Hello hello ! Couldn't help but notice that your q!antoine design had horse(?) hooves :O
Do you have some hcs on what he is under this dirty cloak ?
I actually have a fullbody coloured drawing of him without the cloak somewhere in my files, whereas I’ll share it one day is up to whether or not I get a random confidence boost regarding my own designs and publicaly post them on impulse (but since you so kindly asked you get this one)
At first I wanted to make him some sort of eerie anthro cat underneath as a reference to the catboy meme
And then as I was watching cc!Antoine’s VODs his character happened to find a zombie horse head and wore it for about 4min and 22sec, and me being me it became free real estate and I horsegirled again
On top of that I kind of imprinted on people’s headcanons of him being an end creature hybrid, and stealing people's better ideas is the second thing I'm the most talented at (after turning everything into furry)
So to sum it up :
Underneath the cloak, my q!Antoine design is some sort of anthro unicorn x enderman-ish hybrid, with a shatered horn. He’s got a black pelt with a white star & snip marking on his head, and a short disheveled mane that runs all the way down to the middle of his spine. The skin on his ribcage is transluscent and purple light pierces through (for aesthetic✨), and if you look close enough (which he wouldn't let you do) you could see glimpses of his insides and whatnot.
He wears lime green waterproof leg wraps on each of his limbs (I wanted it to be practical with the whole dirt/mud thing, and this design choice could have made me look smart if I hadn't added heavy feathering on both his legs, which nullifies it all)
He has a flexible tail because I can, and anteater-like claws for hands (perfect for digging !)
Other headcanons I have in my head that I won't ever share if I don't do it now :
-His unicorn horn is broken, only the stump remains and it can hardly do any magic anymore, but I headcanon that he uses it when using the symetry wand instead of the actual in-game tool.
-With my eggs designs I like to sprinkle around bits of the parents' own appearances on top of it all, this is why my Pomme is a pony
-Speaking of Pomme, she's the only one q!Antoine is confortable enough with taking off his mask around for relatively long periods of time (which I imagine he would do when writing in his secret room)
-The other french-speakers have seen him without the mask at least once, but it was usually by accident and for merely a few seconds (For Baghera, it would probably be because curiosity got the best of her, so she would have forced a her way into the situation)
46 notes
·
View notes
Oh wonderful, another YouTuber I usually agree with butchering their critical thinking skills while talking about NATLA.
Just like with Jessie Gender, I usually agree with Read With Cindy's takes on media, but, just like with Jessie, Cindy just....point blank lies about what happened in the live action Avatar?
Because I have that terminal condition of 'can't let inaccurate information remain un-challenged', here's my response to her points:
She claims that because Sokka isn't sexist, Katara has nothing to be angry about…..so colonization, genocide, a 100 year war, the fire nation murdering her mother, the broken state of the world aren't things to be mad about? Sexism is the only thing a WOMAN could POSSIBLY be angry about???
She claims they 'sanitized' Sokka's character 'removing his flaws so he has nowhere to grow' - same as the last point - do you think sexism is the only flaw a man can have? There are absolutely no other character traits available for men to have that they need to grow from?
She claims that it's only in the animated show that Katara frees Aang from the iceberg - in the live-action, she wasn't the catalyst for the story - that's just…demonstrably not true. In the live-action, Katara's waterbending is still what breaks Aang free. Just because she doesn't do it in an angry tirade doesn't mean it wasn't her power. Yet again, women can show power in MANY ways other than screaming at sexist people. In the live-action, she's waterbending despite Sokka's command for her not to, he's trying to find a mundane way to get the boat back and Katara decides to attempt to solve the problem with her waterbending - which works, but also breaks Aang free. Yet again, if you can only see 'agency' as 'screaming tirade' then you're missing out on a lot of other ways people can show their agency
She claims that they substitute showing Katara and Sokka's 'everyday life' intro for Aang's to push him as the main character rather than the Water Tribe siblings, but…that's just not true? The live action shows Aang's 'day-in-the-life' AND Sokka and Katara's - it actually shows more of Sokka and Katara's 'day-to-day' than the animated show does. So this point is just a flat out lie.
She continues on about the 'hero's journey' and how the hero 'always refuses the call' - yet….in the animated show, Katara NEVER 'refuses the call' to go with Aang - she almost abandons her family to 'answer the call' and only stops because Aang and her family don't want her to be separated from them. Please stop using the hero's journey as gospel and anything that breaks from that mold is 'bad' - but if you ARE going to use it….get better at viewing media because all that DID happen in the live-action.
Cindy claims that the 'call to adventure' in the live-action is still 'go to the north pole' but it's not - the call to adventure is helping Aang on his journey to be the Avatar - a journey that Katara and Sokka willingly go on to play a part in saving the world. Did you not watch the entire first episode and then the first part of the second? She claims that Katara had no reason to go on the journey in the live-action other than to help Aang when that's point-blank not true. She was excited about how much more bending she could do and how, because of Aang (like in the cartoon), she could now become a better waterbender. Part of her journey out of the southern tribe is STILL for herself and her own growth, not just Aang's.
Cindy makes the argument that Katara isn't a real main character in the live-action because she had nothing to do with the inciting incident (Aang being released from the iceberg) and she didn't have her own reason for going on the journey (get a waterbending master at the north pole). Both these assertions are, just factually wrong. Katara DOES free Aang from the iceberg and she DOES continue on with him because being in the world is helping her waterbending - she even got a waterbending scroll out of it and the mental training that helps her begin her journey. Not only that, but the inciting incident could also be seen as the decision to help Aang or not, it doesn't have to specifically be 'freeing him from the iceberg'. That's an incredibly narrow way to view inciting incidents.
But more than that, Cindy's assertion that those two things have to be present in order for someone to be a main character are just…really bad and narrow storytelling. You can still be a main character even if you don’t personally cause the inciting incident: ummmm…Aang? Hello? He didn't CHOOSE to be the Avatar, he was drug along and finally had to accept his role despite not wanting to at all! Not only that, but Sokka is a main character too, so is his reason for sticking with the group not good enough? Is he not actually part of the Gaang?
She goes on to say that Katara was the glue that created and held together the Gaang and in the live-action, she wasn't. That's…also literally not true as well. In the animated and live action, Sokka is totally on board immediately with saving Aang after Zuko takes him (after Katara changes his mind about turning Aang over in the first place), then she's the one who insists that they all need to continue on with Aang even after the immediate threat of the fire nation is done. In the animated show, Sokka is on board from the second episode on, so Katara isn't 'keeping everyone together' - yet. I think Cindy is drawing from future seasons with that analysis when it isn't accurate in the live-action at all. Many times in season one of the animated series, Aang is actually the one to get in between sibling squabbles and tries to keep them together, so placing all the weight of being the glue of the party on Katara is…well, parentifying Katara in a way that's not exactly the best.
Cindy also claims that live-action Katara never has any dialogue or action that does anything for the story. That's just….again, inaccurate? Genuinely it feels like she just stopped paying attention to Katara the moment she didn't scream at Sokka and just heard the 'wah wah wah' of Charlie Brown adults every other time Katara spoke. She didn't pay attention to Katara as a character at all and that says more about Cindy's view of female characters than it does the writer's. She even claims Katara didn't do anything to help in fights when….she definitely does? Just because she's not a super competent waterbender off the bat like animated Katara is, doesn't mean she doesn't try to help in battles, but it makes a lot of sense that she's easily beaten because….she has no combat training and is fighting against trained soldiers???? Sorry she isn't 'girl boss' enough for you.
At the same time, Cindy is claiming that Sokka is put in a more important role than Katara and he's learning all these new things while Katara isn't. Which tells me that Cindy doesn't put any importance into Katara learning about leadership and waterbending and keeping the emotional core of the party in tact (something she claims Katara needed to do but didn't) - she only views Sokka learning about different ways to interact with being a 'warrior' as important. Apparently, Katara struggling with her cultural trauma isn't 'a lot going on' with her character - I guess Cindy found that stuff boring and just wanted more 'heroic' stuff. Apparently sustaining the cultural traditions of her entire tribe wasn't enough going on with Katara - that stuff isn't important and at all, apparently.
Again with the complaint that Aang is 'just pulling Katara along with him on his own journey making Katara a passive observer' while…showing the scene where Katara is practicing waterbending herself and encouraging Aang to join her in training too? And HE'S actually the one being more passive???
I think Cindy fundamentally misunderstands ensemble cast stories. She makes the claim that because Katara and Sokka don't come into the story until 20 minutes in, that means they can't really be main characters. Tell that to EVERY ensemble cast that picks up new protagonists along the way! Is she also saying that Zuko isn't a main character because the show didn’t start with him? Because he didn't "cause" the inciting incident?
Of course, she then tries to claim that both Suki and Yue were relegated to 'love interest for Sokka' in the live-action but she somehow believes that that wasn't the case in the animated show?? Both Suki and Yue had SOO much more agency in the live-action than they did in the animated series! I already made a post about Suki, but Yue's post is coming.
Idk how you could ever call live-action Katara 'meek' or 'just a good girl with no flaws'. She stood up to Sokka when he wanted to turn Aang over to the firebenders, she pushed for them to go on the journey with Aang, she stood her ground against Zuko and his entire group of soldiers (ALONE!), she joined Jet in tracking the spy and attacking him and his men, she stood up for what Jet was doing (before she knew everything) and then stopped the arrow from blowing up everyone at the palace, she again stood her ground against Sokka and made him see her pov (and she accepted seeing his too), she was excited to join Aang in the spirit world, she fought back against Pakku's sexism, and she stood her ground against Zuko yet again to defend Aang. So, which one of those things was 'meek' or 'just being a good girl'?
Cindy also claims that everything about waterbending was just 'handed to Katara so easily' and she didn't have to work for it. Like, WHERE???? In the animated series, Katara was automatically great at waterbending and was doing super advanced stuff immediately! In the show, we see her practicing in every spare moment. To claim that her being given a scroll that had been hidden among her tribe for years in an effort to preserve their culture the fire benders were trying to destroy was 'cheap' and 'just handing the win to Katara without her having to work for it' is, quite frankly, pretty disgusting.
This poison of 'individuality is the only good trait, you have to do everything yourself or else it doesn't count and you had it easy' is so freaking toxic and we need to get rid of that thought process right freaking now! To have your own culture fight and risk their lives to preserve knowledge to pass down to you is a beautiful and powerful thing - to claim that it was 'the easy way out' discounts the sacrifice of all the water benders before Katara who sacrificed so that she could have that knowledge. She still had to study and practice from the scroll - would you say that reading the works of scholars before you meant you didn't actually learn anything? You needed to do all the experiments and research yourself or else you're 'lacking agency'?
Not only does she have to study and practice from the scroll, she learns from observing other benders and trying out new moves based on their techniques. She uses both the scroll and her observation of others to scrape her way into learning new waterbending techniques. Contrast that with the animated Katara that we never see training unless it's the point of the episode yet she's still doing amazing things without a hitch. Absolutely bizzare that Cindy (and so many others) complains that Katara didn't crack open an entire iceberg with her rage, but ALSO complains that she….lifted some water to stop a fireball claiming it was 'too advanced' of a move for her to be able to do…..choose one, PLEASE!
The more 'critiques' I see people making about the writing of female characters in NATLA, the more I'm afraid we're regressing massively in what we think are 'acceptable' ways to write women. It seems like they all want to go back to the early 2000s white pop feminism that lacks any nuance or intersectionality - the only thing women can be mad about it shallow sexism and the only way to SHOW they're mad is to get physical or scream their heads off. No other method of showing anger or complex reasons for anger are allowed, that's "watering it down" rather than adding layers and nuance, incorporating every aspect of a character rather then just their gender to their motivations.
Ironically, what they're doing is contributing to gender essentialism - women are this way, men are this way, the only way to fight against 'women are this way' is to scream at a hyper-sexist man and if you're not doing that (or don't have a hyper-sexist man to scream at) then you aren't actually a 'strong female character' because screaming at sexism is the only thing that makes a woman strong.
23 notes
·
View notes
Hey Hi Hello I absolutely LOVE your gijinka designs and your style and I would be honored if you would gijinka-fy my beloved my oinglydoople messed up sad wet cat Tangled Threads!!! do what feels right... in your heart... go wild... i absolutely love your designs...
more info!
more more info!
sorry for botherin ya but i had to ask! have a wonderful day/night! ^^
Okay i swear im not biased when it comes to the doodles but she's just so jfjdjdjdjksk aesthetically pleasing to draw im so biased to space and stars patterned anything
Also i decided to change brushes for the main image from here on out i hope thats okay
Okay lastly you put her in a glacial winter themed area you fackin bet she deserves to see the aurora its so pretty jdjdkdks. I also gave her houseki no kuni shiny hair because shiny hehe
Ps. Sorry for the shit image quality so far my tab is dying of space and i can only screenshot images jfjdkkddk
Pps. I think i fixed it sobs idk
124 notes
·
View notes
How do you feel about RT'S rule of having one trait only for faunuses?
(Idk if I even spelt that right)
Hey!
So if I recall...this condition was created due to limitations for the team, and I don't mind it honestly. They turned a technical limitation into a creative one, and I'm all for character designs like that. You only have ONE animal trait to play with so what will that lead to?? It's fun. Good for exercising your creative muscles.
At times it does make it hard to tell who is what animal depending on which trait they give the person. Initially I couldn't figure out what faunus Adam was cause his lil baby horns are hidden in his hair. His name suggests bull but his horn say baby goat lol.
But then it's also like. Comical. Like every time there's been a bunny rabbit it's always ears we see. Why just the ears? What about their tail or some paws? How about different types of ears to imply different types of rabbits? Short ears, one that's crooked, long hare ears, floppa ears.
Something I did like that they did with this was the idea of some faunus hiding their lone trait versus others who didn't.
In Arrowfell, there's this mouse faunus named Mikado who is initially wanting to hide their ears, but is then encouraged to keep them out in the open. I know we've seen this sort of topic being explored in the main series (blake hiding her ears and velvet choosing not to), and seeing it again in this game was nice. Something that's interesting to explore every now and then.
But yeah my only thing is it would be nice to see different traits called out for an animal type. Like if someone is a bear, one faunus could have their ears, another could have paws or fangs, etc. Just diversify it a bit so it doesn't look copy paste. I don't really hold RT to much standards cause I know they don't have the money, but if they did, this would be my request on that.
Thanks for stopping by~
---------------
I know this has nothing to do with the question asked, but are there such things as mythical/folk lore creature based faunus? Like imagine a unicorn, griffin, Selkie, fairy, etc. I mean if this is a fairytale like world then why not?
38 notes
·
View notes