#badly written char analysis? | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

sarahjtv · 3 years

Text

BNHA Chapter 316 Quick Analysis: I’m Legit Worried About Deku, Guys...

Chapter 316 is out and it’s called “Your Turn”. Oh, the parallels; you love to see them. While I was here loving Shoto’s provisional Hero debut in the anime this week (God, I love him 💙), Deku was getting blown up at again! All For One is one of those villains who’s incredibly written and you still want to punch him in the face. I also don’t like how reckless Deku’s being right now. He needs therapy now:

So far, Lady Nagant’s still alive. She managed to tell Deku and the others about where AFO probably is, but of course it was all a trap set by AFO. Thankfully, Nagant’s heroic heart manages to recognize the shine in both Hawks’ and Deku’s eyes despite everything they’ve gone through. She can still see the good in heroes. I hope this is enough to redeem herself back into the Pro Hero she was before. Again, I think she would be a great ally to Deku. Also some extra revenge towards AFO is nice.

Hawks is so damn good, guys. Despite everything he’s been put through, he still manages to be an optimist. It takes a lot of strength to do that. Maybe he and Nagant could team up one day once his tiny wings grow back again. Seeing him frantically flap his little wings was kinda funny ngl LOL 😂

There’s a small panel where Lady Nagant says that AFO told others to capture Deku too. So, there’s Lady Nagant and I think Muscular? I wonder who else he sent to get Deku? Stain maybe? A Nomu? Maybe one of the LOV? I’m trying to think of who else. Since this is the Final Act, it probably has to be some old villain who has a vendetta against Deku. Or a cool new villain like Lady Nagant would be good too.

Speaking of Villains, Overhaul has been captured! And Deku finally gets the chance to talk to him. Deku wonders if Overhaul has thought about the horrible things he did to Eri. Overhaul doesn’t really show much remorse towards Eri here; he’s seeing her as a solution to his problem. I like how Deku’s handling this btw. He’s not going to try to talk Overhaul into going to the good side like I thought. He remembers what Eri went through and coldly asks if Overhaul feels anything remotely related to guilt. Overhaul doesn’t need any sympathy.

But, Deku being the good boy he is, offers to fulfill Lady Nagant’s promise to Overhaul if he genuinely feels sorry for what he did to Eri. Now, I don’t think that Overhaul should see Eri just to apologize. I think Eri should be kept away from that bastard forever. But, I do think he should show some sort of guilt towards her. Genuine guilt. It won’t change what he did of course. I hope Deku knows what he’s doing.

And, Overhaul didn’t heal Lady Nagant like I thought. She’s getting medical aid instead. Which neither confirms or denies that Overhaul still has his Quirk. I believe what the Ultra Analysis says that he still does have his Quirk somewhere in him. It would’ve been good to see Overhaul heal Lady Nagant through. Seriously, Overhaul could’ve been an amazing Doctor or Pro Hero healer if he weren’t such a scumbag.

And here’s where my worry for Deku increases tenfold. After seeing Lady Nagant’s charred body, there’s a panel where his eyes are filled with rage. He is so pissed off! Dude looks ready to commit murder. He recklessly goes after AFO in his supposed hideout. Thankfully the other pro heroes (including Edgeshot, Mt. Lady, and Kamui Woods) are behind him, but even Endeavor’s warning Deku to stop being reckless. Deku ignores him though. Deku doesn’t even talk for the rest of the chapter. He’s just filled with anger and rage. I’m so scared that this is all going to backfire on him so badly. But, maybe that will finally convince him to get some help. Not from a therapist per say (maybe after everything calms down), but from his friends. Based on an interview from Horikoshi they will come back. Not sure when, but they will be there. I still want that talk between Deku and Shoto and Bakugo. Shoto needs an explanation and Bakugo just needs to talk to Deku in general.

Finally, there’s AFO. He’s changed his focus from All Might to Deku now. And now it’s Deku’s turn. What a freaking twist on that hopeful saying All Might said to Deku back in Kamino Ward. God, I hate AFO so much. He’s such a good villain though. So, he blows up the entire house Deku and co. entered. Guy loves explosions just as much as Bakugo.

We shown if Deku and co. got out of the blast, but I want to say they did. There’s a constant ticking noise during AFO’s monologue leading up the the blast so someone had to know. Also, you would think Deku’s Danger Sense would go off. Maybe it did and we didn’t see it. There was one panel that looked like Deku was activating OFA to escape, but it might just be Deku’s outline against the black background. Regardless, I think everyone will be fine. A little more crispy, but fine.

Me seeing Deku’s mentaity go downhill even more:

17 notes · View notes

mybg3notebook · 3 years

Text

Gratitude and care in Astarion

Disclaimer Game Version: All these analyses were made up to the game version v4.1.101.4425. As long as new content is added, and as long as I have free time for that, I will try to keep updating this information.

It’s hard to say if Astarion has a level of gratitude, which can be understandable since, as he said explicitly during the bite scene, it takes some time for him to trust in another person due to the torment that Cazador made him pass through (but like everything with Astarion’s words, it may be a plain lie to excuse himself in front of Tav ). The main reason for this lack of gratitude, or a twisted version of it—if there is any—, comes from the possibility of “Dark Desires” working on him (check post about Vampirism).

Astarion has two situations in which he seems to show, ever so slightly, a thread of gratitude.

The first one is during the bite scene. The acceptance of his vampire nature is not exactly what he is grateful for, but for the willing offering of blood. This is—if we believe in what Astarion told us—the first time he has ever tasted blood from a thinking creature. This may be, like all words from Astarion’s mouth, a lie/half truth. We need to remember that Astarion considers a broad group of humanoids who are thinking creatures as animals (check Astarion Analysis). So he may or may not have drunk blood from a, let’s say, goblin or a gnome before. It’s also true that the only images we saw in his head by using the Tadpole were rats in his master's crypt; we don't see anything about his recent feedings (we know it was a boar). From Astarion’s perspective, killing a nearby goblin would count as feeding on animals, but technically it is not and therefore, Tav is not his first.

In any case, putting aside this consideration, Astarion explicitly says that this offering of blood is a “gift” that he will not forget (if your rolls succeeded in stopping him). We still need to see how this apparent “gratitude” will manifest—if it ever does—.

If we got the bad luck of failing those checks, in which Tav asked Astarion to stop twice, but he did not, Astarion would end up killing Tav. In the next morning, he is not even guilty or ashamed for his excess (an excess that one could understand a bit since the vampiric bloodthirst is too intense in general), but his careless attitude and his dismiss of the gravity of the situation, giving an apology more concerned about his permanence in this group than being honest with Tav, shows that Astarion cares little for Tav. If he does, it’s always around the fact of guaranteeing his permanence in this group of powerful members that gives him safety and potential solutions in controlling the tadpole. When Astarion kills Tav there is no scene of “gift”, so Tav is completely unaware of how important this event was for Astarion…. if it truly was such (why would Astarion not say anything about it later since it has been such a “gift”? I’m deeply distrustful about his gratitude). Later, in datamined content, we will see Astarion subtly asking for permission to feed on the companions (Check post Astarion's Standards and Manipulation)

The second time he shows a minimal hint of something remotely similar to gratitude is in datamined material, related to a pair of videos that pjenn has shown about the scars on his back [1] [2]. He needs help to read it since he can’t see his body in reflective surfaces due to his vampire nature. We get from the narrator:

* He might be sneering, but you can see pain in his eyes. He needs help, but doesn’t know how to ask. *

Helping him to decipher the infernal message on his back (if Tav is a tiefling) or at least attempting to (if Tav can’t decipher it at all), Astarion will add “thank you by the way, this is… well, it’s something.”

And that’s all. That’s all the content in EA where you can see a hint of “gratitude” in Astarion, if you squint your eyes, scratching content from a single phrase in two scenes. There is also no meta-knowledge information to add to this, or any explicit reaction from Astarion that could imply more gratitude than this. As a character who represents a “bad behaved victim” probably makes sense. He has only focused on himself and on his own needs for survival. There is little room for gratitude there.

Should we expect any gratitude? Personally I don’t think so. Although he follows the troupe of the bad-behaved victim, he is also a power-focused character that manipulates constantly every situation in order to guarantee his survival or simply to have fun (bloodshed or sex). Those small details of apparent gratitude may have perfectly been part of the games he plays.

Could he eventually be grateful? Hard to say in EA. If he is, it seems to me that he will be in the evil way. When I say this I keep in mind what Swen said in several talks/videos about how they were not considering alignment change in characters but only in the main char. Which is a curious change from bg1 or bg2, or simply the true reason to work with more generalised alignments: good, neutral, and evil alone.

It is clear that we cannot trust in Astarion’s gratitude, only shown in two single lines that will not always be seen. Astarion is a great manipulative char and that small hint of gratitude he shows may be one of the many tricks he uses to survive and gather power.

Does Astarion care for someone?

Since we are talking about gratitude, we can also talk about care. If Astarion has shown something clearly during all EA, it is his lack of honest interest for the well-being of any creature beside himself. This includes the members of the group. There is never meta-knowledge information displaying that “deep down, in a silent way” he cares about his companions.

The only opportunity in which he apparently seems to care about some companions, is when he is reading the book of Thay, which apparently is asking him to kill the group, to which Astarion answers with a “No, I won’t kill them. Maybe *insert scripted companion’s name*”.

We know at this point that he would enjoy seeing his companions suffer and die, because bloodshed is always “fun”, but he is prioritising how this group protects him. This concept can be seen pretty clearly when we are witnesses of Lae’Zel’s death at the hands of the githyanki patrol. Astarion will say something along the lines “what a pity, she was a powerful specimen”. Another proof of this aspect is when he approves of sacrificing one of the companions to the fish-people who worship Booal. Astarion doesn’t truly care about anyone of the group (not even the main char, to whom he may kill in a bite dismissing the gravity of the situation) but he needs them as protection and also as the only way to find a way to control his tadpole. It’s always about his needs.

After all, we should not forget that iconic phrase during the stargaze scene:

“You think I’d kill you, just like that? Darling, I would never. I still need you.”

And this had been stated in every opportunity: The most important thing at any moment is survival. Astarion doesn’t care about killing or betraying. He enjoys it, “it’s fun”. He is not turning against the group basically because, by now, it’s the only safe and promising means to guarantee his survival. He needs this group so badly that he won’t abandon it even if a good aligned Tav mistreats him and disrespects him at every opportunity they have. Tav is the one who has to insist for Astarion to abandon the group, and even then, he will try to convince them of the contrary. That speaks volumes about what this group (and Tav) truly means to him. Like everything with his character: just a means for survival.

This post was written on April 2021.

→ For more Astarion: Analysis Series Index

#astarion #bg3 early access #bg3 meta

47 notes · View notes

light1625-blog1 · 4 years

Text

Reader Response Journal Portfolio

Focus: While we started school, I didn’t have clear information about the story elements. I was not sure about the characterization. I didn’t know the difference between theme and topic. Now, I can understand and implement in my Reader Response Journals. The story elements help us to understand the story clearly. For example, we analysis the topic and theme. Topic helps us to understand the author tells us what. Theme helps us to understand what we learn.

Entry 1:Blue Eyes Far Away

The short story is in the past in the courtroom and Esther Lee’s house. There is a car accident. In the courtroom, everybody becomes angry and the defenses create tension when the events are progressing.

Esther Lee is the wife of Joseph Lee who had been killed in the car accident. In the story, the author speaks about Joseph Lee: “Joseph Lee was neither wealthy nor a well-known man.” Joseph Lee dies because of Archie Stolt. He is a rich person. We can understand it from these sentences: “The case would cost Archie Stolt money. But he could well afford it.” He thinks he can get out of the courtroom without the punishment, but the events are not progressing like his thoughts. Archie Stolt is a flat character. He tries to get out of the courtroom without the punishment. When the truths come to light, he and his lawyers continue to do this bad behavior. They always say “I object!”. He tries to escape the truths, but he couldn’t. Esther lee is a round character. Firstly she acts like she doesn’t see the scene of the crime, but when the events are progressing, she says everything that she knows about the crime. She changes her behavior.

I think she doesn’t trust her husband. At the start of the story, she acts like she doesn’t see the scene of the crime. I can’t understand why she doesn’t let the accident to the cops when the accident becomes, and why do you watch your husband with the telescope when he comes home? Why do you act like you don’t see the scene of the accident, especially if the dead person is your husband? I think the most important event is this. She tells everything about the accident that she knows. The result of this is the case can not Archie Stolt money. He must go the jail. The plot is linearly and believable.

There isn't an author in this story. The author doesn’t speak with the characters. The author wrote this story in the third person “he/she” point of view. The author uses “she said”, “she explained.” We can understand the story is written which point of view from this.

The main conflict is the case. Everybody who is in the courtroom. Discuss the case. Sometimes this discussion creates tension, everybody becomes angry. The defenses are mixing around. I think a big part of the story is conflict because a big part of the story about the case.

I think the climax is Esther Lee tells her defense. When she tells it, she fills the gaps in the case. At the same time, she makes the gaps about the case. She explains how the case becomes and she becomes a question in their mind. “How did she see the scene of the crime from a far distance ?”

I think the theme is maybe a person you know, you think this person trusts you, doesn't trust you. This person probably does interesting things, because this person doesn’t trust you. This person may watch you, follow you, etc.

Entry 2:Charles

The short story is at the school time when Laurie goes the kindergarten. They are in school and at home. The events are happening at home and at school. When time progresses, Laurie tells more lies at this time than tells lies in the past. The short story takes place in the past. The author wrote this story in 1948.

The main character is Laurie. He goes to kindergarten, and he tells lies to his parents about his unreal friend Charles. “It was Charles,” he said. “He was fresh. The teacher spanked him and made him stand in a corner. He was awfully fresh.” Charles is Laurie and Charles doesn’t do it. Laurie does it, but he chooses to tell lies. Maybe his parents act badly to him, so he tells lies. Maybe he has psychological problems, and his parents don’t realize that. Maybe his parents don’t show enough interest in him. There are many reasons why did Laurie tells lies. I can’t decide which one is true or false. Laurie is a flat character. He always tells lies, he doesn’t stop anytime. I think his mother is a round character because firstly she questions the behaviors of Charles. She says it to her husband. “Do you think kindergarten is too unsettling for Laurie? All this toughness, and bad grammar, and this Charles boy sounds like such a bad influence.” “It’ll be alright,” her husband says reassuringly. “Bound to be people like Charles in the world. Might as well meet them now as later.” After that, she acts more careless than before this part. His father is a flat character. He always acts careless.

I think the most important event is Laurie’s mom finds out all of the truths. She learns them from Charles’s kindergarten teacher. It is the end of the story, so we don’t know what she does after she learns. I want to know Laurie’s mom's reaction. I want to know Laurie’s reaction to his mom’s reaction. The plot is believable.

The speaker is Laurie’s mom in the short story. The story is written in the first person ‘I’ point of view. The author uses “I said.”, “ I asked.”. We can understand the author wrote this story in which point of view from these.

I think there is an internal conflict. The conflict is between Laurie and his mind. I think he has psychological problems, and he tells lies. He can’t keep his mind control. I think it can be a conflict, but there is an external conflict too. If he is scared of his parents' behaviors, so he tells lies. There is an external conflict between Laurie and his parents. These can be conflicts, but one of them can be a conflict.

I think the climax is Laurie’s mom finds out all of the truths, all of the lies. There is a turning point at the end of the story. I think the story finishes at the turning point.

I think one of the themes is when you tell lies, no matter what happens the truths come to light. Everybody finds out all of the truths. The other theme is when someone has psychological problems, you should show more interest in it.

Entry 3: The Treasure of Lemon Brown

The short story is on a rainy evening at the home and the abandoned building. The setting is important because if there was not a rainy day, Greg didn’t go to the abandoned building because of the rainy day. Because of the time, there is dark and the abandoned building becomes frightened than the sunny morning. They have some interesting events.

The main character is Greg. His father doesn’t want him to play basketball, he wants him to study. Greg walks in the street on a rainy evening and he goes to the abandoned building because of rain. He meets with Lemon Brown there. He is an old singer who someone called him Sweet Lemon Brown. In the text, Lemon Brown says “They used to say I sung the blues so sweet that if I sang at a funeral, the dead would commence to rocking with the beat.” He has a treasure. It is a harmonica, his son’s harmonica. Lemon Brown tries to feet his son and one day there was a letter in his home. The letter says his son killed in the war. This treasure is one of what left back from him. In the story, three people want to take this treasure from Lemon Brown and they try it. These characters are believable.

I think the most event is Lemon Brown tells the story of his treasure. The treasure is from his son. He has attention to this treasure. We can understand it from this part: “Him carrying it around with him like that told me it meant something to him. That was my treasure, and when I give it to him, he treated it just like that, a treasure.” The plot structured linearly.

There is not a speaker in this story. The author doesn’t speak through the characters. The author wrote this story in the third person “he/she” point of view. The author uses “Greg said.”, “Lemon Brown said.”, “Greg asked.”. We can understand the author uses which point of view from this.

I think there are 2 main conflicts. Greg has an internal conflict. In the text there is a paragraph about this internal conflict: “ ‘And you want to play basketball?’ His father’s brows knitted over deep-brown eyes. ‘That must be some kind of joke. Now you just get into your room and hit those books.’ (So, Greg wants to play basketball, but his bad grades are keeping him from it.)” His father doesn’t want him to play basketball, wants him to study, but Greg wants to play basketball. He should choose one of them. He can’t decide what he should choose. The other conflict is external. He goes to the abandoned building because of rain. After he meets with Lemon Brown in an abandoned building, he should escape to three people who want the treasure of Lemon Brown.

There is a turning point in the story. Some people want to take the treasure of Lemon Brown and they come in the abandoned building. Greg and Lemon Brown hide from these three people. They are frightened because this building is dark and they don’t have any flashlights. The climax takes place in the middle of the story.

I think the theme is every treasure is not jewels, money, diamonds, etc. Someone can have a treasure that has sentimental value.

Entry 4: The Old Man at the Bridge

The short story is on the bridge. There is an old man at the bridge who comes from San Carlos. There is no information about the time, but we now he comes from San Carlos because of war. We can understand because of what from this dialog. “‘And you had to leave them?’ I asked. ‘Yes. Because of the artillery. The captain told me to go because of the artillery.’” That is to say in 1982 there was a battle in San Carlos. Maybe we think the time can 1982, but when I searched for when the story was written, Google says The Old Man at the Bridge was written in 1938. That is to say, the time can not 1982.

The main character is a man who leaves from San Carlos because of war. We can understand he comes from where from this dialog."‘Where do you come from?’ I asked him. ‘From San Carlos,’ he said, and smiled.” The speaker says “An old man with steel rimmed spectacles and very dusty clothes sat by the side of the road.” We can understand that he is in a bad situation. Maybe he doesn’t want to leave San Carlos, because he doesn’t know his family is in where. The speaker tries to help him. The old man at the bridge sits on one side of the road for the animals. He says “I was taking care of animals.” These animals are special for the old man because these animals are the only thing he takes from San Carlos. He says the only thing he takes from San Carlos. She says “‘And you have no family?’ I asked, watching the far end of the bridge where a few last carts were hurrying down the slope of the bank. ‘No,’ he said, ‘only the animals I stated.’” The speaker tries a lot of time to convince him to doesn’t sit on one side of the road. The speaker says “‘This is not a good place to stop,’ I said. ‘If you can make it, there are trucks up the road where it forks for Tortosa.’”

I think the most important event is he says he just has these animals. He has no family where he is now. We can understand from this dialog “‘And you have no family?’ I asked, watching the far end of the bridge where a few last carts were hurrying down the slope of the bank. ‘No,’ he said.” I think family is the most important thing for us. If I don't have any family, I am more upset than when I have a family. I think he is more upset than when he has a family. The plot is believable.

The speaker is someone who tries to help an old man. The story is written in the first person “I” point of view. The speaker says “ I asked.”, “ I said.” There isn’t an all-knowing third person in the story.

I think there are 2 conflicts One of the conflicts is an internal conflict. I think the old man has an internal conflict. He comes from San Carlos, and in San Carlos, there is a battle. He leaves from San Carlos, and he has just the animals from San Carlos. He hasn’t any family, any home. He sits on one side of the road and waits for the animals. He takes care of animals. He says “I was only taking care of animals.” the other conflict is external. In San Carlos, there is a war and the war between the two countries. That is to say, I think these two countries have external conflict. They can’t compromise with each other.

I think the climax is he says he is the last person who leaves from San Carlos. I think this is interest. He says “‘I stayed, you see, taking care of animals. I was the last one to leave the town of San Carlos.’” When I read this part of the story, I think it attracts interest.

I think the theme is if your country is in a bad situation, and you must leave your country which you love, you may be in a bad situation in the other country.

Reflection: Actually, I didn’t like verbal lessons, but in RC Literature lessons can be more fun. For example, in Literature lessons, we do group work, and studying with friends is more enjoyable than individual works. I think the fact that these lessons are fun makes the lessons more understandable and educational. I'm learning more information about how can be a good reader in RC literature.

When I started school, I was like a kite. Our teacher taught something to us, and these things sounded strange. I thought I can’t learn them. We learned a lot of things from our teacher like the story elements which I used in my portfolio. At the start of the first quarter, I didn’t good the analysis of the story elements. I was forgetting to give evidence from the text, and I couldn’t analysis. I just described what the author tells us. I just wrote the summary, but now I can do all of them. For example at the start of the first quarter, I didn’t know the difference between theme and topic. I was confusing them, but the time proceeded, I started to learn and understand. The topic is what the author tells us in the story. The theme is what do we learn from this story. For example, “Family” can be a topic. “Family is the most important thing in our lives.” can be a theme. It is just one example. For example climax in the story, elements are the turning point in the story. It changes everything or makes the readers more exciting about the story. In the story someone has disappeared or someone falls from the plane can be a climax, and if I analysis climax, I should provide evidence from the text. For example, if the climax is someone who has disappeared, I should write how does the author explain it. For example, maybe the author says, “When I turned my back, I couldn’t see Alisa. Where is she? The forest was quiet. “Alisa,” I shouted. The silence continued. I was scared of Alisa. She had disappeared. I continued to shout. “Alisa!” “Alisa where are you?” “If you hear my voices, please shout.” This part can be the climax of the story. I want to give one more example. In the story elements, there is a conflict. The conflict is the disagreement between the characters or something. For example, war is a conflict between the two countries or more. They disagree with each other. These examples were my most significant learning as a reader.

While the time was progressing, and we got close to the middle of the first quarter. We did more practice to improve our reader response journals. We were improving our reader response journals, our thoughts. I can use more words in my reader response journals. That is to say, I can give more details in my reader response journals. When I read a book or a short story, I think the story elements of the story. I can be a good reader. If I improve my reading skills, I can be a good reader. I think the most important thing to be a good reader is you should read a book which takes your interest. That is to say, if we read a book takes our interest, we can focus easier and we can describe our thoughts easier. I was improving myself, but I felt like I missing something because while I read a book that may take my interest, I can’t focus on the book.

As we approach the end of the first quarter, I understood why I can’t focus on the book. When I searched why I can’t, I found some recommendations on the net. The net said you should create a pleasant reading environment. I am a residential student, and I read the books and write reader response journals in our room, so I can’t focus because of noises. I decided to create an environment for reading. When I read my book or my story in a special environment, I can focus my book or my story and my reader response journal easily.

Now, I finished writing my reader response journals portfolio with what I was learning in the first quarter. I realized this quarter added a lot of things to me while I wrote my reader response journals portfolio.

#book #read #reader #entry #journal

1 note · View note