what primarily caught my attention. The reason Michael is currently trending on Twitter (X, whatever we're calling it) is because of the overwhelmingly positive response to The Assembly, which aired last Friday night. He is receiving a tremendous amount of praise for being on the show, how he spoke to the interviewers, and the respectful and joyous atmosphere that was cultivated on the show. And rather than allude to any of that--not to mention Michael being sick recently, or the trip they went on to Disneyland Paris--Anna made Michael trending on Twitter about her.
That is what stands out to me the most. The idea of "keeping him grounded" that is coming across more like kicking someone when he is already down. That he somehow needs that, and that she would have us believe he is "grateful" to her for, what...comparing him to a loud bird? Repeatedly making fun of his looks and interests without a shred of respect or affection behind it? I'm also confused by the implication (and the irony) that Michael somehow has a large ego that needs to be kept in check when she is the one coming across as self-involved in this Insta story. So, yes. I'm at a bit of loss here.
I just keep thinking of the things she could have said instead. How she could have uplifted Michael, wished him well on returning to the stage tonight after several days' absence, said how she was glad to have spent time with him or taken care of him while he was ill. Just something that would give him a reason to hold his head high. But I guess it might just be easier to convince herself/everyone else that he is smiling if his head is hanging down instead.
I am just glad Michael is out performing again tonight and getting to be on stage and do the thing he truly loves to do. But those are my thoughts, and I'd be glad to hear from my followers about what you think, regardless of whether you agree or disagree...
63 notes
·
View notes
so i actually went and read that article (grazie sophia christie on the cut). its flagrantly self-obsessed - she goes on for paragraphs about how she's just one of the smart girls who got picked up by a fully-formed man (then 30 to her then 23) while passing on badly disguised barbed 'pity' onto the now 20-year-old girls.
the reason for this pity is that they're currently teaching men how to live - how to grocery shop, how to move into an apartment, how to do laundry, etc. she pities them because "statistically, they will not end up" with their current boyfriends, and the next woman will benefit from this now fully-formed man while never knowing who came before her.
for someone who incessantly proclaims their intelligence (says if her classmates AT HARVARD were supposed to be smart girls, why aren't they out here getting with older men, oh btw did you pick up that she went to harvard? her ba in literature is from harvard university?), she can't see the painful irony of her own situation. her husband (not partner, gods- can you imagine being in a partnership with your significant other?!) magically appeared to her as a fully-formed grown man, and for whatever reason she does not divulge, he is the singular statistical outlier of all men -- no woman formed him! she is not living off some poor discarded girl's unappreciated labour right now!
this sentence in her last paragraph just prove my point: "Last week, we looked back at old photos and agreed we'd given each other our respective best years." Because you, unlike all those women you pity and the women in his life you oh-so-easily forget, didn't have to grow into who you are with someone. You said it yourself "At 20, I felt daunted by the project of becoming my ideal self, couldn't imagine doing it in tandem with somone, two raw lumps of clay trying to mold one another and only sullying things worse" (emphasis added). That project still daunts her, and she never reconciled with it. She just exported that burden to someone who had already done that work and knew what kind of person he wanted, so she became that person. She's a fraud.
go fuck yourself grazie sophia christie. ig that harvard literature ba isnt worth shit if you're such a self-deceiving author whose critical eye only ever turns outward.
17 notes
·
View notes