KAEYA HANGOUT ANALYSIS
Qubad: Fate means to send the machinations of war to every corner of the land, to fan the flames of conflict till they engulf the entire world...
Qubad: Fate would see my sword tainted with the blood of innocents, that the bright banner of my homeland might fly in every nation known to mankind.
It so perfectly tells you what will happen in Kaeya's story without actually saying it. It's utterly lovely.
Firstly, it points out that Kaeya does not like violence, does not want it and he hates that fate wants him to be active participant in the creation of violence.
The homeland in the story could seem to be reffering to Khaenri'ah if you don't think about it too hard. But, weirdly, it reppresents both at different times of the play. In the beginning, fate wants the homeland to win, which would imply it's not exactly a 1:1 to Khaenri'ah unless the heavens have a weirdly convuluted plan as they themselves are the ones that destroyed it to begin with. It is also a place with a god, as you can tell in multiple points in the story.
Qubad: When I departed my beloved home to fight in a foreign land, I did so to honor his wishes and for my duty to our people.
Qubad: Alas, is this fate's grand design... Is this fate's grand design...
Qubad: Must it be so...?
Kaeya was, in a way sent to fight in a foreign land. Not in the sense of physically fighint but in the sense tha he's an agent there for a specific goal we are not privy through.
He's placed in the impossible position of having to choose between Mondstadt, the place he loves and Khaenri'ah, his homeland who he owes a duty to. Fate, not his father decided this. His father has not helped the situation, his father has harmed him, but in the end he is not the one that created the problem in the first place. As Kaeya's himself points out here.
Kaeya: Yep, "inept" is a good word for it. Honestly, it might even be a little too civil to describe a god who turns fathers against their sons and is bent on endless warmongering... don't you think?
While there is clearly an arger towards his father, Kaeya does not see him as a bad person but as someone who was forced to be evil. A victim of manipulation, just as much of a pawn of this game as Kaeya himself is. The god (Celestia) is in the end the main problem. Because he set up the twisted system in teh first place.
Qubad: I, Qubad, will spend the rest of my days in a foreign land, till I breathe my last in a place far from home.
Qubad: But I shall not bow to the will of fate. I am no pawn in heaven's plan.
Qubad: Gundafar, my dear mentor... You have always been like a father to me. It brings me only anguish to bid you farewell.
Qubad: But I must walk this path, or freedom dies by my hand. Goodbye, my tribe and kin. Farewell, sweet land of my birth.
The important part of the hangout is this. "I shall not bow to the will of fate. I am no pawn." Kaeya makes his decision. He's made up his mind finally. He knows what he should do.
Now. What is that?
Well, we can see in the play in Kaeya's improv that he'll say goodbye to his mentor who was like a father to him. He also says goodbye to his kin and his tribe. He isn't picking either the side of his family of choise and his blood.
What we see here is fundamental. Kaeya shouts it at us. He is not picking either side, because both have significance to him. It's important to realize that the thing with his sides, that is also made up. It's a construct set up by the gods. Neither side is whooly right or whooly wrong. The Heavens WANT kaeya to choose.
Kaeya: If you don't like the script, just walk off the stage and join the audience. You always have a choice.
You always have a choice. There is always a less obvious choice. The Heavens do not control anything.
Qubad: My dear audience, I ask you this: Do you believe in fate? If fate decreed that your life was to end in tragedy, what would you do?
The point it's making about Kaeya's story is fundamental to both his and the travler's story. Kaeya's life is to end in greatness and tragedy as his constellation says. It's written in the part. But Kaeya is no pawn, and Kaeya will not turn back, as freedom itself, as a concept dies. Unlike his father, he will not let himself be tainted by hate and preperpetuate the cycle of violence that the warmogering gods want him to do.
Anyways this is my coming out as a "Kaeya isn't picking either Khaenri'ah or Mondstadt he's picking the secret third option the heavens don't want you to know about."
24 notes
·
View notes
I'll be honest, having seen a lot of the boil over, I think the thing that keeps catching a particular subgroup up about the finale is that the finale unequivocally says two things:
c!Dream was not always this way, he was at one point, just a 20 something year old running around in fields with his friends.
c!Dream was, and still is, unmistakably and indisputably human.
I feel like these two facts, being presented in such a way that there's no way for it to be misunderstood, are sticking points for that group because it forces an understanding that they have been actively been working against.
c!Dream did horrible things, but he was still human. He was human the entire time. He wasn't born evil, he wasn't a one-dimensional purely malicious villain that existed only to fill a role. He was human. He was human, and he did horrible things, and those horrible things did not negate his humanity. c!Dream was a human, and he was hurt, and he handled that hurt poorly, and he hurt people as a result. He wasn't always this way, he ended up this way because of how he was hurt and the poor choices he made to handle that hurt.
It's vicious towards people who've been stuck on this idea that c!Dream is inhuman, that's he's a monster, that he was always selfish, evil, "the problem". Because they need that simplicity in a narrative and can't handle the implication that anyone can end up being horrible. That there isn't a neat little line between good people and bad people, and that anyone can both be hurt and hurt others.
c!Dream is an ugly, vicious reflection of what someone can become when they believe their goal is worthwhile and they don't care if what they're doing is wrong. He is though, above all else, a human. Just a person. Who was hurt, and made bad choices. Nothing more, nothing less. Familiar and terrifying.
I feel like there's a certain group out there that absolutely cannot stand this idea that anyone can do horrible, irreparable damage, for much the same reason that some people don't like mirrors.
481 notes
·
View notes
I don’t understand how people and sit there and put the entire blame of the whole Dance with Dragons conflict on Alicent. I know people have biases but I don’t understand how you can watch as all of these men commit horrid deeds with grievous consequences and then go on and pretend like it’s all Alicent’s fault. This entire scenario is only possible in the first place because Viserys decided to strip his first wife of any bodily autonomy and agency she had and ripped a baby out of her without her consent . A torture of a procedure that brutally killed her. Following that, he decided to marry a teenager, maritally rapes her and treats her like a baby making machine, without any regards to the potential consequences or how it’s impacting anybody. Just because he’s two seconds away from rotting away doesn’t remove the unwashable stains he has made and how he has laid out this conflict to be even possible.
The line of succession ended up being changed in the first place because Daemon can’t stop himself from doing nonsensical attention-seeking half-assed stunts (like extreme public torture, grooming his teenage niece and later starting a whole war) that have grievous aftereffects, once again with no regards to their real brutal consequences, all in order to get his brother’s attention and validation. In fact, this whole scenario only ever had the potential to happen due to the patriarchal monarchy that Westerosi men created alongside the Targaryen’s blatant lack of preparation and established rules for a scenario where the next ruler would be a woman, and the seven kingdoms staunch refusal to genuinely accept one as their ruler.
All that and people will still choose to pin this whole thing on Alicent, with no consideration to the fact that she was pimped by her dad, when she was 15, to an old man, and had no say or choice in the matter due to her being inside a system that strips most women of any real choice or say in their lives. It’s like this fandom would rather spend over a month demonizing a female character (like Young Alicent) for not being the ‘’perfect’’ victim to patriarchal violence due to and based on a hypocritical usage of modern standards and using rhetorics steeped in rape culture than hold male characters accountable (for longer than two seconds) for torturing and killing their wives in explicitly sexist frameworks. That aside, Alicent absolutely plays a part in this whole conflict (as she grows older), as does Rhaenyra, to the point where both end up becoming the emblematic faces of this chain of events. However, if you can’t see how the conflict itself is only made possible due to and founded on sexist biases, gendered violence, grooming, sexual abuse and negligence that stem from all these men in the highest positions of power, then you are simply not paying attention.
334 notes
·
View notes
The pushback to the term "cultural Christianity" from atheists is real odd to me because, as someone who has been an atheist since 13, only ever went to church a handful of times never with my own family (made a note never to sleep over at that friends house on a Saturday again bc I HATED church it smelled like shit, was boring, pews are uncomfortable as fuck, and the religious people I knew were all wildly misogynistic and I've never been here for being told I was less of a person for being Born Like This), and generally had no actual connection to Christianity in a meaningful way but still only knows Christian mythology, has been steeped in Christian values I had to untangle, and my religious understandings are still deeply Christian.
Like Ive never paid attention to the bible, church, Jesus, Christian teachings, or whatever but if you asked me about any religion the one I'll reliably know the most about is Christianity. I don't know why atheists are offended by being called culturally Christian because they have bad blood with the religion because like sorry bruh that doesn't mean you're less indoctrinated by Christian values if the culture you grew up in is predominantly Christian. In fact I'd say that religion being this ubiquitous in the culture regardless of anyone's consent to exactly ONE religion being shoved down our throats is reason to team up with other religious folks who ALSO don't like being constantly evangelized to by the culture at large, not a reason to throw a fit because you don't like being tied to a religion that is so ingrained into the culture that shit like "oh my god" and "Jesus Christ" are common expressions of surprise regardless of how atheist you are. Like surely I'm not the only atheist to notice the shocking amount of cultural religious shit that works it's way into my life and speech despite having not set foot in a church since I was like 10, and I can't remember the last time I was in one before that.
Idk man cultural Christianity seems like a pretty damn useful term to describe my relationship with a religion I never fully bought into and then actively rejected as a child yet still hold weird connections to and knowledge of just because Christianity is so baked into the culture I grew up in like it or not. If you want to be mad, be mad at the Christians who stole your freedom from religion from you, not usually religious minorities who discuss cultural Christianity and how it damages them too.
64 notes
·
View notes
There is this YouTube channel called Jubilee that hosts people of various backgrounds with opposing viewpoints (such as Liberal lesbians vs Conservative lesbians) and puts the group through a series of questions to prod their opinions on various topics.
It would be really interesting to get that sort of platform for former foster kids because I'm truly tired of the topic of foster kids being limited to a mere mention in the abortion debate.
I'd love to hear about what former foster kids think of trans activists and how it impacts their lives.
I'd love to hear about what former foster kids think of DEI and woke culture. What do they think of social justice warriors and feminists? What do they think of pro-choice and pro-life people? What do they think of religion? What do they think of the statistics for former foster kids? What do they think of adoption trauma? What do they think of foster parents and social workers? What do they think of the nuclear family? What is their dating life like? What was it like to age out of the system?
I crave these view points and the media just doesn't like putting us in the frame.
2 notes
·
View notes