#i can't respect this series on a fundamental level

[williamrikers]

The Undeniable Queerness of Enchanté the Series

(thank you @ranchthoughts for letting me ramble about this in your inbox before turning my thoughts into a post)

there are bls and then there are bls. right? there are dead fish kisses and there are characters who kiss each other like their lives depend on it.

and enchanté firmly belongs in the second category. 1,500-word essay under the cut.

there is such a consistent and tangible queer undercurrent to everything that's happening on this show and i'm not just talking about the fact that several scenes look like they could be the opening scene of a gay porno. or the surprise bondage. or force in drag. or proposing marriage in front of the eiffel tower. no, there's this aching, desperate desire underlying everything. theo has--in addition to his main love interest--four very hot gay suitors who all very obviously desire him carnally... this is some sort of gay manic pixie dream boy wish fulfilment fantasy and i am absolutely eating it up.

there is a vibe to the show that @ranchthoughts called "fanfic-like", and i would argue that that's because enchanté is actually fanfiction of the little prince. (i'm planning on making a separate post soon about how the book was referenced on and used as inspiration for the show.)

enchanté is fully aware of its own fictionality. it is on-the-nose fictional. but that's what makes it so much fun--it's not trying to be something it isn't.

take the reading memories segments in episode 4 [3/4] for example: these scenes were incredibly cringe, like, full-on bad-green-screen terrible-costumes-and-wigs hilarious-acting cringe, but fully aware of their own cringe-ness. (also, gawin was both in drag and naked in the same scene as two different characters, like. get on enchanté's level.) (incidentally, can anyone tell me what character aou/phupha was supposed to be? i got detective conan, monkey d. luffy and momotarō for the others, but i'm stumped on phupha's character.)

and that self-awareness makes it camp! there is such a level of camp to the whole show which feels extremely intentional (especially in the first two thirds), almost like a meta-commentary: "this is the genre. we know it's stupid but we love it here", and i adore that. they know the tropes, they know the bl landscape, and they're just having fun with all of it.

and the whole set-up in itself is a queer allegory, isn't it? theo and akk are "from different worlds", so to speak, hindered in their love not just by their complete inability to communicate but also by their forced separation as children. when they meet again, theo doesn't really belong anywhere, he's an outsider both in france and in thailand, he is unable to act the way thai society expects him to act (e.g. failing to show the proper respect to the seniors), unable to get his parents to understand him while being actively lied to by them (the whole ocean of miscommunication in that family deserves its own post), harboring feelings for his childhood friend his whole life but unable to voice them in a normal sort of way, instead falling back on concocting the most convoluted, immediately backfiring plan to try to make akk jealous and get him to confess his feelings first.

theo is fundamentally isolated because he grew up between two cultures, and neither one quite fits him: when he's in france, he is comforted by thai food and the only people he's close with (his grandmother and sun) are from thailand like himself; but when he's in thailand, he can't quite get used to the social conventions and makes social blunders, he is very slow at writing in thai.

it's such a poignant queer allegory in my opinion. they didn't end up making as much a point of it on the show as they could have, but it very much informed my whole reading of the show and the characters. there is a sort of inability to articulate his experience surrounding theo that makes him even more isolated and screams "baby gay in need of a community" to me. having akk share his experience at the end is something that i'm not a big fan of for other, unrelated reasons (might make a separate post about enchanté's ending and why it fell flat for me), but when looking at it through this lens, it is the only way for akk to really get theo, to really understand his struggle on a fundamental level.

which brings me back to that desire i mentioned earlier: theo desires akk, very much so, there are a whole handful of scenes where akk gets close to him and theo closes his eyes, expecting to finally be kissed by him, but more than that, he desires understanding. he often brushes off his own difficulties and has a tendency to be emotionally clueless (for example about his parents' divorce), but what i see most in his character is the desire to be understood, to be seen by akk, for akk to see him for who he is and to love him for who he is. (akk, of course, has been doing both of those things all along. he's constantly taking pictures of theo, he's watching him through his window--with theo's full knowledge--he is always looking at him, he's always loving him.)

it's not inherently queer to want to be loved as we truly are, i believe heterosexual people experience this, too, but in the context of queerness itself, being perceived as queer by other queer people is indeed a fundamental aspect to experiencing queer love (maybe not in gay for you bls, but i haven't heard of much gay for you happening in real life). not to be unscientific about this, but the vibes of the perception aspect of enchanté are just very queer to me, you know?

oh, and speaking of desire: enchanté in general is very physical. there is a level of intimacy between the actors and the camera that seems incredibly intentional: there are several shower scenes, scenes of theo and akk shirtless, TWO (2) nude gawin scenes (though one of those is sadly a fake-out and he is actually wearing shorts), many, many scenes that include bare feet, which is not something i see super often in bl, at least not to the point that i notice the frequency of it.

enchanté is very rooted in the physical reality of desirable bodies: theo is allowed to openly, physically flirt with saifa, even though that's not even his endgame love interest, phupha uses physical touch in his pursuit of theo, natee shows his obsession with theo by drawing his face/body about a hundred times, and akk and theo are wholly unable to keep their hands off each other. i've joked about the intricate rituals, but seriously, they are constructing so many intricate rituals. there are two separate scenes in which they make up excuses to kiss each other's elbows/arms/backs. they keep touching each other in a thousand ways, in every possible way they can that is still plausibly deniable as physical desire--until they kiss while watching that movie and then it's just a game of chicken of who will confess first. because their physical attraction to each other is undeniable. it's obvious. this was really refreshing to see in a genre that so often plays with the blushing maiden trope, and one character is so often made to pursue the other: on enchanté, akk and theo are equally horny for each other. it's not their lack of physical attraction that keeps them apart for so long.

(sadly, the show then shies away from actually getting very sexually physical: after their desperate, stunning, amazing balcony-kiss, they aren't allowed to be horny for each other in the last two episodes, when they're actually in a relationship. this is just one of the many aspects that i didn't like about the conclusion of the story, because you simply cannot tell me that these two as we got to know them in episodes 1 to 8 would really be as chaste with each other as they're shown in episodes 9 and 10.)

leaving that aside for the moment, let's talk about that kiss. as mentioned right at the beginning, when these two kiss each other on the balcony, it's desperation in its rawest form. these two--and especially theo--crave each other. theo kisses akk like he will die without him. theo kisses akk like he can finally breathe. theo kisses akk like he never wants to do anything else ever again.

i'm a bit obsessed with book's acting here, because of all the kissing scenes i've seen him in, i think this is THE most desperate one. force plays it a bit more subtle, but book's expression is full-on anguish. theo waited his whole life to be kissed by akk, and book portrays that so beautifully, with such depth. it's one of my favorite bl kisses for sure, it's played with so much heart, so much feeling, that it's hard to even think of kisses that compare, apart from the bad buddy episode 5 rooftop kiss.

anyway, all of this to say that enchanté to me is deeply, lovingly queer, and it's a shame that so many people are sleeping on it. (and that includes myself, i was wary about watching this show for a long time because i'd heard so many negative things about it.)

but i'm here to tell you: watch enchanté. it's wonderful, it's hilariously funny, it's endearing, it has book and force in it, and it is extremely queer.

#enchanté #enchanté the series #enchante the series #*mine #my enchanté meta

[lakemojave]

I feel so bad that I didn't actually play resident evil 6 for my project last year. I based a lot of my opinions about it based off how wild its narrative content was and secondhand accounts about its gameplay. It's very easy to say "it's bad" just by looking at it, but playing the game itself reveals much deeper, more fundamental flaws that you don't get just watching a video essay or let's play.

Resident Evil 6 is attempting to be so many kinds of games at once, so it's actually so many kinds of bad at once. The first ten or fifteen minutes of the game are a slow crawl through dark corridors and university ballrooms; there are no enemies, just a series of tutorializing sections and thin attempts at building a tense atmosphere. It's extremely slow and dreadfully boring, which is crazy because all of this happens within seconds after shooting your best friend, the zombified president of the united states like a rabid dog.

It moves to a city in the midst of the first wave of a zombie outbreak, then a cathedral filled with traps, then a secret lab, then like three layers of medieval dungeon. The tone and genre intention of this section varies wildly, but it seems to be a repeat of the spare parts of Residents Evil one through four: first the abandoned opulent structure, then the burning city, then the gothic architecture complete with spike traps. The city section is actually really good because at this point there had been no reimagining of the Raccoon City destruction in a modern console, so the level of chaos and manic destruction at play with the return of more classic zombies to the series is extremely refreshing and fun. Then the cathedral happens and, after a pretty boring cemetery maze, there's a really good sequence of co op puzzles that harkens back to classic Resident Evil design. It's a good series of levels--the problem is that it's derivative.

It's not just derivative of it's own series, actually. For all the references to past games, Resident Evil 6 is assembled mostly from the spare parts of other popular action games from the 2010s. There's lots more mobility mechanics, way less ammo scarcity, absolute heaps of weak zombies, cover mechanics, swimming sections, and quick time event after quick time event. Combined with the artificial widescreen black bars, it's riffing off of Uncharted, Gears of War, and David Cage style design so closely. So many of the dungeon props and layouts look almost exactly like levels from Dark Souls or Skyrim, and when we get to Chris' campaign the tone is almost indistinguishable from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. Is there an aspect of game design that was popular in the 2010s, or even just happened to appear in games that were popular in the 2010s? That mechanic is absolutely in Resident Evil 6.

When RE6 has an original idea, it is so patently ridiculous and unhinged that my immersion is immediately shattered and I can't possibly take the game seriously. When RE6 is borrowing an idea, it is so bland and anonymous that my immersion isn't given the respect it needs to form whatsoever. RE6 fluctuates between these two moods so repeatedly and with so little warning that experiencing the game first hand is like going to a haunted house and, instead of actually getting the proper experience, a guy in a room just beats the shit out of you. Is it scary? Technically it is, but not in the way I wanted, not in the way I enjoyed, and the experience was so painful that I could barely process what was happening.

Like all bad horror movies, if you're gonna experience Resident Evil 6 at all, I insist you do it with a friend. That is the only way to salvage the experience--to suffer with someone else.

#resident evil #re6

[zepumpkineater]

Thinking about how Jeb and Sanford & Deimos could/would be friends, if given the chance.

Canon wise, they've actually only met a grand total of once during the events of M:PN, or at least talked to each other anyway. Sanford and Deimos have never really gotten an opportunity to know Christoff and vice versa.

During Shakedown, the only level in the game where only Jeb and Deimos are playable characters, it happens to be that both of them have the "hacker" trait, meaning that during the segment where Deimos hacks the terminal to activate the robot, there's actually a bit of flavor text that sort of sparked this whole train of thought.

If you attempt to hack the terminal as Jeb, the game will give you a little text blurb that says "Let the boy show you his idea, sheesh!" Which of course, could be interpreted in a few ways. Personally, I always saw it as Jeb's way of trying to see what Deimos was capable of. I can imagine him peering over Deimos' shoulder as he types away lines of code into the terminal, the code being sloppy and unrefined, but functional nonetheless.

Generally speaking I always got the sense that Jeb developed a sort of respect for S&D, one he doesn't have for their compatriots in the slightest. Him choosing to say "Very wise, my friend." to Sanford gave me the sense that he sees him in a much higher light in spite of the people he chooses to associate himself with.

I definitely think S&D would find Jeb to just be a downright weird individual, and a little crazy with his constant talk about being Nevada's savior. All they see is an old man way past his prime, kept alive by a magical artifact. The years have worn away at his body and his psyche, but it hasn't made him any less powerful, if anything his resolve has only strengthened with time.

I can imagine Deimos playing practical jokes with Jeb, or intentionally saying something stupid in order to annoy him. Normally, it would, if it were anybody else. For some reason I think Jeb would find Deimos...Somewhat endearing, he would see a lot of potential to what would be relative to him a young man. It annoys him in the same way your little brother annoys you. You say you hate it, but you'll miss it when it's gone.

Sanford I think would be a bit of a foil to Jeb's high thinking, Jeb is always constantly thinking about the bigger picture, what's next for Nevada, what he needs to do in order to save it. Sanford, to a degree, understands why that's important, but he generally thinks on a much smaller scale. He cares more about the people immediately around him and what he can do to protect them. Jeb has a hard time thinking of people on an individual level, seeing them all as pieces in a much larger game. Sanford is one of these pieces, and he knows more than anyone that the only way to stay alive and sane is to stick together.

That's not to say Sanford and Jeb wouldn't like each other, but I do think they would get into sort of philosophical arguments with each other. They both agree with each other on several fundamentals, but they have such a different perspective of it that they can't help but clash. Jeb always thinks about what's in the future, and Sanford lives in the moment, taking everything one day at a time.

Unfortunately I don't see Christoff's tendency to manipulate people fading when it comes to Sanford and Deimos, if anything he would try to coerce them to his side, the only side he thinks is correct. He would try to get them to abandon Doc and S.Q. and let him be their leader, as he would be the only one who can truly "save" Nevada, but as always this is just a delusion he's conned himself into believing.

Luckily Sanford and Deimos would become masters at brushing his ramblings off, much to his annoyance, but I don't think it would be enough to pit them against each other.

It's just an interesting dynamic, one I hope to see explored further in the series at some point, whether it be via game or animation, or something else entirely.

#Madness Combat #Madcom #txt #long post

[inukag]

I recently learned of a research on predicting the longevity of a marriage and it really helped me understand why anime InuKag was not at good as manga InuKag.

The research showed that fighting was not a problem, as lots of happy, long marriages had lots of fighting. The crucial aspect was whether the couple was mutually respectful during their fight. Observed disrespect was a very strong predictor of a short-lived marrriage.

The fundamental difference between manga InuKag and anime InuKag is how much disrespect was in the anime. InuKag bickered in the manga but I never cringed at their arguments, while in the anime there were insults randomly thrown in for the sake of more osuwari.

YES. I've always struggled to explain why manga Inukag's bickering / fighting made their relationship more endearing to me but @mustardyellowsunshine explained it perfectly:

"Their bickering (and even their genuine arguments) speaks to a level of security and trust in their relationship. They can disagree with one another knowing that it ain't gonna break the relationship." "Conflict in relationships is completely normal and unavoidable (and really shouldn't be avoided), it's really important to find a partner with whom you can be in healthy conflict. (Sometimes loving someone isn't enough to make a relationship work -- you've gotta be able to be in conflict with them too.)"

It's healthy to be able to be yourself around your partner and not constantly be afraid that a difference of opinion or a day when you're in a bad mood and you have a fight will break your relationship. Inuyasha and Kagome fight, they take some time to cool off, they potentially apologize to each other and then they move on.

As you pointed out, the big difference that turn their bickering in the manga into something unhealthy in the anime is the disrespect. Inuyasha is constantly insulting her to her face, and I can't blame anime-only fans for thinking Kagome doesn't deserve that. Sure it's supposed to be a joke, but Inuyasha is painfully aware of Kagome's insecurities regarding his "ex", and those are not treated as a joke in the series for the most part.

Sunrise's sense of humor is extremely childish and I'm just too old to find this endearing. I can easily explain Inukag's fights in the manga, but not this. This is just Inuyasha being unnecessarily mean to Kagome because some of the writers clearly didn't like her very much.

#ask #Anon #sunrise-critical #i also noted some other anime-only lines #where characters insult kagome #one time it was miroku and there was another time i can't remember #like those lines were not in the scene in the manga so a writer at sunrise literally just decided to add a jab at kagome #which makes it very clear to me they don't like her lmao

[weprywepry]

Hatred never ends. It's a bit absurd, absurd in the narrative sense of the word. How can we expect a story about the endless cycle of violence to do anything other than perpetuate that violence? Either AOT is wrong, and there actually is some way to prevent people from killing each other, or the series will end up as just another part of the killing.

I remember defending AOT against people that criticized its portrayal of fascism. Some of those criticisms are, still, to me very hollow. Like that one Polygon article which can basically be summed up by *"guys i think there might be fascist subtext to a story explicitly about fascism"*. That much is just a kind of trolling. But there is the more serious matter of whether or not the show accidentally encourages the sort of hatred it displays.

"You can’t choose where the cat sleeps."

"There is no such thing as an anti-war film."

No matter how talented and well minded an artist is, there is no way you can actually *make* your audience react a certain way. I'm sure there are neo-Nazis out there that enjoy watching Schindler's List. If people are stupid enough to actually *do* the things portrayed in media, then why should we be surprised by their reactions to the media? There's no way AOT could kill fascism. But still, for how intelligent the story is, I wonder if that just doesn't even matter.

It is also very stupid at times (like the S1-S2 openings), but those seem unintelligent only by how easily they are taken out of context. I think the narrative structure of Attack on Titan relies on building up expectation and then dismantling them in such a way that is revealing about ourselves. The Titans are presented as an absolute, unifying, and indiscriminate evil. The Titans are actually deeply tragic beings that are the product of human choices. This may teach an audience to not trust such narratives. That sort of "bait and switch" relies heavily on the "switch." If you only ever are exposed to certain parts of AOT (like just the action or overly dramatic AMVs), then its easy to get the wrong message.

But it's hard to blame AOT or Isayama for that. Asking an author to not allow that may as well be asking an author to not tell stories at all. It's inevitable, even more so with popularly. It's hard to tell a truth about propoganda without enabling the spread of that propoganda. Context matters, but people are inevitably lazy. It's just the law of large numbers. That isn't to say there's no use in trying to provide context. An audience can be lured into a critical experience with a piece of media. But there will always be bad actors, and those bad actors will be just as cunning.

But as a more fundamental flaw with AOT itself rather than art in general, oh my god. What the fuck is the ending.

Here's my two cents:

Armin hates himself. Even before becoming a mass murderer, he viewed himself as inadequate and undeserving of respect. That self hatred never left him and never was resolved. Becoming a soldier allowed him to quell it and act rationally according to his objective, but the self hatred was always still there.

For him, to thank Eren is an expression of his self-hatred. He sees himself as at the same level of moral fault and that they both deserve the same fate. Eren is undoubtedly *worse* than Armin (80% of the worlds population), but Armin still considers himself just as culpable. So his friendliness with Eren is a sardonic, cynical expression of his own hopelessness.

This is the most charitable interpretation I can come up with. Even if this *was* an intended subtext, I think the more honest interpretation is that Isayama just got tired and lazy. The theme of "those who can't abandon anything can't change anything" needed to be reincorporated, and this was a giant flashing neon sign indicating that. Eren did certainly change something.

What I want to say is that, by this point in the story, the notion of positive change through sacrifice had been disproven. There is no common enemy to humanity; humanity is its own enemy. So "tatakae" is no longer about promoting a greater good, but promoting one's own interest over others.

"Fight! Fight to survive!"

has a very different tone from,

"As long as we have unbending convictions, a clash is inevitable. There is but one thing to do. Fight."

I wish i could say all that.

But far too much credence is given to the idea that the Rumbling is justifiable. Hange says, "I'll be damned before I justify genocide." But at almost every step, the Rumbling is presented not as a moral apocalypse, but as a solution to a problem. This is absurd. Erwin counsels Levi that, "No one will know how things will turn out." And yet these two outcomes, let Paradis be destroyed or let Eren destroy the world are presented as the only two options. Even worse, that this is supposedly the case is supposedly *the fault* of Hange and Armin and Jean and everyone else. Floch saying that Paradis will drown in a sea of blood is propoganda. This propoganda is treated as if it is the unquestionable truth.

I think Isayama wanted a moral dilemma for the characters to ponder (save ourselves or save the world), but got lazy along the way. That dilemma, "us vs. them," is never true and is used to justify atrocity in the real world. Violence never ends, and the us's and the them's change to fit the needs of whatever cruelty needs justification. I hope that Isayama knows this. It’s present in the work already. But here it vanishes in favor of a simplistic, cliche narrative. Laziness, when dealing with subject matter as sensitive as this, has a real cost. And it's a bummer beyond all other bummers that this is how the story ends.

#attack on titan #shingeki no kyojin #help me

[lotronprimesucks]

Regarding the "negative reviews" that ROP is apparently receiving, because you all seem to claim, without seeing it, that it's a bad show or of low quality: most negative reviews on ROP I have seen are outright racist or, if they're not racist/bigoted they're childish arguments and incompetent critique. "The elves have short hair now". "Elrond isn't respectable enough". "Galadriel is too warlike". This is not a slam dunk. They're setting up character arcs and prepping them for development, as you do when writing a story. You idiots. The fanfictions you've devoted your life to have taught you nothing, apparently. They don't have primacy, and there's no intrinsic value to following the "fan-accepted" version of any character. Nobody who is negatively criticizing ROP can make a good argument against its writing or dialogue (which is no worse than the original LOTR, they're basically on the same level), its set design, its characters or acting. All they have is petulant stuff like "this is not my Galadriel" "they gave Elrond short hair" "they don't say Finrod's name". You embarrass yourselves, you lower the quality of the discourse. Boycotting ROP on the basis of Amazon being ghoulish is a valid approach, but making up incompetent arguments and passing them off as critique isn't. Y'all just can't accept that an evil company can also create a technically and artistically competent TV series, because you lack critical thinking skills and are consumed by tumblr brainrot, thinking things can only be wholly bad or wholly good. Children

Okay, anon, sure.

Let’s take this in order:

The negative reviews I’ve highlighted have been from respectable mainstream publications who are not caving to reactionary racist or sexist backlash. You’re assuming I’ve been going to great lengths to seek out user reviews or comments on Twitter or the shit the Daily Mail or Bounding Into Comics is saying. I’m not. The reviews I linked to all point out significant flaws with the writing and dialogue and approach to the showrunning. Whoever you’re accusing of being a child, it sure as hell can’t be me.

The things pointed out in those reviews - the gender-essentialist short hair, the complete mishandling of the family relations in House Finwë, the details they legally can’t mention, the political situation in the Second Age that are being completely rewritten - are all signs of a bad adaptation. They are indicators that the writers fundamentally do not understand the text they are using as a source material, and that therefore the story they are telling is not connected to the books. You present these as petulant or childish complaints but they aren’t, they’re significant and show that the people writing this work are not interested in accurately portraying what’s written on the page. At that point, regardless of how good the writing is, this project has failed at its most basic task.

The first episodes also prove that they didn’t have the rights to anything except the Appendices. This means they are compelled to write an entirely original story, which might be good but so far is neither accurate nor compelling on its own.

Whether or not the adaptation is accurate matters to people who aren’t racist. This is because a desire for accuracy is not approving of the author, the author’s personal politics, or the author’s preferences. I don’t want accuracy because I care about Tolkien the man. I want accuracy because I like the books as they are written, and clearly what Amazon is doing is not following the books as they were written. This matters to me and to many other people. (“Accuracy” is not a shorthand for “white people”. I have said before on this blog that I want substantially more people of color in the show, not less and not the current amount. It is in fact necessary to include more characters of color to accurately reflect the text.)

The writing on this show is bad. Abysmally bad. Horribly bad. So bad I’d rather watch The Room and Birdemic and Zardoz on loop. Assuming that everyone criticizing this show has nothing to say about the writing and dialogue is false. The production design is horrible, the music is either generic or actively racist, the plot is already disjointed and badly structured. All of these are things that have been said in many critiques, and all of them matter. I at this point doubt that anyone who likes this show has actually watched it because the incompetence in every possible place except for some of the effects and the cinematography is staggering.

So no, I can’t accept that Amazon made a technically competent series. They didn’t do that, and I am not interested in being told they did simply because of your assumptions about what we’re all objecting to.

Cheers!

[not-poignant]

hello! thank you for replying to my ask abt finding the enthusiastic consent post. i’d like to ask about your approach towards writing death? whether it’s evolved over the years? the representation of death in media vs your own preferred version in fiction. also! what does death mean to ash glashtyn?

Hi anon!

Those are some huge questions, and I definitely can't answer them all in a lot of detail otherwise I'd be writing a 6,000 word post. So I think we need a cliff notes version or something.

I suppose I'd first say there's a lot of different kinds of deaths, and a lot of different ways to feel about it. So I can't give you a neat answer because my approach to writing death is 'treat every situation as unique' and not some kind of unified approach?

I don't even treat it with the same level of respect every time, depending on whether the death is a character we've never gotten to know, vs. if it is one we have, vs. (in the case of murder) how the character doing the character feels about it, vs. whether the character dying is a villain or a hero or neither. How I approach Augus hunting vs. Gwyn killing the otterkind family vs. Mikkel dying were all extremely different. There's no...similarities between them re: how I thought about them!

Therefore, I don't know whether that's something that's evolved over the years. The fact is, I don't sit there thinking 'what's my approach to writing death' before writing it, I just write it. I know I'm influenced by the many books I've read and philosophies I've read and more, but I don't have rules about it or anything like that. I just try and write it with the weight it deserves in the moment. Sometimes, that's no weight at all. Sometimes it's with a great deal of lasting gravitas. Death is ordinary and profound depending on who it's impacting, why, and how folks are thinking about it. And that's the same as with everything ordinary and profound (like sex, and people being born, and everything in between).

the representation of death in media vs your own preferred version in fiction

Tbh idk! There is no unified, universal way of 'representing death in the media.' It changes! It changes within the same series! How Scrubs wrote death in its media depended on the characters being impacted and the point of it! Sometimes it was comical and mundane, sometimes it would have you weeping, there's no such thing as a unified representation of 'death in the media' and I don't have a 'preferred version' in fiction. I have written mundane death, unimportant death, ugly death, grotesque death, meaningful death, profound death. And as with everything, it just depends on what that part of the story calls for.

I would also say quite honestly I don't really care about how I represent it that much. Like, I care as much about it as I do about any part of my writing. It's not a core reason behind why I write and it's not crucial or fundamental or really important in many of my stories. Like, it's not that 'I don't care' - but I'm not researching death and the symbolism of death the way I'm researching trauma and trauma recovery, anon. I have only ever bought one book on death. I have bought over 50 on trauma.

(For those curious about death narratives in general, I highly, highly recommend the series Six Feet Under, which was quite ahead of its time across a few different areas, but is one of the best shows - hands down - for the many different ways we can look at death, and the many different things it can mean to us, from nothing, to everything).

what does death mean to ash glashtyn?

You're not gonna like this anon, because my answer is going to be 'see above.'

As in, it depends! How Ash feels about his own death changes over time. How he feels about the deaths of others depends on who it is that's dying, and his connection to that person, and that will also not be static and going to change over time!

I don't actually know of anyone who always sees death the same way, of every person, all the time, always. That doesn't mean people like that aren't out there! But generally speaking how someone feels about the death of say, weeds they're pulling out of the garden, is going to be very different to their own death, the concept of death, and the death of their loved ones. We are often negotiating our relationship with death, from the moments we don't negotiate it at all because we deem the death/s insignificant (people killing cockroaches come to mind, or people not thinking about the creatures in their back garden dying every second), to the moments we deem it significant because of the person's closeness to the person or creature (or plant or object) that has died.

The ordinary/profound things in life just require a natural fluidity, because they're not static even though they're ever-present. I can't pin any single thing down on the page, anon, because there are an infinite number of ways to respond to and think about death, and an infinite number of ways for the mass media to conceptualise it, and for folks like me to write it.

I have no rules, I have no single approach. Sometimes it matters, sometimes it doesn't. It's...very...not something I can pin down, I'm afraid!

#asks and answers #ash glashtyn #fae tales #fae tales verse #pia on writing #death is both not special at all #and very special #depending on how it comes into my lives #it's going to matter to me a great deal for example when my loved ones die #and yet it doesn't matter to me in the same way #when i pull out a weed in the garden #even if i mentally experience a pang for snuffing out its life #(something many people never bother to feel) #almost no one holds funerals for weeds anon #we must all negotiate our own fluid ways of relating to death #i hope i never have firm rules for writing it or approaching it #death itself denies it #administrator gwyn wants this in the queue

[krawdad]

It still hits me as absolutely bizarre that someone would agree to pick up the torch of a series they themselves are most likely big fans of, without contacting or discussing it in any way with the original creators. Who are like. Entirely available. Eager to participate, even.

Like

I guess it makes sense to me now how their sense of humor might hit me in a vaguely abrasive way.

#it was abrasive before i knew it was new people for the record. #i had no idea #I intentionally avoided learning things about it when I heard it was happening #i just expected it to be like. more than i was willing to feel things about. #and heyy i was right holy shit #thank you past me you saved me however long it was that i didn't have to stew thinking about it #the old guys are willing to do stuff i fucking saw them in person together doing the music it was a lot of fun #now i bet that fan community is going to schism #as they do #being a fan of stuff sure seems like more trouble than it's worth for me #but then my reward center has been fucky for lord knows how long so #like part of me is curious to see if it gets better but most of me is too exhausted to give a shit #i can't respect this series on a fundamental level #a laugh here and there doesn't seem like it's worth the emotions I'd probably also be going through #i want to have fun when i watch cartoons #i want to be entertained by my entertainment

[urupotter]

So while I've said before that I don't like the HP subreddit, I still frequent it because occasionally I read something insightful. This is one such case, where I read a reading of Lupin that I'd never seen before in response to a comment of mine analyzing the shrieking shack confrontation between Snape, Remus, Sirius and the golden trio, where I mentioned that Lupin was a gaslighter so I wanted to share. It was created by reddit user u/UsuallySiSometimesNo and is posted here with his permission. We had a little conversation in the comments. Read it under the cut

UsuallySiSometimesNo: That struck a cord with me, too. I didn't think about that on a conscious level before, but when I read it, it felt instantly true.

Honestly, I think the strongest examples of Lupin gaslighting are actually done to himself. The biggest, character-defining example, I think, is that after finding friendship with James, Sirius, and Peter, he becomes so desperate not to be ostracized from them (due to his issues of self-worth and his personal brand of impostor syndrome) that he deliberately and routinely feeds himself false narratives about their behavior until he can no longer tell fact from fiction, even as he's experiencing it.

Their relentless bullying of Snape? A childhood rivalry.

Their casual bullying of other students? Kids being young and stupid.

Their clear disinterest verging on contempt for Peter, someone less fortunate and vulnerable with whom they're supposed to be good friends? Just mates being mates.

Even actions taken against Lupin, himself, are revised in his memory to be 'no big deal', because he desperately needs that to be true. Let's pretend for a moment that Snape indisputably deserved to be slaughtered by a werewolf the night Sirius told him how to get past the Whomping Willow. Sirius did not send Snape to be killed by any old werewolf. What happened that night was that Sirius - one of Remus' best friends, if not his actual best friend - attempted to use Remus' curse/illness against someone (which is a big enough betrayal on it's own) without ever telling Remus that when he woke up in the morning (covered in blood and in the presence of a shredded corpse) it would be to find that he had committed the act he was most petrified he might one day commit. In setting Snape up to be killed by Lupin, Sirius, at the very least, risked Lupin's sanity, and, at the very most, risked Lupin being sentenced to death.

Now, I understand that Sirius wasn't thinking about all of that when he did what he did, and I, as a someone removed from the situation (and armed with the additional character/situational knowledge granted to a reader) can even understand why Sirius' own trauma led him to grant such a blind death sentence to Snape (which I think is related to a point you made elsewhere, u/Adventure_Time_Snail, about Sirius' "violence towards those who trigger his fundamental fear of wizard fascists" because of his abusive upbringing). But Lupin's perspective is not one of an unbiased observer. And once James found out what was happening and pulled Snape back before it was too late (which, I would think, was more to save Lupin than to save Snape) and once Remus awoke the next to day to discover everything that transpired the night before, I find it hard to believe there wasn't at least some conversation about the true gravity of the situation. And yet, even all these years later, Lupin doesn't bat an eye when Sirius not only doesn't display shame when the event is mentioned in POA, but offers something akin to regret, NOT at the fact that his actions could have gotten Lupin killed, but that that they DIDN'T get Snape killed: "It served him right...", he sneered. etc. etc.

I think the obvious question here, is 'Even disregarding what Sirius did to Snape - how can Lupin be okay with the knowledge that Sirius has no regret, at all, for what he did to him, even now that they're adults?' Well, we're not in Lupin's point of view in the books, which means we can't hear his internal monologue, but I think a satisfactory answer to the question is that he's done a substantial amount of internal gymnastics in order to get to a point where he doesn't see this as a big deal, or even as something that he has a right to be upset about.... just like a gaslighter does to their victim.

Again, because we're not in Lupin's POV, we can't point to the exact instances that such internal gaslighting took place, but, based on what we do observe from Harry's POV (and based on external knowledge of gaslighting as a true-to-life concept) I wouldn't be surprised if Lupin so desperately needs everything to be okay that he derides himself for feeling bad or betrayed, that he calls himself stupid for thinking terrible things that have happened to him are a big deal, that he wars with himself about how people who are his friends and who are so good to him and who are better friends than he thinks he deserves could possibly do something to harm him/others, and that he beats down whatever emotions and senses and gut feelings he has that tells him something his friends have done might be very wrong. What we see in the books is a man who makes excuses for his friends and harbors a warped perception of reality in much the same way victims of gaslighting do, and he seems to exploit his own insecurities in order to instill doubt in his own experiences in much the same way perpetrators of gaslighting do.

I can't help but think that, by the time Lupin tells Harry that Snape harbors a particularly strong hatred for James because James was a better Quidditch player, Lupin has become so adept at gaslighting himself that he actually believes it.

tl;dr: One of Lupin's defining characteristics is that he gaslights himself out of a desperate need to be liked by others, since he has a difficult time liking himself and seems to believe all of his relationships are incredibly fragile.

Urupotter:

This is a fascinating reading on Lupin that I've never seen. I don't read him the same way, in that I think Lupin actually does know that what he's doing is wrong, he just doesn't have the moral courage to act on his conscience. (I view him as the anti Snape, great conscience, but abysmal moral courage, while Snape had unbelievable moral courage but a shitty conscience. Their arcs are about growing their moral courage and their conscience respectively) Realizing that his negligence almost got Harry killed is what triggers his arc, concluding when he goes back to Tonks and Teddy after running away, taking responsibility for his actions for the first time.

But this reading is so interesting that I'll have to reflect on it. Do you mind if I post it on my Harry Potter tumblr blog? I'll credit you of course, I would just like to discuss it with my followers. Of course if you don't want to I won't.

UsuallySiSometimesNo:

Honestly, I think the lack of in-depth conversation about Remus Lupin (at least compared to fan favorites Sirius Black and Severus Snape) is a missed opportunity and a shame. Don't get me wrong, I can discuss Sirius and Snape until blue in the face, but Lupin's arc is just as powerful in an understated (and often underestimated) way. The muddy, oversimplified truth is, without the fatal-flaw decision making of all four Marauders throughout their lives, the series of events proceeding the first chapter of the first book don't happen, and the story we all know and love never comes to be.

And speaking of sparking a discussion about Lupin...

I think Lupin actually does know that what he's doing is wrong, he just doesn't have the moral courage to act on his conscience.

You know what? I agree. And that's what makes him so interesting, I think. He is constantly and dependably full to bursting with internal conflict. When his friends are wrong/do something wrong/say something wrong, he can and does immediately identify the situation as wrong. When he does something wrong, or when he does nothing in the face of something wrong, in that moment I believe he knows the full weight of the situation. Like you said, he has a strong conscience, as well as a deeper, perhaps more nuanced understanding of right and wrong than do, for example, James and Sirius. Now, Lupin needs his friends. They're not just people to hang out with, they're a lifeline for him. He's not going to engage in conflict with them if there is even the slightest chance that he might lose them (for a variety of reasons, he lacks, as you said, the moral courage to do so). But he's also a generally decent human being, and with a strong conscience comes the capacity for sincere guilt and remorse. So, not only will he not confront his friends, he needs it to be okay that he doesn't confront them. And it's at that point that I think the self gaslighting is triggered.

But Lupin is intelligent and nobody's fool, so the gaslighting creates only a thin layer of ice over the problem. Just enough of a cover that he can live with the things he would otherwise deeply regret. I do think he believes the alternative reality he makes for himself to be accurate as long as it isn't really challenged. Crack the ice, though, and we see him express remorse and reveal an underlying awareness of past and present truths. But then the moment is over, and the war between the uncomfortably and full weight of the truth and his need for the companionship of his friends returns, and then the gaslighting begins again, allowing him an easier return to his closest friends (and eventually his closest friend, singular, after the others have been taken from him as was his fear all along) without conflict and with minimal strain on his conscience.

Once Sirius, the last of his original chosen family is gone - truly gone, as opposed to 'located elsewhere' as he was when in prison - following OOtP, suddenly Lupin's arc takes off at a greater speed than at any point prior. He's now literally lost all of the people he'd been terrified of figuratively losing. Although there are still people and things he cares about, he isn't as dependent on any of them as he was on those foundational friendships, and the finality of their absence allows him to finally grow beyond his stifling cycle of reality shifting, confront the truths of his reality and his circumstances, and, as you said, finally take responsibility by returning to Tonks and Teddy - a decision that, ultimately, triggers his death (I don't mean to imply that it was a bad decision or that it's the sole cause of his death, but Rowling has said that being 'out of practice' contributed to his loss at the Battle of Hogwarts, which makes for a fantastic tragedy).

I don't mean to overstate the importance of this theory or imply that it's always present when he's on-stage, and, as with anyone, many other elements, of course, factor into his actions/words/motives. But I think it's a fascinating potential component of his character all the same. If you have more thoughts on this, I love to hear them - and I look forward to reading the discussion on your blog!

So what do you think? Is this a valid reading of Lupin? I'd say it is, but I'm interested in reading my followers thoughts!

#remus lupin #lupin #severus snape #sirius black #moony #padfoot #the marauders #marauders #harry potter #hp #mwpp

[princeescaluswords]

I think another reason fandom treats Deaton so abysmally is, like your tags point out, he's the only person to remind Scott he's just a teenager shouldering so much responsibility. And that doesn't work for fandom. They simultaneously deem Scott unworthy of being the lead and hero, yet also say he must constantly exert himself and protect everyone without fail. He must be a living teddy bear for Stiles, attending every mental and emotional need. He must prioritize being the (unpaid) Town Protector over schoolwork but must keep his grades high. They don't like Deaton reinforcing Scott's humanity which they're dead set on denying.

There's a scene in Raving (2x08) that I think addresses what you are talking about succinctly as well as sets the stage for Deaton's role throughout the entire series.

Ms. Morrell: I can't decide if I admire your sentimentality or despise it.

Deaton: If I want your opinion, I'll make an appointment with the guidance office.

Ms. Morrell: From the state of things, I think you could use a little guidance. Are you really going to leave all of this up to a couple of kids?

Deaton: They're more capable than you think.

Ms. Morrell: And are you going to tell them what's coming?

Deaton: They've got enough to worry about.

Now, on one level this scene serves to reveal that Ms. Morrell as involved at a deeper level than the audience might have thought previously and suggests that she mistranslated the Argent bestiary on purpose. It also serves to warn us -- extraordinarily early if you give it some thought -- about the approach of the Alpha Pack. But this scene does far more than that. Each line tells us about Alan on a fundamental level, insights into character that will be repeated.

"I can't decide if I admire your sentimentality or despise it." Marin's initial jab separates Alan from her, from Derek, from Gerard, from Peter. The latter characters all see the teenagers involved in the ongoing action as, borrowing from a third season motif, pawns on a chessboard. Scott, Stiles, Lydia, Allison, and the betas are all treated like soldiers in a war. In a battle like this, characters like Marin see treating these children with respect is "sentimentality." I can't be absolutely sure why Marin lied to Allison in Venomous (2x05), but I suspect it was intended to disrupt Gerard's plans for the kanima by encouraging Scott and his friends to think that it can be saved. She actively deceives them rather than trust them with the truth. We'll learn later that she works for Deucalion and "this isn't the first time [she's] gotten her hands dirty."

This ruthless use of teenagers is a trait she shares with Derek, Peter, and Gerard. They all have goals, some good and some bad, but they feel that these ends justify those means.

"If I want your opinion, I'll make an appointment with the guidance office." Deaton is repulsed by her attitude and, in response, draws a clear boundary between them. Deaton may not share his entire life story with Scott and his friends immediately, but he doesn't actively deceive them to serve his own agenda. He's not trying to shape them under false pretense, as Marin and the others are doing. He will call Derek out in Fury (2x10) for this behavior.

Derek: I don't trust anyone.

Deaton: I know. If you did, you might be the Alpha you like to think you are.

Derek doesn't trust Scott or even his own betas to work with him if they know the full truth, so no matter how noble Derek believes his intentions are, this fundamental deception ends up getting him nowhere.

"From the state of things, I think you could use a little guidance. Are you really going to leave all of this up to a couple of kids?" Marin offers a riposte, criticizing Alan for being unwilling to do what's necessary. People are dying and a lot of people are probably going to die, and here is her brother, hoping that teenagers will make the right decisions and do the right things when he could push them into what is needed. In an echo of Peter's and fandom's criticism of Scott, she's arguing that Alan isn't willing to do what's necessary to protect others. If stopping Gerard means manipulating teenagers into danger, the reward is worth the risk (another motif from season 3). After all, as Gerard will tell Scott in Battlefield (2x11): "You want to play chess, Scott? Then you better be willing to sacrifice your own pawns."

"They're more capable than you think." Alan's answer is that he has no intention to push Scott and his friends to do what he wants. If he trusts them, if he supports them, they're going to do what's right anyway, because that's the quality he sees in Scott, which Deaton believed in from the first moment he knew Scott was bitten.

This is the key difference between the show's antagonists and Alan Deaton. He's willing to trust people, to believe in them, rather than manipulate them into doing what he wants. It's a fundamental respect for Scott and his friends as people, that the antagonists and the villains fundamentally lack. It's one of Scott's strengths as well, though he sometimes fumbles at it because he's not perfect. Scott consistently believes in his and his friends' ability to overcome obstacles, from finding a way into a bank vault to rescuing Mason from the Beast. This shared virtue is not a coincidence.

"And are you going to tell them what's coming?" This is both a defensive move from Marin -- are you going to tell them about the Alpha Pack, in which I am involved? -- and a challenge from her. If Deaton believes in Scott and his friends so much, why doesn't he tell them about the pack of murderous alphas who are undoubtedly on the way here, and that Derek knew about it.

"They've got enough to worry about." This line further marks Deaton as a wise and benevolent mentor: he recognizes that they're still teenagers. The Alpha Pack is not their responsibility, so he's not going to make it their responsibility. The antagonists and villains almost always use what their enemies are capable of as levers to try to force or convince the teenagers (and sometimes even adults) they're trying to exploit. We see this a lot out of Derek in Seasons 1 and 2, "it's what they do, and it's what Allison will do," "we have to find it first," "this is what they do, and this is why you need me," and "either you kill with it, or it kills you." Indeed, one of the first signs that Derek's redemption arc has begun is when he tries to avoid telling Scott and Stiles about the Alpha Pack, because he's learned his lesson about using fear to motivate teenagers.

Too often, the adults in Teen Wolf push teenagers, over which they have influence, into actions that the adults believe are for the greater good, using fear and/or authority to make them do what they feel is necessary, rather than treating them as individuals with their own choices and believing in them to make the right choice. This is epitomized by Peter, who constantly manipulates and fear mongers everyone around him into doing what he wants, including his own relatives, Derek and Malia. He despises Scott because Scott seems to win most of the time because of his belief in his allies. (And no, Derek was not his ally in Master Plan, he was a villain.)

Fandom too often misses one of the themes of Teen Wolf that a character achieving their goals through abusing authority or manipulation is not 'doing what's necessary,' it's fear. It's cowardice. The Anuk-Ite, a creature so powerful that it had to be imprisoned in the Wild Hunt, its manipulative abilities so potent and far-reaching as to turn the entire town against the pack, was ultimately scared. Its motivation turned out to be "I won't be trapped again!"

Standing against that attitude is Alan Deaton, from this scene in Raving to the scene in Pressure Test (6x15) where he is able to enter the cell and discover the identity of the Anuk-Ite when no one else could do it. He trusts in himself and others, and he won't let desire or fear pressure him into manipulation or deception. He consistently holds to that belief and he instills it in his protégé, as Marin describes him.

#alan deaton #alan deaton defense squad #teen wolf meta #teen wolf fandom problems #scott mccall #scott mccall defense squad

[tinkertayler]

Love, Loyalty, Power, Insanity.

You know that part in “Meltdown” where Aeryn says "I love it when you take control" and John says "That's the drexim talking" and Aeryn raises her eyebrows and says "No it isn't". That part makes me FERAL, every time, because while I know it might seem like just a sexy, flirty, throwaway exchange, it's honestly anything but.

John Crichton is an unhinged bastard with whom Aeryn is hopelessly in love. She is willing to follow him anywhere, anytime, under any circumstances. She’ll follow him to the ends of the universe, into the face of mortal danger, and down paths that lead to almost certain death, again and again (and again). She would quite literally follow him into the swirling, all-consuming, universe-destroying vortex of a wormhole if he asked her to (and eventually, he will). She loves him. She respects him. She believes in him. She is loyal to him beyond good sense or reason, and is willing to commit herself to every single one of his impossible, insane, foolhardy plans.

"I love it when you take control" she says, and oh, it's true. When she says it, I can't help but think about the many times throughout the seasons we see just how true it is.

Exhibit A: Liars, Guns and Money (s2)

John is at peak instability at the end of this season and he presents a crackpot plan to the group. Aeryn is a freak, so she finds it arousing. Seriously--she's turned on by his mad genius here. She wants to jump him. When I first watched this scene, I thought "Wow, okay. Aeryn has never wanted to fuck John more than she does at this moment. Interesting. A lot to unpack." She is slightly scared of (and for) him, but mostly she's just really into John when he demonstrates his intelligence, charisma, adaptability, ingenuity, and capability as a leader by taking charge of situations--even, maybe especially, when he exhibits the fearless confidence and nonchalant rule-breaking, dangerous risk-taking behavior of an absolute madman (P.S. Aeryn needs therapy).

Exhibit B: Fractures (s3)

She just lost him to a suicide mission, and now he stands before her again, proposing yet another suicide mission. She's shattered, emotionally decimated, a shell of her former self. She can't even look at him. And yet... and yet. She still can't say no. She knows she can't say no. John has a vision and a plan--a crazy one, as always--and she's prepared to follow it dutifully, as always. She'll follow him anywhere. She'll follow him to his death. She'll follow him to hers. The level of loyalty she feels to this man... it’s beautiful, and also terrifying.

Exhibit C: We're So Screwed (s4)

John is insane in the membrane... AGAIN... and delivers another half-baked plan sure to go awry. He is legitimately the most powerful man in the room, and Aeryn has never been more in love. I find this blink-and-you'll-miss-it moment deeply poignant; the look they exchange is made of pure love, reverence, sadness, and understanding. It is equal parts heartwarming and heartbreaking. There's something sorrowful yet ultimately peaceful about her attraction to him here. Aeryn is in love with and committed to John and by this point, she knows and accepts the risks. She knows he could die. She knows SHE could die. Been there, done that (more than once!). Whereas previous seasons find Aeryn loyal yet conflicted, there's virtually no conflict here. She knows who John Crichton is and what he is capable of: he's a man who has been driven to the brink of insanity; who has the most formidable, destructive knowledge locked in his brain; who is able to command rooms full of the most powerful beings; who can bend the fabric of the universe to his will; who can singlehandedly destroy entire galaxies; who is fundamentally pure of heart yet willing to commit atrocities; who has selflessly sacrificed his life to save millions, but most importantly to save her; because, above all, John Crichton is utterly, unequivocally, viciously in love with Aeryn Sun. She knows all of this, and she’s content in her commitment to him. They've been through the ringer (and will almost certainly go through it again), but she has resolved to stand by him till the bitter end.

Exhibit D: The Peacekeeper Wars (s5, kind of)

Remember when I said Aeryn would quite literally follow John into the swirling, all-consuming, universe-destroying vortex of a wormhole if he asked her to (and eventually, he would)? Well, here we are, folks. John reaches peak destructive insanity and Aeryn doesn't falter. Her commitment to him is almost as terrifying as his commitment to his cause and his willingness to do whatever it takes--whatever it takes--to get what he wants. I would say Aeryn follows him blindly, but to suggest that would be an insult to her as an autonomous, self-directed being. She doesn't follow blindly. She knows what she's doing by choosing to align herself with John, as much as he knows what he’s doing. And that's the kicker: John has never been more lucid than he is at the end of PKW. His insane actions have never been more calculated or considered. That's what makes this the most dangerous and terrifying brand of insanity we've ever seen him display. And Aeryn supports him. She joins him. The Aeryn of PKW retains all the inner peace and resolve she had in s4, but with darker and more sinister undertones--this is the most complicated, vivid depiction of Aeryn's love and unwavering loyalty, respect of John's power, and willingness to join him in absolute insanity. Together, they make quite a team: destructive, deadly, diabolical. Their commitment to peace is violent. Their heroism is villainous. They are prepared to die for what they believe in, and they are willing to take everyone else with them.

"I love it when you take control."

Yeah. She does. She really does.

ANYWAY... Gotta love a show wherein a single comedic line (from an episode that could, at first glance, be viewed as little more than fluffy fanservice) is actually important, and speaks to fundamental truths about the characters, their relationship, and their choices over the course of the entire series. Gotta love it.

#...okay #i think i'm done #do you ever just wake up plagued by Thoughts #this weekend's descent into insanity brought to you by: caffeine and avoidance of actual responsibilities #john x aeryn #john crichton #aeryn sun #farscape

[xxgothchatonxx]

It’s pretty clear in the book that Clarice could have kept Buffalo Bill alive until the ambulances arrived to rescue him, but she preferred to watch him die. What do you think so? Someone said Clarice also has dark features. She’s not on Will Graham’s level (tv series), but she also has a pretty dark self. What do you think ?

Clarice Starling absolutely has a dark side, but you're right it's not on TV!Will Graham's level. I think (need to emphasise, this is just my interpretation) her 'dark side' is that she doesn't follow the rules. The fact that she was at Buffalo Bill's place at all is proof of that. She was not supposed to be there. She was removed from that case, and she was told to just go home and let the authorities deal with this. But her strong desire, her want, her need to save Catherine Martin and stop Buffalo Bill from continuing his crimes, pushed her towards breaking the rules.

And she had been doing that since she first met Hannibal. She was explicitly told "do not approach the glass' and "you're not to tell him anything about yourself... you don't want Hannibal Lecter inside your head". And she does both things. But that rule breaking helped her solve the case, save the day, and also helped her better herself. Clarice was basically supposed to just be a tool to help the FBI and she ended up being so much more than that. And for people like Paul Krendler, that's a terrifying notion: someone moving away from 'their place'.

But back to the first part of your question. So, I think the part you're talking about is this.

"Starling had to be positive he was dead."

Again, this separates her from the rest of the FBI. Because, granted I'm not exactly an expert, but I'm pretty sure the protocol is to make some attempt to keep the criminal alive, if it's possible. Clarice didn't do that. She had to be positive he was dead. She needed to make sure he could never EVER hurt anyone again. It's not exactly what we'd think of when we think of a traditional hero. "Okay, I've stopped the bad guy, now I'll just pass him off to the authorities-" no, Clarice understands that there's some people who can't and shouldn't have the easy way out. I should also point out that she only shot Bill out of self-defence. 

Speaking of which, let's look at her reaction (in the novel) to Paul Krendler being... well THAT. I've got two interpretations. 1. She is not stupid enough to try and convince Hannibal to not kill him. Taking words from the movie here, she doesn't want to "deny (Hannibal) his life", she doesn't want to change who he is anymore than he wants to change her. 2. She thought Paul Krendler was a morally bankrupt prick who had it coming.

And let's finally talk about what a lot of people think is the darkest part of Clarice's story. When she decided to run off with Hannibal at the end of the eponymous novel. So, we all know that it was her choice, he didn't force her, that conditioning attempt didn't work - she is still Clarice Starling. So, the fact that she has decided to leave the right side people who used her and threw her under the bus and run off with a dangerous psychopath the only man (aside from Barney) who really treated her with any respect... that's terrifying for a lot of people. A woman taking charge of her own life, and especially with it being a sexual ending - "oh no, a woman is being sexually active and it's not cos she's getting assaulted!1!' - is a horrifying concept.

So... in conclusion (if you can follow all of that, bravo, cos I don't think I've said this in a way that makes any damn sense 😂) Clarice Starling's "dark side" is that her perception of what is right and wrong is different from what she is expected to believe. She is still fundamentally a good person, she just goes a step beyond what a lot of us would do, and what she is "supposed" to do.

#clarice starling

[animentality]

Wait. So you’re saying it’s ok for the world to kill the innocent population of an island they kept imprisoned for years out of fear and ignorance? Eren is wrong and the world is wrong. There’s no winner. If Eren does but the world gets away with what they did to the people on that island and what they want to do it’s still a shit ending. Isayama wanted everyone to die at the end. I hope he has the balls to keep that. That whole universe has no room for forgiveness. They’re all trash.

It's a trash story because he wrote himself into a corner by establishing that the only "solution" is killing everyone.

Like you literally just confirmed it yourself!

The story is trash because either way, Isayama wrote himself into a corner, damned if you do, damned if you don't!

Genocide is ok because eldia deserves to survive vs genocide is ok because the whole world doesn't deserve to survive!

My god. I can't believe you just said that, you just utterly proved my point! The man's a lunatic.

That's the very stupid reality about the series.

Edgy gray morality has always existed in snk but at least before the basement reveal it had themes about survival in the face of extinction from an external source.

At least it had themes about people being driven to the brink by struggling to survive.

Making it about human violence against humans shifted the genre and shifted the mood in total.

It said look, it's one race against the entire world!

It said look a Nation thats hated by every nation can defend itself by any means necessary.

It said this special race has magical powers and it's oppressed for them. It has real life parallels that are uneasy, gross in a lot of respects just because of its implications, and it's narratively aiming for a no win scenario that teaches nothing except that ultra violence is in always an option.

You can fucking argue that what's happening in snk right now is realistic or that it displays the all too real human tendency towards violence and oppression to solve its problems.

But in my opinion, if I wanted to see that, id just look at the news. I'd look at a news report on China and its concentration camps, or America's.

I don't need some Edgy Dark Fiction to tell me humans suck.

On a less deep level, snks story is flawed in many other ways. It suffers from stupid and zigzagged pacing, asspulls, too many flashbacks during critical narrative climaxes, benching important characters on and off just because Isayama doesn't know what to do with them, PATHS, certain characters being passed The Idiot Ball when the plot demands it.

But I think the fundamental flaw of the series is that like Naruto and Bleach and Tokyo Ghoul, it lost the substance that made it so interesting to begin with.

It lost the spark that ignited the fandom fire to begin with.

If you had started snk with the Marley arc, with overly convoluted political and military drama, no one would've picked this manga up.

There's a reason people became so obsessed with season one of the snk anime. Because it was a strange but interesting concept of people flying around with grapplehooks and steam power.

It was interesting watching humans fight enormous monsters and try to survive the day.

It was cool to see so many nuanced and unique anime characters who felt like real people.

Now everyone is just...an asshole.

An almost cartoonish genocidal asshole.

The "good" characters are overshadowed by a lame plot that forces them to act powerlessly or not at all.

Eren Jaeger is utterly intolerable right now and only edgy 4chan keyboard warriors like him now and that's just because they're a bunch of pseudo fascist shut ins who think a race war is coming and believe in white genocide.

Armin Arlert is a pathetic weirdo who's obsessed with an unconscious girl because I suspect Isayama is also a creep.

Mikasa still suffers from obsessed with Eren syndrome and has been since day one. Her modus operandi is to be Eren's happy ending, and all you have to do is go into the Mikasa tag to see evidence of that.

Connie, Jean, Hanji, and Levi are the idiots who just sat around taking orders and passing important exposition whenever the plot demanded it.

Connie and Jean weren't even relevant until this last chapter where they finally did something other than express dismay that their buddy Eren was being an asshole.

Gabi, falco, Porco, Pieck, and Reiner are all just There. They move around because Isayama decides they should get the spotlight for the month, and it's usually to hammer in the usual tired message that "there's two sides to every story!!!"

Even though he already did that with bertholdt and Reiner and Annie already. And we got it back in 2013.

Snks entire plot has just become so convoluted and full of magic bloodlines this and magic bloodlines that.

It feels like...oh God it feels like Naruto.

And for my next trick, the Pull-A-Titan-Out-of-Your-Ass No Jutsu!

But anyway back to my original point.

Do you not see how writing yourself into the position where you have to tsk tsk tsk at the human race and say well genocide is justifiable sometimes is bad??

Like.

As a writer myself, I just cannot fathom how other writers, or even just readers, don't see that?

You decide the direction of the story you're writing, you plan it ahead in advance.

People argue that snk has always been about genocide, that titans are "a race," and Eren has been about killing them all from the start, but people never remember that Eren was growing away from that angry 15 year old kid.

He was growing compassion and learned that the world was more complicated than that...until he decided wait no I'm genocidal actually.

Isayama could've taken it the other way.

But he made the choice to present Eren as ax crazy again, but this time turned up to the extreme.

I am so vastly disappointed and almost hurt by how hard this series dropped, no, hurled the ball.

I spent so many years defending snk from the outside world that now being made to look like a fascist fool by a Japanese imperialist feels like it's almost deserved.

[themagiciansreccenter]

Five @ Five @shmazarov

As a part of our author spotlight, we’ve asked each writer to highlight 5 fics and tell us a little about their experience writing (or reading) them.

If It Makes You Feel Better by lazarov

"Jesus Christ," Quentin moaned. "I am such a fucking asshole! All I remember is that Margo started kissing me, and I was all emotionally jumbled up and she was crying and you were there, passed out -- and this was a huge, horrible mistake.” He paused. “Uh, no offense.”

“Mhmm.” Eliot rolled his eyes and pulled out a bottle of Cuervo, pouring two sloppy fingers into a tumbler and topping it up with what could generously be called a splash of OJ. He slid it towards Quentin. “Tequila sunrise pour vous? ”

“Please no.”

“Suit yourself.” He slid the glass back towards himself and took a sip, before furrowing his brow and examining Quentin’s face. “Did you say Margo was crying?”

Twitchily, Quentin shifted under his gaze and shrugged. “It was just leftover bottled-up emotion brain-junk. No biggie.”

“Alright,” he said slowly, and Quentin suspected he wasn’t quite off the hook. But Eliot’s forehead relaxed and he changed the subject, pacing in a circle and waving his drink around, explaining: "Look, you were extremely drunk and hopped up on bootleg magic. The cheap, street stuff is like bottom-shelf tequila: nobody can be blamed for their actions after a few shots, worm and all." Eliot paused, quirking an eyebrow and leaning his elbows on the counter. His robe slid an down his shoulders, revealing a fucking bite mark under his left clavicle, and Quentin dragged his eyes away, doing his best to convince himself that the reddish-bruised imprint was way too small to have come from him. "To be honest, boo, I didn't think you had it in you."

This was my very first fic for the Magicians fandom, and my first attempt at developing an ear for Quentin and Eliot's voices. I didn't quite hit the mark, but I think it was a decent early start. It's satisfying to see how much further I've come in developing a feel for these characters.

Caught You by lazarov

"I thought that after all this turned out to be real, that I wouldn't..." Quentin sighs and thumps his head backwards against the wall, frustrated. "I shouldn't still be doing this. I shouldn't want to..." He trails off.

"Why?" Eliot says. "Because of magic?" He spits the word out like it's vinegar in his mouth, then sighs. "The fact that magic didn't fix all your problems doesn't make you ungrateful. And you're not stupid."

Quentin quirks the corner of his mouth, a doubtful sort of 'maybe.'

Eliot's hand have finally stopped shaking enough that he can let go of Quentin's arm ("You take over," he murmurs) and start to form a spell. There are probably better ones, stronger ones, but his brain feels scrambled and it's the only one he can bring forth with reasonable certainty.

His hands work methodically but cautiously as he moves through the procession: slow, carefully-drawn arcs and deliberate patterns. He nearly stumbles on the third movement, a transition from bhramara to Flamel's Interlock, but he manages to keep going, the energy building in his hands like glowing coals. Quentin watches him with tired eyes, tracking the movements with clear interest; it's not a spell he'd've learned yet, second-year Fundamentals of Wellness spellcasting stuff, and something twits in his stomach as he realizes Quentin is committing it to memory.

I love Caught You, the whole series is so important to me. Not just because I feel it was vital to explore what could've-been with Quentin's depression after Dean Fogg suggested he go off his meds, but also because I think this fic is the one where I found my voices for Eliot and Q as well as my personal style for writing hand-spellcasting.

Stories We Tell by lazarov

They stayed wrapped in each others arms for a long while: warm, slippery skin pressed together in cold water, the immediacy of their thoughts drowned out by the constant, soothing white noise of the falls, only occasionally pierced by the sound of songbirds sweetly singing to each other across the clearing.

"Will you tell me what you thought when you first saw me?" Quentin asked, his breath hot on Eliot's shoulder. He dragged his teeth against Eliot's trapezius, eliciting a shiver.

"At Brakebills?"

Eliot felt Quentin nod. He nosed against Quentin's temple: "I thought you were beautiful" - he pressed a kiss to Quentin's cool skin, over his eyebrow - "and intriguing" - another kiss, between Quentin's eyes - "and I immediately began plotting an intricate plan to make you fall head-over-hells in lust with me."

"You're supposed to tell the truth," Quentin said quietly, giving Eliot a gentle, admonishing bite.

"I know," said Eliot. "I am."

He was.

I generally have an extremely hard time writing romance but this? I was proud of this. There's something about setting a mood and teasing out exactly the moment you want from the setting you've created that is satisfying as fuck. This fic is an off-shoot of Caught You, but stands on its own as well: Quentin and Eliot trying to figure out how to be alone with each other - and take care of each other, despite their respective hang-ups about feeling loved - in Fillory.

One and the Same by lazarov

“Well, I hope that jackrabbit got eaten! Mashed up and squished right between a killer turtle’s teeth so he can’t call me names ever again.” Still draped over Quentin’s shoulder, Rupert did his turtle impression again. He poked Quentin in the back. “Turn me so I can look at dad.” Dutifully, Quentin spun so that Rupert was level with Eliot’s eyes. “What do you think? About him getting eaten?”

“Well.” Eliot tapped his chin with one finger. “First of all, I don’t think turtles have teeth. Second, I guess whether or not I wish a horrible death upon him depends on exactly what name that rabbit called you, buddy.”

“He called me a…” Rupert frowned, reconsidering, and waved Eliot closer. Eliot dutifully leaned forward so that Rupert could whisper with one hand cupped around his ear: “A two-legged idiot.”

“Well,” Eliot said gravely, rocking back on his heels. Quentin’s shoulders were bobbing with silent laughter and Rupert bounced gently along with them. “That is particularly rude. And I’m glad you chose not to repeat it in front of your dad. We both know he’s very sensitive”—

“Hey!” Quentin protested.

“But, if we’re talking eaten-by-turtles bad? I think I could find it in my heart to let that rabbit go. Mercy is a virtue, no?”

Rupert nodded, pleased with the answer, and Eliot stepped towards them. He pressed his lips against the sun-warmed top of Rupert’s head, before nosing at the soft, stubbled spot below Quentin’s ear. Gently, Quentin leaned into his touch

—

“Jesus fuck.” Eliot slammed one angry fist on the table and then buried his face in his hands. The sharp pain in his wrist helped to draw him out of the memory, but he was still stuck half-in and half-out: he could still smell Quentin’s hair and the damp of his skin after working on the mosaic in the afternoon heat. He could still feel a tiny hand tugging at his linen shirt. Eliot suppressed the urge to throw his chair backwards and rip himself away from it. “Jesus fucking Christ,” he said again, wounded, his lips muffled against his palms.

“Hey,” Quentin said quickly, shooting one hand out to gently grab Eliot’s wrist. “El? You okay?”

He couldn’t answer – paralyzed by the memory, he opened his eyes and slowly blinked before taking stock of himself: they were in a shitty diner in midtown. In front of him, there was a scuffed white plate with a bagel on it. There was lox on the bagel. Quentin was sitting across from him. Quentin was wearing a grey sweater. He could feel Quentin’s foot touching his foot. Quentin’s warm hand was on his wrist.

This is an in-progress series about Eliot and Quentin dealing with their memories of the mosaic timeline. I tend to write what I want to read and, if I could read nothing except fic about Quentin and Eliot emotionally processing flashbacks of that timeline for the rest of my days in this fandom? I would be very lucky indeed.

spring sooner than the lark by greywash

"I love you," Eliot says, very quietly; and Quentin says, "I know."

"I'm in love with you," Eliot says; and Quentin says, "I know," and then lifts up his head.

Straightens. Quentin reaches up. Rubbing a thumb against Eliot's burning cheek: Eliot can't stop looking at him. His lovely serious sweet face.

"I think I've always been in love with you," Eliot says, barely breathing; and Quentin nods, cupping his cheek.

"I know, sweetheart," he says, really gently. "But that's not what I asked."

His big dark, sad eyes.

Eliot swallows. There is an odd, unstable sort of a wobble, buried somewhere under his sternum. "If I said no," he says; and then takes a breath, and corrects: "if. If it doesn't work out."

Quentin closes his eyes, and then touches their foreheads together.

"Then we'll figure it out," he says, very quietly, "that's not what I'm asking."

Eliot closes his eyes; and Quentin takes a breath.

"This is your home," Quentin says, very quietly. "I'm—yours, whatever happens, we're yours, I'm not going to leave, and I'm not going to—to take Teddy away from you, or something"; and Eliot—Eliot can't— "Oh, Christ, El": Quentin slides his arm around Eliot's middle.

Pulling him. Close.

Eliot curls up. Tucking his face into Quentin's throat.

"You know you gave him to me, right?" Quentin says, very quietly. "You're as much his father as I am"; and Eliot presses his eyes to Quentin's warm rough sweat-smelling skin.

Get the FUCK out of here with that intensely gorgeous prose. Talk about setting a mood. Ever since I read it, this gorgeous fic has spurred on my desire to write for the Magicians and my desire to WRITE BETTER.

#the magicians #the magicians rec center #author spotlight #author spotlight: lazarov #author: lazarov #five @ five