I swear I have read your big post regarding Peter Parker's neurodivergence and why it is best to avoid labelling him, but he definitely has a weird brain
Can't find it and feel kinda sad about it cuz I deeply related to it
i know exactly which post you're talking about and i can't find it either! i've raked through my archive, and it's just - nowhere to be seen. i think tumblr eated it (it happens.)
really, tumblr's search functionality is so so useless, i don't know what to tell you. there are plenty of keywords i can search to find it that post, but the search functionality actually just does not work!
undiagnosed audhd-addled peter parker, my darling, my light, my life, my everything.
i think peter parker's such an interesting creature to write, because a lot of people will point to a certain behaviour about him and say "this is an autistic thing, right?" but a lot of those behaviours are actually, in my head, tied to certain traumas in peter's life too.
people say "oh, the food thing, peter's a picky eater because he's autistic" and yes, absolutely. but also it's tied to his trauma with his parents.
peter gets overstimulated, and yes, it's an autism thing, but also he was bitten by a radioactive spider and his senses are dialled to 11.
it's a similar case i've found for myself, too – where a lot of friends i have kind of diagnose me because i have autistic traits, but actually - i'm hesitant to claim the label or pursue diagnosis because, actually, i know where these certain behaviours come from, and they come from certain traumas. there are events i can pinpoint in my life and say "yep. that's where this behaviour comes from."
so - i think there's a lot of overlap between trauma and autistic traits. the brain is very complex! i think the reason for that overlap is maybe as simple as the fact that people with autism and people with trauma are both doing the same thing - developing behaviours to protect themselves or soothe themselves. so - i think it's nice to be able to see a character like peter parker, who may or may not be autistic, but recognise behaviours in him and see yourself in him.
people who go undiagnosed for whatever reason - people who are really good at masking - so good, in fact, that they have no idea they might be on the spectrum - everyone and anyone at all can look at peter parker and recognise themselves. because i think we discredit the thought that every single brain does the same thing! develops certain behaviours in order to survive. every brain has that same software - we've just all been faced with different hardships that we need to overcome, and that's were all the differences come in.
autism is a spectrum, i guess - everyone falls into it to some degree. and i think events in your life probably push you along on it. but i don't know, i didn't study brain science. probably what i'm saying is very stupid and uninformed. of course there's brain chemistry involved. but i know people in my life living with autism and certain events in their life have exacerbated certain behaviours or made coping with it a lot more difficult. so maybe trauma is a catalyst.
60 notes
·
View notes
the zestiria timeline baffles me to no end because i know all the camlaan stuff takes place 17 years before the events of the game and i know it has to be that way because that's the only way for sorey and mikleo to have originated in camlaan. and yet. what do you mean heldalf has only been living with his curse for 17 years. what do you mean the celestial record is 21 years old. what do you mean camlaan has only been around for less than 30 years. in my head all this stuff takes place on a waaaaaay larger scale like heldalf should have been wandering the earth in solitude for at least a century right? you're telling me it only took him 17 years to give into the malevolence? what a loser. and the celestial record felt like an ancient book from a time long past when they were nerding about it in the beginning of the game. you're telling me it's barely older than sorey and mikleo themselves? and you can't just go around calling a village that existed 22 years ago and was lived in for only 5 "the origin village." like nah that thing has to have been around for at least 50 before you go calling it something as dramatic as that. idk. in the two-and-a-half-years in between playing zestiria i forgot all the lore and i had it in my head that shepherds were like a once-every-one-hundred-years deal and michael was from like ages ago and all this stuff was ancient as hell. and it feels so silly to me that it was all so recent
14 notes
·
View notes
Hrmm... Revising my game and I feel like there's still sooo much writing left to do, for something that probably won't even amount to much, so.. I do want to narrow my focus more (especially given my health problems seeming to get worse/less energy the past few years), but I'm not sure how would be best to...
I currently have 5 characters as the Main ones with full planned questlines and such, with each character having 6 quests you can do for them. But I haven't really started the writing for the 5th main character.
So then I was thinking, if I were going to write 6 full quests worth of content anyway... is it better to allocate that time on just doing a Complete 6 Quests for ONE single character, OR would it be better to do something like.. choose THREE side characters and do 2 quests for each of them? So that people have a wider variety to interact with and sort of sample around (of course with the idea that, once the first version of the game is released, IF people actually care about it enough to make it worth the effort, I would then add additional content to complete those 3 characters stories as well)
-
SO... If you were playing an interactive fiction sort of game centered around talking to & doing quests for a cast of characters (like there's no larger plot, more it's just about interacting with people, every character kind of has a self contained story, the focus is just learning about them and the world and exploring the area) --- Which would you rather have?
(and of course it would be stated up front which characters have only partial questlines, so people don't expect them to have full quests like the others and then get disappointed, or etc. etc.)
Basically, is it better to just focus in specifically on having one fully complete questline? Or for there to be a few stories that are not complete yet, but have more initial options available?
10 notes
·
View notes
I talked about it last year, but it's Christmas Eve and I'm going to talk about it again!
We know that Elizabeth and Darcy invite all the Gardiners to Pemberley for the Christmas following their marriage. I suspect Darcy would insist on paying to smooth out the various complications of getting from London to Pemberley with children, and thus the invitation would not impose extra expenses on the Gardiners. (Darcy might have to apply epistolary peer pressure to do this, but he's honestly pretty good at that.)
This may be the first time since Georgiana's early childhood that there were any young children in the family at Pemberley. If so, it hasn't really happened since Darcy and Georgiana's father was alive, so even with Austen's relative unsentimentality about children, it's still probably a big deal on their side.
But also, I occasionally entertain myself by imagining what it would be like for the children, especially the oldest, a girl of eight. The other children are six or younger, and I suspect they're not going to have clear memories of life before their cousins' marriages (especially the boys, but perhaps even the six-year-old girl). An eight-year-old, though?
Miss Gardiner, I think, would have a very clear sense of life at home vs holidays at her aunt Bennet's much bigger house at Longbourn. The Gardiners seem to be quite well-off, but I doubt they're extravagant in the way of Mrs Bennet or living at the edge of their income—there's a reason they continue to live within sight of Mr Gardiner's warehouses. So a middling kind of genteel estate like Longbourn would probably seem quite grand vs her house in Gracechurch Street.
And then she goes to Pemberley.
Note: I've occasionally seen it suggested that Pemberley is a more or less ordinary gentleman's estate that is just really pretty and has a bunch of land attached, which I think is manifestly false. Apart from the architectural and landscaping details which suggest otherwise on their own, Elizabeth does note that the interior is suitable to Darcy's wealth and markedly elegant, yet understated by contrast to the OTT splendor of Rosings; this is a mark of aesthetic taste, not humility.
So I think Pemberley's elegance is about what you would expect from the combination of what they would consider good taste (furnishings along finer lines than the heavier and more ornate furniture of the past, restraint in decoration and semi-naturalistic landscape, that sort of thing) and an income greater than the average lord's. It looks like what it is.
The point is that for this young girl who does not always (perhaps often) accompany her parents' travels, Longbourn is probably a lot. Pemberley is a lot more. She was probably warned that it was much grander than most (or all) of what she'd seen before, but even so, I think that she's just the right age to be really powerfully struck by a place like that, and a place like that being Elizabeth's home. That's the moment, I imagine, when she realizes that things are going to be different now.
Jumping even more into headcanon, I also imagine that later, when Miss Gardiner is going to come into society, the Darcys very much want to do whatever they can for her. Ten years after that Christmas at Pemberley, their own children (assuming they have them) would still be young. Miss Gardiner would be eighteen, though—just the right age to come out. And I kind of love the idea of the Darcys hosting a big winter coming-out ball for the daughter of their beloved relations in trade.
Of course, she'd have gone to Pemberley more than those two times. But I imagine that first, powerful impression in that first Christmas at Pemberley is very much with her as she dances at her first ball.
70 notes
·
View notes