Maomao is her own villainess who cares about class and propriety
You know how in a lot of shojo/josei literature there is a villainess (either the mother or a rival) who is deeply offended by the romance between the princley ML/ commoner FL because it's.just.not.done and commoner FL could never be worthy of ML?
one of the more brilliant narrative moves of kusuriya is to combine the person who cares about status and propriety to a frankly unsettling degree with the protagonist.
Because that has a lot of advantages:
First: this conflict between class/person is now an internal one. One of the reasons Maomao has difficulty accepting Jinshis advances is because she sees herself as unworthy of him. She really can't understand what he sees in her.
Second: It's realistic. Of course Mao Mao is aware of the class system. She knows she survives on the good graces of the people in power. She knows she's unfree to a certain point. She knows she has far more to lose. She wields this class system expertly to gain a maximum of freedom. I find it pretty telling how few of the rules Maomao actually breaks while still living the life she wants.
Third: It frees up the villains to have other reasons for their villainy. Even Lakan the person who comes closest to this character cares more about having a relationship to Maomao than about destroying Jinshi because he's not good enough. And he's rightly called a weirdo for his obsessions. The other villains (the Ma-Clan, the white lady, Gyouk-Ou) have other reasons for their villainy who've frankly nothing to do with the romance.
and I find that refreshing
107 notes
·
View notes
I've seen a number of discussions of the NMCU Daredevil ep Nelson V Murdock, some of which I couldn't understand, and figured I'd throw in my 2 cents so far as my feelings on one particular thing.
I really, really dislike what I call the 'BFF Secret Identity Reveal Fallout' trope.
I see it all the time, often as a key narrative beat when attempting to create tension or complexity. The hero has someone they care for or trust more than anyone else, but they keep the secret out of fear - fear of a number of things, but often at the core a fear of rejection. This might be amplified by the BBF previously expressing negative feelings about the masked persona.
Then the secret comes out, and just as they feared the BFF is angry, and at the center of the interpersonal tension is the fact that the hero lied, and that's the part that gets to me, because the reasons for why the hero lied seem to so rarely be taken into consideration - lying, especially to a loved one, is depicted as wrong in and of itself.
But here's the thing - lying isn't inherently amoral.
(I'll note here that I recognize this is an opinion - our personal morals are steadfast, connecting to our core values, which are actually the anchors of our identities/sense of self, but they're just that: personal, not universally absolute. What I'm expressing here is my own opinion.)
The concept that it is inherently amoral gets my back up, and I know it's because of personal experience (good times with trauma! (ノ◕ヮ◕)ノ*:・゚✧), but I think my feelings are legitimate nonetheless. I know how it is to lie to protect yourself or others from harm, physical or otherwise; that there are times honesty is unsafe, or even simply unkind. I know how it is to lie out of fear of rejection - every time I come out to someone I feel it. I've learned the hard way that someone who has given every indication that they have zero issue with queerness and would be accepting of my queerness can end up not being accepting. It rips my heart out every time, and does nothing to help my own trust issues - this reminder that you can never actually know how a person will react to something, or how they'll treat you as a result.
I know how it is for a friend to believe that them showing me trust creates an obligation that I show them the same - the expectation that trust from one party should engender an equal degree of trust in the other, regardless of what is or isn't being shared or what either party's personal experiences have been.
Now, how does that apply to these fictional situations? Well, it varies depending on the story of course, but when the 'lesson' is just straight up 'lying is amoral' or even 'best friends should never hide things from each other', I grit my teeth. The impact of a lie on the person it's told to is put front and center, while the impact of revealing the truth on the liar is treated as secondary or even treated as moot. The liar broke The Rules by lying, and that makes them the one in the wrong, full stop.
I see that a lot in discussions of why or why not people consider Foggy's reaction 'right' or 'wrong', and rarely consideration of the shape his reaction took (whether the things he said were warranted, fair, or should later be discussed or apologized for). I see people saying that Matt's reasons don't matter, and that he was wrong for not trusting Foggy (and whew, the issue of Matt's ability to trust is a whole other thing, speaking of trauma). I also see people defending some things Foggy said on the basis that he was angry and had a right to be, when his right to be angry isn't actually the issue. If I say something unfair or unkind, etc, in the heat of the moment, it's my responsibility to talk that out with the person later when tempers have cooled, regardless of whether I was 'right' or 'wrong'. That's the kind of thing healthy communication and healthy interpersonal relationships require. All emotions are valid, but not all behavior rooted in that emotion is.
Of course, it's a very complex thing. Sometimes there isn't a clear cut 'person A was Wrong and person B was Right'. And what you lied about and why factors in, but that's exactly the point. My ex lying to me because of trauma-caused trust issues? Understandable. Him doing it because he was afraid I'd dump him when I learned he'd been cheating? Nope.
And then there's the 'you should have known it would be different with you' thing.
I recently saw a situation play out in a story where the hero brings up the BFF's previously expressed opinions on the masked persona and the BFF saying that the hero should have known that their opinion would be different as far as the hero is concerned - that their particular case would be viewed differently, an exception to the rule, so to speak.
I don't love that, either. 'It's okay because it's you' is a kind of exception that isn't the kindness it's so often portrayed to be. I've had people say homophobic or sanist things then tell me that oh, they don't mean *me* of course, because I'm *different*. My grandparents heard the same kind of thing all the time growing up, having friends say all kinds of antisemetic garbage in front of them and say, 'oh, but we don't mean you, of course'.
When I'm treated as an exception because I'm a 'good queer', it isn't a relief. That person still disdains what I am. Them saying that to me isn't kind, and I can't believe it to be kind in these fictional contexts. If the BFF can understand, accept, or even get behind why the hero takes certain actions - or even commits certain crimes - that should open the door to the possibility that there may be more to why other people do similar things. A more openminded viewpoint, such as a willingness to look at all the factors before rendering judgement, should be the result, not 'it's okay just this once because I care about the person doing it'.
My feelings about people equating criminality with amorality is a whole other complication when it comes to my thoughts on these situations. I won't get into that here, but I thinks it's another issue worth consideration.
I'm not going to write out my opinion on the Foggy/Matt conflict, though I do get into it a little in the fic I'm writing. I really just wanted to express my issue with that particular aspect of that narrative trope in general and how it's discussed, and the way the matter of trust and applying morality to distrust is often talked about, too. I may be expectionally sensitive to this kind of thing, or maybe I'm not. I'm not sure my possible sensitivity is the point, though.
Either way, it's a trope that gives me a lot of anxiety, and when I rewatch shows or reread stories I often find myself needing to skip those parts. That goes for fanfic, too.
50 notes
·
View notes
so since I wanted to make posts about tropes in media that I do not like but don't know which one to start with I thought some more about why I do not like these tropes and I think the thoroughline through most of them is that they...hurt.
not necessarily that they hurt me, specifically, but that something about them just feels hurtful and/or harmful , wether intentional or not. Obviously all in different ways and some in worse ways than others but there is just something about all of these tropes that has an element of pain or ridicule or trying to force some kind of normative standard on characters (and people) or a disregard for the complexity of a character or of society as a whole.
so since I have a lot of thoughts on all of these and it is too much stuff to put into one post, I figured I'd just make posts about them each, individually. And because I am very indecisive and also just curious here is a poll about this topic:
there are more but there's only 10 poll slots so please also tell me abt other tropes in the notes!
(also ofc it depends how these tropes are handled, they can work if handled well enough, but this post is not about a good handling of them)
29 notes
·
View notes
I get the sense from your writing that you're a major proponent of Earn Your Happy Ending, where the characters go through absolute hell, but they get the ending they deserve as a result. They have to struggle and push for it, and suffer a lot along the way, but eventually, things get better through their efforts.
ok flightfoot, i'll give you that for angst, i do go this route. in a nutshell my answer is yes but there's a but!
i swear i'm not actively looking for ways to make the characters' lives awful, that's just how the story forms in my head! the three basic elements i conceive are 1) character: who are they? 2) goal: what do they want? and 3) obstacle: what's stopping them from getting it? granted all the fics i've written so far (on ao3) have had the "earn your happy ending" trope embedded in them, but that hasn't been the point of the stories XD i think what leads to so much suffering for the poor kids is that their actions have very large repercussions. my plots are very high-stakes. also the hardship, anguish, and grief are extremely necessary thank you very much
if i were to write a low-stakes, fluffy story which i AM capable of (you'll see when i'm done with odnlb, you'll all see), i'd eliminate the hardship, anguish, and grief and still find a way to give them a happy ending. i still think characters need to "earn" their ending of course, but i don't think it's necessarily proportional to the amount of suffering i put them through!!
28 notes
·
View notes