#christian analysis of media | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

fanfic-lover-girl · 7 months

Text

Christian Take on the Southern Raiders

As a Christian, I wanted to examine Katara's desire to pursue her mother's killer in the Southern Raiders episode. Especially the topic of forgiveness and justice.

Was Aang right about forgiveness?

Aang claims Katara has a second choice: forgiveness. Zuko claims forgiveness is the same as doing nothing. Aang responds:

"It's easy to do nothing. It's hard to forgive"

Aang is 100% right. Forgiveness is hard. Even when the slight is minor, forgiveness can be hard. Aang is also right about revenge. Revenge can poison someone beyond repair. Forgiveness is meant for the victim, not the perpetrator. As Christians, we can not be forgiven by God if we can't forgive others. In secular terms, forgiveness sets you free from the shackles to your tormentor. So as a friend, Aang is right for pointing this out as an option.

HOWEVER, how he goes about it is insulting and condescending. Comparing the death of Katara's mom to losing Appa temporality. I know Appa is one of his last links to his culture but Appa is an animal and comparing him to a mother is disrespectful! And comparing her to Jet. Another issue here is that Aang presents confrontation as mutually exclusive from forgiveness. At least initially. For me, I struggle to truly forgive unless I confront the person who hurt me first. He did validate her need to confront Yon Rha though when he confronted her and Zuko at night. So right idea but poor execution, Aang.

I think Aang may be a bit too demonized in this episode by Zu/Katara fans.

Justice vs revenge

So justice and revenge both involve addressing wrongs. However, Christians should not carry out revenge. We should leave punishment to God and the law. Justice is also tied to forgiveness. Any Christian who says that we should just forgive criminals and let them off the hook from the law is speaking nonsense. Shame on the Christian press who bashed Rachel Denhollander in her sexual assault case.

Zuko called Katara's desire justice. Aang called it revenge. Who's right?

What was Katara going to do?

What's interesting is that Katara does not explicitly specify what she will do when she confronts Yon Rha. Aang is the one who brought up seeking revenge. But even then no one outright says murder. Maybe because it's a kid's show or maybe Katara did not know herself. It's not until she goes for the kill that it is explicit that she wants to actually kill him. Although her wanting to kill him was heavily implied or could be inferred from the tone of the episode.

Is it revenge or justice to kill Yon Rha?

Technically, yes it is revenge. Justice is meant to be carried out by an impartial party (eg. the law) and/or someone with absolute higher power (God). It is an eye for an eye, but it is still revenge.

HOWEVER, Katara has no avenue for proper justice in the Avatar world! And Christianity does not exist in ATLA obviously lol.

ATLA has spirits but the spirits are indifferent to human problems. Tui and La or Agni will not avenge Katara like God promises to do for Christians.

There is a war going on and there is no law that will condemn Yon Rha. He was doing his duty as a fire nation soldier so he is not guilty under fire nation law. Katara could THEORETICALLY get justice by waiting for Zuko to be crowned and letting the new regime prosecute Yon Rha. But then it poses another problem! Zuko would be forced to prosecute who knows how many FN soldiers! Would all retired military leaders be sent to prison?? What if there was some super old guy who participated in the air nomad genocide and was on his deathbed, on the verge of croaking? Should he be carted off to jail?? And you can't (or shouldn't) lawfully prosecute someone for doing something that was not illegal at the time of the action.

If the WT captured him and held him accountable for murder under their law that could work.

Thankfully, Katara made what I believe to be the right choice for herself. Killing Yon Rha would not bring her mom back and probably would not bring her the closure she needed. There are things worse than death after all.

Even though Katara claimed she did not forgive Yon Rha, she did in a sense. By confronting him, she let go of his hold over her. She no longer fears him. She is able to move on and let go of her anger. She does not demand any payment from him by sparing his life because she sees him as a pathetic waste of space already. She found closure. The difference with her forgiveness of Zuko is that she chooses to put her animosity in the past and give him another chance. Reconcile with him. Unlike with Yon Rha. Not that there is anything to reconcile with him anyway...

#yon rha #the southern raiders #christianity #Rachel Denhollander #justice #revenge #forgiveness #atla katara #atla aang #aang critical #only a little bit #christian analysis of media #atla #atla meta #atla zuko #anti christians who demonize victims #forgiveness does not mean justice is not suppose to be served #kataang friendship #zutara friendship

75 notes · View notes

bread-tab · 9 months

Text

okay random 4am rant time, don't take it too seriously, but: people need to recognize there's a difference between "bad worldbuilding" and "worldbuilding styles you personally don't like."

bad worldbuilding is, for example: internally inconsistent, bigoted, or something else that messes up the plot or characterization of the story itself. sloppy. careless.

things that are *not* bad worldbuilding:

minimalism.

i've been thinking about this in the first place because i saw a post about the Murderbot Diaries a while back (don't know who made it, don't care; this ain't personal) saying the worldbuilding in those books is bad and lazy. to me, as an avid sci-fi reader and writer, that is clearly not true. but i understood why they thought this. the series uses extremely minimalist worldbuilding which intentionally withholds a lot of detail, in a way that is consistent with the (nonhuman, robot, depressed robot) first-person POV. this could also be a feature of the author's writing style in general—i haven't read her other works—but i wouldn't bet too much on it.

the signature of intentional minimalism is that there *are* details about the speculative setting—they're just doled out very thoughtfully and sparingly. the intent is to leave you a little hungry for more. it's to make you think very carefully about the details you do have. this is best suited to stories that already have elements of psychological and/or mystery plot types. the worldbuilding you do see should still be believable, internally consistent, and have interesting implications if you think about it a bit. but you are for sure going to have to think harder to get it.

if you're not in the mood, i will concede, a minimalist style definitely comes off as a bit dry. if you are in the mood, it's relaxing.

whimsy.

this is a big one for sci-fi fans in particular. see: the constant debate about whether any particular story is "hard" or "soft" sci-fi, and whether soft sci-fi is bad, etc etc. but worldbuilding doesn't have to be realistic to be good. you're allowed to have Jedi and humanoid aliens and time travel in your sci-fi. you're allowed to have historical anachronisms and astrology and po-ta-toes in your fantasy. whether or not they're silly isn't the deciding factor on how "good" these worldbuilding elements really are.

the key thing is tonal consistency. you've got a serious high-fantasy setting with its own strict, un-Earth-like theology and magic system, and you throw Santa Claus in there? yeah, that's not gonna land well. but C.S. Lewis can get away with that in Narnia just fine. why? because the Chronicles of Narnia are whimsical children's stories with a strong Christian/Western mythological influence already, and their central conceit is a crossover between the mundane world and the magical world. of course Santa can cross over too. it's whimsical, but it's not actually random. (and if you ventured into straight-up comedy, you could get away with random too. as long as it's funny.)

the unreliable narrator.

i don't have a good example for this off the top of my head (maybe Murderbot again? idk, i'm sleepy, fill in your own) but i'll tell you how to recognize when this is done well.

by definition, an unreliable narrator has some key misconceptions about their own world. so how do you tell what's going on as a reader? how do you know the writer isn't equally confused?

you connect the dots. solve the puzzle. in practice this is similar to reading a minimalist setting—but instead of just sparse clues, you also have a boatload of red herrings. you can catch some of these misleading details by comparing them to your real-world knowledge and saying "wait, this doesn't add up." other times, the false clues intentionally trick you by subverting those real world expectations.

the trick is in the consequences. regardless of what the narrator says, their actions should still have logical consequences. there should be things going on that the POV character doesn't know about. the character will be forced to learn and adapt their narrative because of these shifting circumstances. you can catch them in a lie. the inconsistencies themselves tell a story.

...

i'm gonna stop myself there because this post is long and i oughtta be sleeping. just. this is a distinction worth making. is it really bad worldbuilding, or is it simply not the genre you're craving today? learn the difference for your own sake. you'll have an easier time realizing if a story is something you'll find enjoyable to read, regardless of its actual quality.

#long post #writing #worldbuilding #media literacy #media analysis #the murderbot diaries #the chronicles of narnia #Christianity mention #rant #sleep deprived

235 notes · View notes

coffeeisfortheresponsible · 8 months

Note

wait what were the bible references in ninjago. i caught the iron sharpens iron one but there were more??

ok well not really references but more so connections and parallels (intentional or not)

so obviously the one everyone’s brain jumps to would probably be lloyd and jesus and like,, yes because you know;

prophesied savior of the world, to destroy the hold evil had over humanity, arrives as a powerless child instead of a mighty conqueror, (grand)son of god

you get my point

but you know who really has more interesting parallels with jesus’s death?? garmadon.

he is, after all, actually the son of god in ninjago

oh and btw this is like where the idea that this is more me doing a literary analysis on this instead of saying these are direct parallels to one specific part of the Bible.

so let’s start with the idea of snakes. there’s a lot of them in ninjago and in the Bible, generally meant to symbolize evil in both contexts.

one snake in particular has extra significance, the great devourer, which parallels the serpent (satan) in the garden of eden. both are kind of this, embodiment of evil that find their way into a peaceful, early in time, garden or general sanctuary where humanity is still good. so in ninjago terms this would be the beginning of wu and garmadon’s lives before garm gets bit and turned evil. there’s also this interesting connection between the action of biting (eve with the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, which brought sin into the world, and garmadon being the one to get bit and this brings evil into the creation of god (fsm). but anyways now we have our tainted humanity and this conflict between good and evil in a way.

then we skip to the scene where garmadon and lloyd fight in ‘the final battle’ and you get this weird double parallels of jesus in both garmadon AND lloyd.

garmadon, the son of god, gets all the evil in the world placed into him, and he is publicly killed for it (i know he didn’t actually die but yeah it like cleansed him so same point still stands), when really he didn’t do anything wrong. he was bit by accident, almost the universe’s sacrifice. (jesuscore lol ok but actually think the crucifixion)

but you also have lloyd, who is the savior, who is the one doing the cleansing of evil, he is the light

dialogue parallels here:

overlord: “Where there is light, there will always be shadow”

lloyd: “Unless my light is bright enough!"

john 1:15

“The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.”

not to mention garmadon’s name is the word Armageddon just mixed up so there’s that

oh and this was definitely intentional

#ciftr gets ninjago fans to read bible verses was not on anyone’s 2023 bingo #ninjago #lego ninjago #ciftrchats #ninjago lloyd #lloyd ninjago #christianity #literary analysis #media analysis #ninjago theory #ninjago garmadon #garmadon ninjago #ninjago season 1 #ninjago lore #ninjago season 2

99 notes · View notes

parachutingkitten · 19 days

Note

Awhile ago you answered a ask about if you support the lgbt community and your general response was “I do but it doesn’t line up with my religion”. Do you still feel this way?

See, I'm a bit conflicted here, because that ask was like, what? 6 years ago now? Like from when I very first joined tumblr as a child? So if you know about that ask, and have been following my blog that long, I hope that answer would be abundantly clear by now, but I'll just assume you stumbled across it at random... somehow.

I am extremely pro LGBTQ+. I am part of the LGTBQ+ community. I have since that first post discovered the asexual label and found it incredibly beneficial in understanding myself. I think all the letters in the acronym absolutely belong there, and deserve all the, if we're being real, basic human decencies they're asking and fighting for. I'd like my blog to be a safe space for everyone in the community, and I try my best to accommodate.

That being said, I am also LDS. How I parse my progressive views with being a part of, frankly, any Christian institution, most of which have historically been quite the opposite of progressive is something extremely personal to me, and which has been an in depth discovery process I am still on to this day, and which I'm not sure will ever really end. If you're genuinely interested in my personal religious wrestles, I'd be happy to talk in a more private forum, over dms, something like that, but as far as what you need to know to follow my ninjago blog um... I don't think it's super relevant.

I'm on ninjago tumblr. If I were in any way not pro LGBTQ+ I would have had to leave a long time ago. Have you seen how ridiculously queer everyone is around here?

Cole is gay, Geo is enby, Kai is bi, Sora is trans, and all the nindroids are very, very ace. A good day to you all.

#i've said it before #but a lot of my views align ridiculously well with CJ the X #who is an art obsessed queer christian gremlin with some great long form videos to listen to on repeat until you die #if you're interested in religious tinted media analysis #check them out #asks #thanks anon!

14 notes · View notes

rosalesbeausderholle · 1 year

Text

The new wave of liberal disregard for atheism as some kind of 'edgy dramatic emo thing' or an 'edgy man thing like crypto currency' rather than as a deeply held ideological conviction is so weird. Like the thing they claim it's edgy about atheist men is not even edgy it's like "there's no scientific proof of god's existence it's all made up!" that's not edgy dramatic behavior that's what happens when you follow rational thinking where it leads you. Human catholicism (or any religious institution) is flawed precisely because it preys on ignorant people's fear of a doomed afterlife. And that's hurtful, that's manipulative that has killed millions throughout history and it's still starting wars today. How do you see everything that people throughout history have done 'in the name of god' and still come to the conclusion that there must be a good god out there? What evidence do you have for that? How does it not simply make more sense that we're just people and people will always hurt each other for power and made up reasons to do so and intricate mythologies that justify us and/or explain what we don't know? How can you he aware that Greek mythology are just stories, but not your stories that you tell yourself about your god? When you look at all the irreparable harm that's been done in the name of religion, does freeing yourself from its constraints and saying fuck this fuck god or realizing that not of it actually matters because there's no evidence whatsoever that there's any truth to it, how does that not feel like the most liberating and revolutionary truth to you?

#religion #atheism #you don't need to be hurt by religion to think it's all bs #it doesn't need to be only oh religion is homophobic #it can be religion makes no sense #and yes you're also allowed to apply that same analysis to islam and judaism and buddhaism and paganism #who all have allowed misogynistic and discrminatory practices to some extent but also don't necessarily make logical sense #and that's neither edgy nor does it mean you condone religious persecution #because you can think religion is bs and still believe people should not be persecuted for their culture #but yeah you can believe religion is bullshit it's okay it doesn't have to be Christianity #also the idea that most media is atheist rather than some level of spiritual omfg #anyway this is all the fault of the americans

65 notes · View notes

ubi-goes-uwu · 1 year

Text

The Mistreatment of Tom Levitt on SMASH

I know that literally no one cares about this, but I want to talk about it, so I will.

In the short-lived TV Show "SMASH" (2012), which I quite liked and strongly reccomend -- as long as you don't watch season 2 --, there is something that really, really bothered me, and I haven't seen it adressed on the internet. Mainly, perhaps, because the show is 11 years old, and because it had a very niche audience.

But here it is: The show treats the character of Tom Levitt terribly.

I will now explain.

Romantic relationships take up a sizeable part of the screentime of "SMASH". it was a drama series in 2012, after all. We get long scenes exploring the romantic relationships of the two leads, Ivy and Karen. But that's a given. And, you say, Tom isn't a lead. And while that is technically correct, he is one of the main characters, seeing as the show structures itself around an ensemble rather than one or two leads.

Furthermore, the relationships of every other member of the main ensemble are treated with importance by the show, given time and thought.

Julia, for example, is Tom's writing partner, and they are equally important to the plot (they are at more or less on the same level vis-a-vis their primary/secondary-ness to the show). And her marriage is a big part of the show. Her husband and her son regularly appear, and she has an affair with an actor that takes up a significant amount of screentime. Not to mention that it brings us the most beautiful and emotional sex scene in the show. Also, her affair has a real impact on the plot of the show.

Eileen, a character who is arguably less prominent than Tom, has an important relationship with her ex-husband who used to produce musicals with her, and a passionate relationship with a younger man that ends up financing the production of Bombshell.

Now, the way that the show treats Derek's blatant abuse of authority is incredibly problematic. The show attempts to adress this in some way in season 2, but no one treats it seriously enough. But, I will say, even he gets to explore different relationships.

Now, Tom has a few relationships throughout the show. The first one with John, a lawyer introduced to him by his mother, the second one with Sam, one of the members of the ensemble of Bombshell, and Kyle, an up and coming writer in the field of musical theater.

There are many things that I didn't like about the way that Tom's relationships were approached. Mainly, they weren't given nearly as much screentime as the other ones on the show.

With Jonh,

Almost every single time they're out on a date, Tom gets a call from one of the other main characters and he has to go solve some problem or another;

Them not having slept together is brought up by John, and it's introduced as a plotpoint, but the the first time they sleep together is off-screen (we're not even shown, like, the lead-up to it), and the show informs us, for seemingly no reason, that it was really bad. They keep dating, but it's weirdly never brought up again;

Other problems in their relationship are introduced but never explored. Not only did they have unsatisfying sex, but John is a Republican while Tom is very clearly anti-Republican, and Tom is always prioritizing the other people in his life (the characters themselves speak on those at some point, but these plotlines are just dropped);

Their break-up is very underwhelming. They've been dating for most of the season, and they have one (1) fight while Tom is like, eating cereal, and then we never see from John again. Tom isn't even really upset.

John is never a priority for Tom. It could be a part of his character, but it feels like the show just doesn't care enough to explore Tom's relationships just for the sake of Tom himself. It acts flippantly about it and doesn't give it importance. Even if Tom doesn't really prioritize John in his life, the show could explore that, but, and here is the bigger issue, Tom is just never allowed to have a meaningful storyline outside of his platonic relationships with the rest of the main ensemble.

With Sam,

The fist time they go out, Tom kisses Sam and he basically slut-shames Tom, making him feel that it's his fault that he's alone even though he's 37 because of his *gay stereotype alert* commitment issues that "obviously" show in the fact that he's "easy";

They're rarely shown alone, and we don't ever see them "finally" having sex, even though they're together for a sizeable chunk of the show;

They have a nice relationship, Tom meets Sam's family, and it seems like they're in love, but Sam breaks up with Tom FULLY OFF SCREEN (like, we knew that he was going on tour for the Book of Mormon, but there's no goodbye at all).

It's strange that Sam is so slut-shamey with Tom when a big plotpoint between John and Tom was that Tom didn't want to have sex with him for an "unusual" amount of time (enough for John to ask him why they hadn't had sex), and it seems like this relationship was just used to shame gay men who enjoy a more bohemian style of life -- it's taking a swing at the gay stereotype of the high-maintenance libido man who has sex with every other man he comes across. Mostly because they don't even try to adress his commitment issues after this (at all! this conversation is literally never brought up again).

With Kyle,

Full disclosure: I couldn't get through season 2. It's really bad. But correct me if I'm wrong, but on episode 14 Kyle f*cking dies and the entirety of Tom and Kyle's relationship is one flashback that's less than 5 minutes in length. And why did they choose to include this secret fling? Tom is barely affected by Kyle's death. And Tom is, like, TWENTY years older than Kyle. Why do this?

The only good thing to come out of this is the audio of Billy Joel's Vienna sung beautifully by Christian Borle (Tom).

This relationship is not only all sorts of problematic, but it's also so short. And the only romantic relationship of Tom's on season 2. It hurts to see that we weren't allowed to see any of it (it had literally no screentime), and that even though the only scene we get to see of it is romantic and cute, Tom is basically unnafected.

This problem extends beyond Tom's romantic relationships.

Tom is basically not allowed to have independence.

His relationships don't matter as much as the other characters'. The only meaningful relationship he is allowed to have is with Julia. They have a really nice friendship. It even seems like he might evolve to have a good relationship with Derek after their big fight where we find out about their backstory (or at least one that's worth exploring), but that doesn't happen.

There are many things that are "almost there" about Tom. They bring up aspects of his character or his life that could be worth exploring, but they're never given any time or care, and the show just sort of forgets about them (his literal character is re-shapeable so that he can serve any purpose in the narrative).

Mostly, he exists on the show to support other characters. He is always sacrificing his own time in being there for Ivy 24/7. And while his relationship with Julia is very nice, he is heartbreakingly attached to their family (he has no family from what we see on the show) while they don't really value him in the same way.

He's always just so worried about everyone else's problems, and not really focused on himself, it's like he's a halfway developed "Gay Best Friend".

He just deserved better.

(This is mostly fueled by the fact that I love Christian Borle so much, and I would like to see him playing fleshed out characters in dramas. He's underrated. Yes, he is great in comedic roles, but he's got range, and he's really good in Smash and Falsettos when he plays more serious roles.)

Anyway, that's that. Tom Levitt had everything to be a good, fleshed out character. But the show didn't really care enough about him.

Also, I hate that SMASH had so may straight sex scenes but was completely unwilling to film two men doing anything other than chastely kissing or laying a foot away from each other in bed half-naked.

#smash tv #smash #bombshell #tom levitt #christian borle #homophobia #gay best friend #gay characters in media #tv analysis

83 notes · View notes

raointean · 11 months

Text

"Hellfire" is way too relatable to young, queer Christians (or former Christians)

I'll elaborate

Fair warning, I'll be discussing the relationship between queerness (specifically sexuality), religion, and faith, homophobia, internalized homophobia, and misdirected blame.

I'll start this off by saying I was raised in a fairly conservative church from the age of 2 onward. I learned that homosexuality was a horrible sin, but that queer people needed love and support without acceptance. Basically, hate the sin, love the sinner.

And then I figured out I liked girls and proceeded to have a months-long crisis of faith that I couldn't talk to anyone about. "Hellfire" from The Hunchback of Notre Dame was actually a super helpful song in that time because, at its core, it is a song about sexuality and religion coming into conflict. (There's also a solid dose of racism and misogyny in that song, but that's a different post)

Beata Maria

You know I am a righteous man

Of my virtue I am justly proud

As a protestant, I prayed to God instead of Mary, but here, he's talking about the pride he takes in his status within the church. He's ashamed of his feelings, so he's puffing himself up defensively. He may also be trying to show Mary, "Hey, look at all I've done for you! I've done everything you asked! Why are you cursing me with this horrid disease?"

What he doesn't understand is that it's not a disease. He's just experiencing normal, human attraction and panicking because he's been taught that those feelings absolutely cannot co-exist with his position/faith.

Beata Maria

You know I'm so much purer than

The common, vulgar, weak, licentious crowd

Again, beefing himself up here. Also revealing his pridefulness.

Then tell me, Maria

Why I see her dancing there

Why her smold'ring eyes still scorch my soul

I feel her, I see her

The sun caught in her raven hair

Is blazing in me out of all control

Women, dude. Women are gorgeous. Here, he's expressing his frustration at his own inability to control his "bad" feelings. He also seems to be asking Mary why God is punishing him with a temptation he's ill-equipped to handle. (God generally allows Christians to be tempted by such things so that we recognize how much we need Him, for anyone who's curious about the theology there).

Like fire

Hellfire

This fire in my skin

This burning

Desire

Is turning me to sin

Jesus says in Matthew 5 that thinking about sin (lust/adultery in this particular case) is just as bad as committing the sin itself in God's eyes. As I said above, God is probably trying to show Frollo that he's a sinful person just like everyone else, and shouldn't hold himself above everyone else. Unfortunately, Frollo didn't learn that lesson and, well, the rest of the movie happened.

In relation to queerness, since homosexuality is taught to be a sin, thinking about someone of the same sex as you in a romantic light is seen as just as bad as actually dating them. I use the romantic example instead of the attraction example because lust is a sin, but loving and wanting a relationship with someone is not! Young, queer people may have been taught that it is, however, which makes that last line particularly devastating.

It's not my fault

I'm not to blame

It is the g*psy girl

The witch who sent this flame

Now, he's trying to blame the person he's attracted to for his own feelings and absolve himself of blame. Unfortunately, for Christians who are discovering their attraction to fellow men or women, the guilt can be crushing! We're often taught about non-heterosexuality as one of the most taboo of sins! When you find out that you are "one of those heathen, godless gays" a lot of people will do everything in their power to get out from under the blame. Surely, it can't be their own fault! It must be the fault of the person they're attracted to, or that episode of glee they saw, or even God Himself for tempting them!

Obviously, this blame is misplaced. Queerness isn't caused. It just is. And like all of the other diversities God created, it has a place and a purpose.

It's not my fault

If in God's plan

He made the devil so much

Stronger than a man

Mood. Frollo has switched from blaming Esmeralda for his attraction to blaming God. (Also, if this were sung by a woman, that "made the devil so much stronger than a man" line takes on an entirely different meaning)

Protect me, Maria

Don't let the siren cast her spell

Don't let her fire sear my flesh and bone

Here, he's begging for protection and relief. He wants things to go back to the way they were. He wants to be free of the moral conflict instead of walking through it. It's a very relatable sentiment! Finding out that you're The Other your community has warned you about your whole life flips your world on its head!

In order to reconcile your sexuality and your faith, you cannot shy away from the conflict, no matter how painful it is! You have to do your own research. You have to think your own thoughts. You have to question everything you've been taught. But I promise, you will come out better for it.

Destroy Esmeralda

And let her taste the fires of Hell!

Or else let her be mine and mine alone

This goes deeper into the "free me from this moral conflict" point. There are really only a few ways that can be done. You can abandon your faith, repress your sexuality, or force the two to get along. Abandoning one's faith is the most common reaction in the queer community because faith, unlike sexuality, is a lifestyle you can choose. However, for a lot of people, their faith is too important to lose.

That only leaves two options. Repressing one's sexuality is usually very damaging to one's mental health. Bottling up all the guilt and shame however, is sometimes easier than doing the research and reevaluating one's worldview.

The "or else let her be mine and mine alone" is Frollo pleading with Mary to give him a way to express his sexuality in a religiously acceptable way. Luckily, that's pretty easy for queer Christians! The Bible gives a lot of tips and expectations for marriages. They are generally framed for hetero couples (because they're the most common), but they apply to homosexual couples as well. You just need to read between the lines.

Paul says in Corinthians 7 that some people should not be married at all (and I think he also implies that he's ace?). That means that ace/aro people and those in queerplatonic relationships are also still in line with the Bible! No conflict there.

Hellfire

Dark fire

Now gypsy, it's your turn

Choose me or

Your pyre

Be mine or you will burn

This is 100% Frollo making Esmeralda responsible for his feelings and not taking accountability for his actions. For the record, that is something you should definitely not do!

God have mercy on her

God have mercy on me

But she will be mine

Or she will burn!

Okay, the first two lines are nice. He's asking for clemency on Esmeralda's behalf for her (imagined) sin of seduction. Then, he asks for clemency for his own (not imagined) sin of lust (but alas, not his pride). The last two lines are a false dichotomy he's created by believing his lust is Esmeralda's fault.

In summary, this song was way too relatable to little 14-year-old me. If you are going through the same thing, don't abandon your faith and don't ignore your feelings. There's a middle ground, I promise. You just need to do your own research and think your own thoughts, as hard as that may be in practice.

Also, be careful who you ask questions to. Remember that your pastors at your conservative church, well-meaning as they may be, have a vested interest in keeping you ignorant of the queer community. Try to find both sides of the story and, if you can do so safely, talk to other queer Christians.

39 notes · View notes

alpaca-clouds · 9 months

Text

Religion in Castlevania

So, uhm. Castlevania has a strange relationship to the concept of religion, right? The games are of course Japanese and to the average Japanese person Christianity is about doused in as much mysticism and alieness as Shinto is to the average white person. As such the games do kinda mirror this like many other Japanese media with European inspired settings. We will get a lot of Christian symbolism and maybe a line or two referencing it, but as much as the average western story using Shinto and Buddhism, it is barely more than set-dressing. It is not offensive or anything, just also not very in depth

The series meanwhile runs into the opposite problem. It is a western production first and foremost and in western circles the relation people have towards religion is... complicated. Especially when it comes to Christianity. Because the fact is that you really can only do wrong.

You show Christianity as something positive? Yeah, fuck it, you are doing white supremacist propaganda (because Christianity sadly is tied to that other believe as a vehicle. Not because of anything inherent to Christianity, just because of history). You show Christianity as something negative? Fuck you, you hate all Christians and are basically the antichrist time to boycot you!

Which leads to the interesting phenomenon that Castlevania has a Muslim character whose relationship with his religion is in depth explored. While Christianity... is somewhat iffy.

First and foremost: The only explicitly Christian characters we have are bad guy who get killed within the first season. Namely the bishop and the arch bishop. Who of course use their religion as a tool to spread hatred. In this case of witches. (Note to self: Write a blog about witch hunts.) And then there are of course the corrupted monks in season 3. The show does not go so far to imply "Christianity = Bad", especially as the show does have some no-dialogue characters who end up siding with the protagonists and what not. But... It also does not have an explicitly positive portrayel of religion, right?

Now, from our main characters outside of Isaac we barely know anything about their religious affiliation.

We know that Sypha believes in Jeshoa (Jesus) and some of the bible stories, but in a way that actually frames God as a vengeful, bad god, rather than a force of good. This is never further explored, though. It is basically two lines over the course of the series we get. All we know is: Yes, she believes it. She things Jeshoa was okay and that God is bad and hates the speakers.

And for the others?

We know nothing about the relation Trevor and Alucard have towards religion, and while there is like two very vague hints that Hector might be of Jewish descent we also do not learn much about that.

And it is kinda ironic, really. While the games do have very little in terms of dialogue linking Alucard to Christianity, there for sure is endless symbolism of him holding rosaries and what not. And it would have been interesting to explore.

Especially given that I also think that the relation between Dracula/Mathias and religion would be super interesting to explore and would be fun to see more about. But of course... we do not get that.

And while it is to be assumed that the Belmonts should be Christian... Well, outside of him cussing out God a lot, there is not a lot of him and his religious affiliation going on.

Which is kinda a pity. Because I found it makes for interesting storytelling. Especially in a world like this.

I mean, we know for a fact that priests can bless water and through this act turn it into a weapon against vampires and demons. And it would be such a fun thing to discuss, whether this actually means they get that power from God - or whether they just use a sort of spell. (Especially given that I somehow doubt that God is gonna channel his power through an undead bishop, you know? Making me think that the zombie bishop rather uses a spell.)

Side note: I would've totally loved to see Isaac use some Muslim prayer to hurt a vampire or demon. That would have been kinda fun - and it is something we barely see in media.

But there is of course more than that: The people in the Castlevania world (especially the series) live in a world where the existence of the afterlife is undeniable, based on the fact that people can literally summon souls from there. People can have a long discussion on whether or not that actually is hell - but it is undeniable that it is an afterlife. It is a place where souls move to after death.

And I do have to wonder how that would affect the people's relationship to religion?

I honestly never realized how interesting it is to write about religious characters. Because due to my own religious trauma, I just stayed the hell away from religion in my writing. Like, sure, in my own vampire novel there is a subplot about the main characters religious trauma (being a queer kid in a conservative Christian household). But she had left her religion behind and all that.

So... me writing Isaac in my fics was literally the first time I ever wrote a religious character in a story who was not framed negatively. And I learned that it actually... can do so much to enrich a story. Because it allows you as a writer to have yet another point of view to frame the story through.

And yes, it also ended up with me thinking a lot on religious backgrounds for the characters and their relation to religion - especially inside a world, where, again, the existence of an afterlife is undeniable.

And honestly, one of the favorite things to me in terms of writing was this bit about Gilles de Rais loosing his religion, upon realizing the corruption of the church. As a more gutteral and painful experience, than I have written before.

Also: Yeah, I have FlysEyes (who I have christened Nicolai, to give him a proper name) still a practicing Christian. Because that is kinda fun.

#castlevania #castlevania netflix #religion #christianity #western media struggles with religion #but japanese media does too #analysis #headcanons

25 notes · View notes

not-souleaterpost · 1 month

Text

Trigun - Inspired by the movie "Wise blood"?

(maybe the book too but havent read it)

Anyways, first I thought it would just be funny to point out some surface visual references of charachters which prolly are too generic to be proof of anything.

I mean ehh thats generic enough-

Well that too-

Well the hat and crazy eyes are there

Well the last more recalls Vash's own injurys

(think there is a scene in his Eriks disguise that match more)

But ok, one could say that this is as arbitrary as any other of my posts that dont deserve to be posted - Until I saw the full movie and got that there may be a deeper and more interessting connection

So trigun is know to have atleast Christian-adjasent themes and the author, even if never or not anymore Christian, seems to have a familiarity and interest with it that goes beyond the usuall japanese "wow cool crossess" and pop kabalah stuff (like NGE and shit or persona having all those occcult demon shit)

So what does it have to do with the movie? Well it is one exploring a theme that seems to be simmilar, even if Wise Blood presents it in a more macabre, black-humor, less sentimental and uplifting way

A world without God - or better said Christ/Love/Forgivness

Triguns whole point about Vash not killing anybody IS in the end an expression of the want of the world to be able to heal, to get better, to people to connect in a true way, of going beyond tricks and self serving rational scientfic interests

Thats why Knifes is kinda a representation of cold, uncarring survival of the fittest, of evolution, of the rule of superior beings by force and cold calculation and deception.

To make a parralel to the movie, it shows a man who cant see Christ, the power of redemption of something beyond himself and his own interests and striving - even if he feels justified by partly believing the things he rejects.

But in the end without them, it becomes a self fullfiling prophecy - his "Church without Christ" - without healing of the blind and resurection, without redemption - it condems him to that, making him blind and dead, and his atempts at repenting for killing some guy for a petty reason futile - not even being able to recupareta the love he gets from a landlady.

The theme of a fake preacher is then what is reflected in Wolfwood in Trigun, who is also just a killer, trained by another one, who can in the end find redemption in death and doing the right thing, even if it has a tragedy to it.

And in a way that illuminates Vash's whole journey more, why he couldnt give up and why it was important for him to find love and not become a more suffisticated monkey in a zoo who's hand only his brother would want to shake...

And thats why Vash not killing is actually cool and good and not stupid - cause of a random movie that butchered a book that prolly was tottally different.

But why the self.depreciation? Isnt apreciating the world and creation, "art", not a dialog, a call and response of unlikely meetings?

If not: Yeah...Sorry

#trigun #wise blood #wiseblood #christianity #analysis #comparison #thematic comparison #dialectical materialism #yeah...sorry #didnt read the book so sorry if that would make more sense #anyways interesting movie #for a moment you think its gonna be a corny oh bad people help each other movie but nah lol #also funny but also sad #and shows how many old gems there are I and most others havent seen #also yeah I wanna quit social media as I said but this was too interesting to not share even if I alone care lol #but trying again even if I fail after two days like allways lol pray for me post-ironically

7 notes · View notes

samwisethewitch · 5 months

Text

Let's Talk About Religious Appropriation and Christianity

In my previous post, I talked about why religious appropriation matters and why it genuinely impacts pagan communities when culturally Christian authors take our gods out of context. Now I wanna talk about why it doesn't go the other way.

Religious appropriation is when someone from a dominant religious group misuses symbols or practices from a marginalized religion. (Reminder: marginalized means an identity or group is treated as insignificant or pushed to the periphery.) There is an element of power imbalance to appropriation.

In the United States, where I live, Christianity is the dominant religious group. Even Americans who are not practicing Christians themselves are culturally Christian -- they were raised in a culture where Christianity is assumed to be the default. In other parts of the world, the dominant religion may be another faith like Buddhism, Islam, or something else. I will be talking about Christianity in this post because that's my experience, but just remember that this isn't about theology so much as social influence.

Someone living in a culturally Christian society might use Christian symbols or elements in their art for a lot of different reasons. It might be a sincere expression of faith because the artist is a Christian (see: C.S. Lewis). The artist might use Christian symbols because they are widely known and will be easily recognized by their audience (see: It's a Wonderful Life). The artist might use Christian symbols outside of their original context or in a subversion of that context to create comedy (see: Dogma by Kevin Smith) or horror (see: Rosemary's Baby). And finally, they might use those symbols as a critique or satire of organized Christianity (see: Children of the Corn).

In any of those cases, it's highly unlikely that the depiction in this media property is going to overshadow actual Christian practices. Christianity is one of the most widely practiced religions in the world. There are over 2 billion Christians globally. 63% of Americans identify as Christians. (And that number is at an all time low! In older generations, it's higher!) And because of the built-in hierarchy of Christianity, there are designated spokespeople who can speak up to set the record straight.

For a real life example of this, let's think about The Da Vinci Code. For those who don't know, The Da Vinci Code is a thriller novel written by Dan Brown. A major plot point in the story is the reveal that Jesus Christ had sex and fathered children with Mary Magdalene, which is considered a heresy by most Christians. The Catholic Church specifically had a huge negative reaction to Dan Brown writing about them spending 2,000+ years intentionally covering up the fact that Jesus fucked.

And The Da Vinci Code had a HUGE impact on pop culture. The book has sold over 80 million copies in 44 languages. The movie stars huge actors like Tom Hanks and Sir Ian McKellan and was the second-highest grossing film of 2006. The massive protests drew even more media attention. This story was a very big deal for a couple of years.

And yet, most people in America and other culturally Christian countries still know that, in Christian lore, Jesus died without marrying or fathering children. Even people who have read The Da Vinci Code or seen the movie can usually recognize that the whole Mary Magdalene thing is fiction. Even if someone did come away thinking Jesus getting it on with Mary Magdalene was historical fact, they're likely to encounter other media at some point that will depict Jesus as unmarried.

More people do not believe Jesus fucked because of The Da Vinci Code. It has not significantly changed popular perceptions of Christianity, or even of Catholicism. This is because Christianity, and specifically the Catholic Church, are huge institutions with both the power and the platform to set the record straight.

Marginalized religions do not have that kind of power or platform, which is why religious appropriation is a much bigger deal for us. In general, you can't appropriate something from a dominant cultural group.

#long post #religious appropriation #cultural appropriation #christianity #culturally christian #media studies #media analysis #the da vinci code #pop culture paganism #witchblr #paganblr

18 notes · View notes

lovelypurpletyphoon · 3 months

Text

Helluva Boss and Hazbin Hotel from a Christian perspective:

I'm expecting to possibly get some negative feedback from this, but I'm okay with that.

So, some of you folks might know that I'm a Christian. I grew up in church, so Jesus is my homie. I'm deeply against the toxicity and hatred in the church today. A while back I decided to check out Helluva Boss to see what all the fuss was about. It's an interesting show, and it prompts ideas for discussions.

Granted, it has flaws, and I've heard that Vivziepop shares many negative beliefs that I've seen in the church. Just watching the show and reading up on the lore, I feel like Vivzie or at least some people on the writing team may have deep religious trauma. Who could blame them with all the horrible things done in the name of God.

I do like some of the worldbuilding, and it's only a human response to laugh at the occasional dick joke. (I like sinners and such taking on an appearance based on how they died) There are many things I would probably do differently. I can't see lucifer as a good guy due to my upbringing. I just can't, I'm sorry. But I do find sympathetic demon characters interesting.

The difference between Heaven and Hell has me thinking of how people can be born into unfortunate situations, living in misery for their whole lives because nobody bothers to change the system. It's a very interesting analogy.

If I were to write the show, I'd have The Church be the main antagonist, as opposed to Heaven itself. Idk, this made more sense in my head. Either that or do something similar to Bloodborne, I'll be honest, there's deep rooted evil in the modern christian church. I feel like a lot of these people who push for anti-gay laws and preach doomsday cult stuff won't find themselves in heaven. Folks like that only push people away.

I also think the show has a similar problem to Dragon Ball Z, in that the lore isn't planned out. Writing lore as you go, as opposed to having a plan from the start, will create inconsistencies in said lore. It's frustrating for writers and fans who like to do in-depth media analysis.

If I were to write my own version of HB and HH, it probably wouldn't even be the same show anymore. My upbringing would just leave a different mark on things that not all people would like. Given my impression of the fandom, I feel like creating my own version would be like showing a Brazilian Black Tarantula to someone who's deathly afraid of spiders and has been hurt by them in the past. The result would be someone understandably fleeing from anything even somewhat resembling what hurt them.

In conclusion, I'll keep observing this fandom. I'm not sure if I even consider myself part of it, because my upbringing makes me feel like something of an outsider. But I can agree on certain things, like Fizz and Ozzie being adorable together and that Moxxie is doing his best. I will also be roleplaying on Discord to explore various concepts, cuz my adhd gets in the way of fic writing.

#tw christianity #christianity #helluva boss #hazbin hotel #Just musing on the perspective on stuff #helluva boss rewrite?#media analysis #my two bits worth

11 notes · View notes

shadowpeachyuri · 7 months

Note

Do you consider Macaque redeemed?

well, THAT is a very interesting question!

first off: do i think he's a good person now?

no. not really. he's still a huge asshole with a lot of problems, even if he's starting to work on them and he's not actively malicious about it anymore.

but that's not all redemption is, is it?

ok, so first off, i'm just going to throw out that first definition with regards to macaque. mk isn't a savior, he's a catalyst for mac's growth. there isn't a saving/being saved thing that's happening- macaque is maturing, growing, learning he has options. he's being pushed out of his passive mindset- being saved doesn't really factor in there.

the second one, though. i like the "clearing a debt" part. this part implies freedom, a fulfilled obligation, action. this one, i'd say, fits macaque's character a lot better- he even directly talks about "[repaying] his debt to the Lady Bone Demon" so he can be "free of this nightmare."

at the end of season 3, thanks to mk reading him like a fucking Book and the events that followed, macaque is no longer bound to LBD. his debt is canceled. is that not, in a sense, redemption? he has his freedom now- or does he? he's been redeemed in that sense, but that doesn't make him a good person, and it doesn't mean he doesn't have other things still in his way.

SO, to answer your question: no, no I don't. I think lego monkie kid is a show that's generally more complicated than that. macaque isn't "good" or "bad"- he's some of both! "redeemed" here implies finality now. "do you consider macaque to be Good Now?" no. his story isn't done yet. none of them are. ask me again at the end and we'll see!

#ask!!#anon ask!!#sorry man u asked a girl who was raised christian and loves etymology and media analysis her thoughts on redemption #this is my trap card #lmk analysis #god i hope this makes sense

14 notes · View notes

da-xiao-jie · 2 years

Text

Okay! To start off, this is just observation and something I personally picked up while watching FMAB for the first time. I’m not usually super analytical or stuff, but the themes and symbolism pouring out of this show are really, truly something. This was a thing that I noticed as a person of faith and i thought it’d be cool to type it out.

Without further ado, remember that scene in FMAB (ep 41, i think) where Edward and Kimblee are fighting in the mine shaft tunnels and Ed “incapacitates” Kimblee before Kimblee reveals his philospher’s stone and pretty much wipes the floor with Ed and buries his henchmen and ultimately Ed ends up like this:

Kimblee said before he did all this, but it was something along the lines of “you should’ve killed me. Look at where your mercy’s gotten you?”

And then the next time we see Ed, he’s impaled through the side, bleeding extensively.

And, I know, there’s a lot of interpretation of FMAB as anti-religious and there’s definitely some things to indicate that, but my brain just went ding! and despite being the least analytical person out there, dots were connected(insert meme here)

I doubt it was intentional, but the first thing that ran through my head was that the cost of mercy was blood.

The second was that Ed was pierced through his side.

I’m not trying to say that Ed is a Christ figure. But the theme is there. That in order to show Kimblee mercy, in order to keep from killing him, Edward’s blood was spilled.

Anyway, it was something that I found particularly compelling and whether or not it was an intentional thing doesn’t especially matter to me.

#fmab #fma brotherhood #edward elric #solf j. kimblee #christianity #religion #worldview #anime analysis #anime through a christian’s eyes #fullmetal alchimist brotherhood #please don’t come for me #let me appreciate these themes #media through a christian’s eyes #imperfect picture of christ

80 notes · View notes

catsconflictscopicsandchamomile · 2 years

Text

ok yknow what? The Winchesters panel is tomorrow, the PILOT is NEXT WEEK, I don’t want to wait til november/til i can format this to work with ao3. Here yall go. Sorry for the long post, I fixed the entire finale.

Sam and Dean Winchester are not human beings. It’s hard to say if they ever were, but they definitely aren’t anymore. This may sound strange, but hear me out: many sources agree that descendants of Cain are not human, by definition. Even aside from that, if a person repeatedly dies and more or less physically fights their way out of every variety of Christian afterlife, it would be a considerable stretch of logic to still consider them a fully human being. Unfortunately for anyone trying to figure out exactly what Sam and Dean are, the only instance of a confirmed Descendant Of Cain is Grendel, from Beowulf. (source: Beowulf, translation by Seamus Heaney, lines 100-110)

“Grendel was the name of this grim demon Haunting the marches, marauding round the heath And the desolate fens; he had dwelt for a time In misery among the banished monsters, Cain’s clan, whom the creator had outlawed And condemned as outcasts. For the killing of Abel The Eternal Lord had exacted a price: Cain got no good from committing that murder Because the Almighty made him anathema, And out of the curse of his exile there sprang Ogres and elves and evil phantoms And the giants too who strove with God Time and again until He gave them their final reward.”

In terms of appearance, Grendel is never described in the text. He has been referred to as an archetype, a monster, an evil or corrupted human, a demon, or a forest spirit. In Beowulf, Grendel was immune to iron weapons ( Beowulf lines 986-989) but the only other widely accepted canon source on the subject, the book “Grendel” by John Gardner, puts forward the idea that that specific power comes from the outside source of The Dragon (Gardner, 75).

When Grendel was killed, his mother (also a monster of some sort) came back the next night for revenge/further murdering. While this is not a 1:1 comparison, it seems a fair guess to say that these creatures (I will be referring to them as Grendels from here onward) usually come in pairs and have strong familial loyalty. In Supernatural, the dynamic is a bit reversed: while they are siblings, Dean did essentially raise Sam. Despite this, Dean takes the main-Grendel role of initiating melee combat, while Sam takes the role held by the original Grendel’s Mother, as the more cautious and magic-focused backup/range fighter (Or at least, Sam SHOULD be doing that. Instead he lives his life like a dnd wizard trying to play a tank, refusing to learn actual magic and getting KO’d in every fight.)

----------

Moving on, let’s talk about Cas, or Cassiel in the actual Lore (but also spelled Castiel, Kafziel, Qafziel, etc). Yes, Cassiel is a real angel, thought he is not mentioned in the bible at all. In fact, he mainly exists in Kabbalistic studies, some extra-canonical Christian texts, various esoteric beliefs, and, randomly, as a tragic main character in a fairly obscure German Art House film about angels (Faraway, So Close, dir. Wim Wenders). Cassiel’s history of use as a tragic (and ultimately doomed) figure in modern media is likely due to certain aspects of his lore: *note: for this and following sections, I have opted to use screenshots directly from the source material

(Of course he likes crocodiles. It's the perfect level of random)

(Still not sure how Supernatural managed to totally flip the color scheme)

-------------

It is extremely ironic that Cassiel, an angel that Kripke has said he chose “at random” as a name for the character in Supernatural, followed the lore so perfectly that many things about Cassiel work to fill in some much-needed context/backstory for Our Cas. Setting this aside, however, let’s look at the part that is most relevant to the finale.

Though he is also associated with Cybelle and Proserpina/Persephone, due to his rulership of the planet Saturn, Cassiel has much stronger ties to the god Saturn, the zodiac sign of Capricorn, and the new year, all of which only strengthen his connections to the archetypes of death, rebirth and time.

Cas, in a way, is Saturn, or at least a different version/manifestation of that being. The Lord Of Time, an uncommonly isolated spirit of midwinter and the new year, associated with agriculture and the harvest, the dude who Saturnalia is for, the Lord of Misrule in his chaotic aspect, etc, etc....

Also, Saturn is the Roman version of the titan Kronos. We meet Kronos one time in spn canon, in Season 7 episode 12. He was largely forgotten as a monster-of-the-week encounter, but after Cas’ final death in season 15, the fandom took renewed notice of Kronos, specifically his dying foretelling the futures of Sam, Dean and Cas:

Coincidentally, in this episode, Kronos was killed by the Winchesters for Doing Bad Guy Things in order to protect a human who he’d fallen in love with, in defiance of that human being fated to die- A parallel to Cas & Dean’s relationship that only becomes more apparent as the series progresses

In Greco-Roman mythology, Saturn/Kronos is overthrown by the gods, Zeus (his son) becomes king in his place, and Kronos is chopped to pieces and, as he is immortal and unable to be fully killed, thrown into the pit of Tartarus:

Tartarus is by far the best match I’ve seen to what, and why, The Empty is. Note that Tartarus, like The Empty, is both a place and a primordial deity at the same time.

*fun fact- even though Saturn was FAR more respected in Rome, his statues’ feet were still bound with wool to symbolically “bind” the god’s chaos, and were only unbound during Saturnalia, when social roles were meant to be overturned

--------------

Before detaling the actual events of the finale, here’s a rundown of the other major characters:

-Jack is Jack. Literally. A “Jack” is a folkloric archetype from northern Europe, think of Jack The Giant Killer, Jack Frost, Jack And The Beanstalk, Jack O’ The Lantern. Stories often portray all of these Jacks as some variation of the same person. “Jack” as a character is usually young, either naive or “foolish”, bold, impulsive, and unshakeable. In fact, Jack in folklore is often found interacting with God and Satan, tricking and/or humiliating them both, usually within the same story. In many endings of the tale, Jack finds himself banned from Heaven AND Hell for his actions, and, depending on the story, either tricks his way back into heaven in a way that makes it impossible for him to be kicked back out, or, more commonly, convinces Satan to give him one of Hell’s embers to see and keep warm by, and wandering forever with that light, becomes Jack O’ The Lantern. This does mean that our Jack will likely not last long as God. Jacks, no matter how much power they get, rarely manage to keep it. However, could there be any better choice than Jack Kline to be in charge of Halloween?

(The answer is no. This is perfect.)

-Baby/The Impala, is, as much of the fandom has theorized for years, a sentient creature that can take human form. Weirdly, I have found no Human!Impala theories or fics that references Baby’s ability to travel impossible distances (such as Kansas to LA in less than a night), which make it very obvious that Baby is not a car. Specifically, Baby is a Pooka, a type of Fae shapeshifter known for taking equine form:

While John Winchester did buy a Chevrolet Impala, it is doubtful that this car lasted long into Sam and Dean’s childhood. It’s more than likely that John wrecked the original car driving drunk, since the most common way in which someone can encounter (and possibly control) a Pooka goes as such:

John probably used the above-mentioned horsehair bridle method used to gain control of her, specifically by wrapping the hairs around the car‘s keyring, as the keys to a car are the closest equivalent to a horse’s bridle. Additionally, while the car itself has been heavily damaged in-canon, the keys have remained intact. John never told Sam and Dean about the change to their car, but then again, he never told them a lot of important things.

Whatever Baby may have thought of John Winchester, I imagine that having two baby Grendels constantly left in her “care” was more than enough for her to feel some bond or responsibility towards Sam and Dean from fairly early on.

Also, Dean took REALLY good care of her, talked to her, and almost definitely left a few Playboy magazines in the car- an unwittingly amazing gift for a shapeshifter who often appears as a human with rabbit ears.

Lastly, Fae really, REALLY, don’t like pet dogs. Remember this. It is going to be extremely relevant.

*last minute edit: Bobby is a Tanuki. This is relevant to absolutely nothing, but is very funny. Balls

--------

Now, as for the actual events of the finale:

-Cold Iron has been a long-running concept throughout spn canon, primarily for its ability to cancel magic and either weaken or insta-kill all sorts of things, including demons and Fae. In America, cold-wrought iron was phased out of use as a construction material towards the end of the 1800s. Coincidentally, the barn from the finale episode matches the construction of barns from the mid-late 1800s. In case I’m not being clear here: Dean is not human. Dean is a Grendel (*last minute edit: even if he still was still somewhat human before s15, Sam and Dean worked with Michael and Lucifer in 15x19. Dean had just lost the love of his life, the entire human population of the world had vanished, and he was about to literally fight god. He would have easily been desperate enough to agree to let Lucifer kill/turn him on the spot in exchange for Cas/returning everyone who got thanos snapped/the ability to win a fistfight against Literal God). With no angels, Pookas or other beings alive to magically protect him, and no idea that he had to/was able to protect himself, Dean was not immune to iron. Staking a demon or Fae through the back with cold iron will kill it.

That’s Dean’s death explained. What about Sam? ...Buckle up, because this is where it gets wild.

-Féar Gortach/Hungry Grass is definitely an obscure cryptid. It is an Irish spirit/phenomena that takes the form of a patch of grass or field that (depending on the telling) has been cursed by Fairies, covers a grave, is related to the famine, or any combination of these things. There are not many accounts of it, but this one is one of the most well known, and also extremely relevant here. It’s a short read, but I have included screenshots of the relevant section below:

(*Last Minute Edit: it could have been a different Fae- lots of more malevolent Fae or Fae-aligned creatures use this method to harm or kill humans., but I personally would bet on this one)

Earlier in spn canon, Sam and Dean defeated, but did not kill, the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Their encounter with Famine was unique, both because of Famine’s method of preying on the individual weaknesses of each person, and because of the encounter’s clear open-endedness.

Many, many stories exist of people who are abducted by Fae or similar creatures and, while under that creature’s power, experience a whole lifetime within the space of a day (or a day over the course of a whole lifetime, but the first version is the one relevant here). If this person can escape the illusion, they are often drastically physically aged due to the experience.

This is the last image we see of Sam in the flash-forward, before he dies.

This is the horseman of Famine

This is Sam before the finale

And THIS is how Sam’s “Son” appears at Sam’s death in the flash-forward.

So, as a play-by-play:

-Cas, seemingly like every other entity with rulership over Saturn, got sucked into Tartarus.

-Chuck (whether or not he regained power in Heaven later) gives Sam and Dean a final “fuck you” by sending them a pet dog, which, while definitely a Good Boy, interferes with Baby’s ability to protect them from most Fae magic, including their own weakness to Cold Iron.

- In the final fight with the mimes, Dean is shoved over an iron stake, and, since neither Sam is not aware of his and Dean’s true nature, Dean dies before Sam can figure out what is happening. (*last minute edit: Dean probably asked Sam not to bring him back bc 1) where do Grendels even GO when they die, 2) they might go to Tartarus, and Dean is obviously extremely okay with that, and most importantly 3) he does not want his little brother’s last memory of him to be finding out that he’s a demon/bringing him back and possibly having to kill him)

-Sam walks out of the barn to get whatever you need to get in that situation, and, since he’s grieving and desperate, he’s an easy target for the hungry grass, which is waiting in the cornfields surrounding the barn. My best guess is that the grass used its illusions to appear as either Eileen, or someone else that Sam trusted, and led him deeper into the field by promising a way to have Dean back. By the next morning, Sam is dead in the cornfield less than 50 feet from the barn, and Famine, having drained every last bit of magic/energy/life force from Sam, now appears as the young man we see in Sam’s final moments.

-Sam and Dean are haunting the bridge from the final scene (ironic). (*last minute edit: at least Dean is. he’s obviously still there. where tf is Sam. is he on the bridge also, just stuck in a DIFFERENT time loop? if so that’s fucked up, but if not. WHERE IS HE)

-Jack is probably back on earth and/or already having a great time as The New King Of Halloween (*last minute edit. before anyone says he should be working on saving Sam/Dean/Cas. he’s FIVE YEARS OLD. LET HIM BE A KID IN WHATEVER WAY HE CAN)

-Baby is either bothering Adam/Michael (as she still serves the Winchester family line), or has been captured by Famine, if he took the keyring when he killed Sam.

*Also, despite this scene being the butt of many fandom jokes, Dean got to heaven and immediately started driving because the LAST time he ended up in heaven, he got out by following the highway, and found out he was dead by hearing Cas talk to him over the car radio (s5 ep16).

Now, how can this be fixed?

For Sam and Dean, there are two options. The first assumes that there is at least some echo of them haunting that bridge. I am admittedly unsure as to whether this would mean that part of Heaven is linked to the bridge, or that, like many ghosts, Sam and Dean are stuck to one physical location while believing that they are able to move freely. While there is very little written on how to reverse the effects of Cold Iron OR the Hungry Grass, it is widely accepted that running water can be a source of healing for some Fae, and harm for others. As the original Grendel lived in a lake, I’m assuming that Grendels are the type to be healed by water. Also, it has an easy point of access in current canon, and is hilarious.

The other option works no matter where their spirits/souls are, and involves finding and healing their bodies. Healing (or more lore-accurately, “freeing”) Dean would likely consist of finding a way to release the cold iron’s hold on his physical body, and then using some method to wake him up. I do imagine that, since Cold Iron reveals a creature’s true form as well as trapping it, Dean can only come back as a Demon at this point. He might not like it, but it’s that or be dead.

Sam is way more straightforward- in the episode where they fought Famine, he used Sam’s craving for demon blood at the time to taunt him. Now, Famine literally drained Sam dry. ...Therefor, demon blood. Not a pretty process, involves killing several demons beforehand, Sam didn’t handle it too well last time, but, again, it’s the best way to have him not be dead. (*last minute edit: found an alternative re: this weird old poem called “The Goblin Market”. appears to describe a young woman who was attacked and rapidly aged in a very similar way, but is healed by eating fairy/goblin fruits. idk how to get that but we already know a Pooka so that’s a start)

TLDR, any way to have the Winchesters not be dead will have to involve them being demons, permanently.

Now, for Cas, there are three main options, leading to a slightly different mythological primordial void (*last minute edit: assuming that Heaven has given up trying too brainwash or control Cas, and are keeping him locked up in The Empty/Tartarus when they don’t need him. They obviously did let him out for a bit recently, though, as the Queen of England did die and Cassiel is the angel in charge of that shit)

The Greco-Roman route is Cool and finally forces some of the Actual Cassiel Lore into spn canon.

(*last minute edit: discovered some Lore abt heaven’s methods of memory erasure. has heavy connections to myths abt Tartarus. tldf if The Empty= Tartarus, it is likely that Cas has lost some or all of his memories, Because Magic Greek Hell Rivers. Apparently)

The Norse route is a fairly uncommon choice of underworld in modern fantasy, relatively unguarded, and definitely interesting.

And of course the Christian route is familiar to the point of predictability, allows plenty of opportunities for old characters to return for an episode or two, works as a road trip story arc that I’m shocked hasn’t been done in canon already, and ends with Sam, Dean and Cas hiding out in Purgatory, providing a scenario with high potential for emotional reunions/soft Destiel moments/hurt-comfort with an emphasis on comfort, and a chance for Sam and Dean to explore purgatory now that they themselves are demons.

(Technically there IS a fourth route, consisting of going back to the earthside entrance to Lucifer’s Cage and trying to break through to whatever’s on the other side of The Cage... but that feels both too simple to be good storytelling, and WAY too risky if something goes wrong. Still, it’s worth considering)

---------

....anyway. I’m seriously impressed with anyone who reads this far- this is A Whole Entire Fucking Lot All At Once. Am I just posting it now bc I’m worried that I might be right (specifically about the Grendel Thing), and I won’t look as cool if The Winchesters beats me to the punch? ....yes. I am that petty.

Signed,

-Jamie (He/She/They)

Sources:

Beowulf, translation by Seamus Heaney

Grendel by John Gardner

http://www.archangels-and-angels.com/aa_pages/correspondences/angel_planet/archangel_cassiel.html

https://mythology.net/angels/cassiel/

https://www.theblackfeatherintuitive.com/who-is-archangel-cassiel-the-archangel-of-duality/

https://supernatural.fandom.com/wiki/Chronos

https://www.history.com/news/history-of-the-jack-o-lantern-irish-origins)

https://www.yourirish.com/folklore/irish-pookas#:~:text=A%20Pooka%20is%20a%20shapeshifter,mane%20and%20luminescent%20golden%20eyes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%BAca

https://britishfairies.wordpress.com/2019/12/01/the-hair-of-the-dog-fairies-dogs/

https://wizzley.com/fear-gortha-the-irish-hungry-grass/ , https://obscurban-legend.fandom.com/wiki/Hungry_Grass

https://supernatural.fandom.com/wiki/Dark_Side_of_the_Moon

41 notes · View notes