#some people seem to base their entire opinions on every character around how they treat Nesta | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

m1xieup · 8 months

Note

Hey, i wanted to say that i follow your thoughts and theories about Nevermore for a week now and i have the feeling that your questions are quite perceptive !

SPOIL FAST PASS EP 80 (i think)

[[MORE]]

On the topic of Will, i cannot forget the conversation between Lenore and Annabel in 🌟 the closet 🌟 and more precisly the part about currency. Every time i see a character now it just pops in my head : What do they trade ? What do they expect to receive ? What are their character mental traits for them to think like that ? Why ?

I exposed this because it would be so cool to hear your thought on Will and Montrashor !

Spoilers for Nevermore (specifically 76+), read at your own risk!!!

Hi! Let me say first of all I’m flattered, and I’m glad you’ve been enjoying my thoughts/theories! Now this is quite the interesting question and one I need to give some thought, so I'm sorry it took so long! I hope you enjoy my interpretation though! (strap in though this is long)

What does “Currency” stand for?

What this character wants to receive/how they desire to be treated/ what they desire to be given (and by whom)

What they prioritize when it comes to gain → what do they risk/give things up for (what do they give up?)

Questions to be answered

What do they trade (what is their currency?)

What do they expect to receive (also for consideration; what are they willing to give in order to receive this)?

What are their character/mental traits for them to think like that? Why? (How could their personalities/experiences influence their currency and actions [their motivation]?)

Will

Ok Will. I’ll start with him as he’ll most likely be a focal character for the next few

episodes, and we’ll probably learn more about him. A quick reminder! I am not an expert and these theories/opinions are all based on my personal reading. Now, to the best of my understanding Will’s primary ‘currencies’ are security, and companionship. Will is indecisive, and a bit of a pushover. While his actions could be described as cowardly, I think that is simplifying it to a certain accent. He seems to face significant distress at the thought of Monty not being around to tell him what to do, and implies that he needs someone to control/decide what he does. I personally think this comes from indecisiveness, fear, and low self-esteem. Will consistently gravitates towards strong personalities-- people who will tell him exactly what to do so he can’t mess up, and so he can’t make the “wrong” decision. So what he desires from a relationship is security. A person to provide a sense of safety and comfort. He staunchly believes that Monty has a plan, and has complete faith in him. Now when understanding the meaning of ‘currency’ in this context it’s important to understand that this is what someone wants/needs, and is specifically a tool for manipulation. Will also seems to put a lot of stock in the fact that he and Monty are friends, and that they are companions. Will has been shown to be largely ignored/lonely outside of Montresor, and if my reading of him is correct, he is not someone used to kindness. He seems to be a fairly isolated person, so it seems that Will, in addition to security in the face of his fears and low self-esteem, desires friendship greatly. He states that Montresor is his friend so of course he’ll help Will when he needs it. Not only is he very loyal, in a desire to protect the security and companionship he gets, but he is willing to excuse a lot of mistreatment- both towards himself and others. Because if his friend is threatened, his stability is threatened. This obviously makes Will a very dependent person, which does align with his spectre.

Will’s spectre is interesting to analyze for a couple reasons assuming spectres represent the person in some way. Will is a doppelganger, which already means his entire thing is that he becomes like someone else. This implies that Will may not have a very stable identity, and possibly may act very differently depending on who it is he’s following. Secondly he does not have a face, just a circle of drama-style masks around his head. These masks display his emotions, and even become disorderly when he is drunk. These masks most likely indicate a facade, or the fact Will may be hiding some of his true emotions. His limbs are also surrounded by ribbons. Now, this may not be intentional, but we also know that ribbons are important symbols in Nevermore. They indicate restraint, entanglement, and expectations. They also could function somewhat as strings, so it’s possible they could also indicate manipulation and control. Another interesting detail is that Will is a neutral type spectre- the only other neutral spectre we’ve seen is Pluto, which makes him stand out. If it’s true that spectres correlate with either the circumstances of one’s death, or what they were feeling, this puts Will in a fairly unique place. I feel like his spectre also stands out due to its abilities: duplication. mimicry, and entanglement. Mimicry may be a representation of how he models himself after those that admires.

Now that I’ve discussed what I think his currency is, as well as talked a little about my thoughts on Will’s spectre, I figured I could talk a little more about what I think could lead him to act this way. Now in my explanation of why I chose ‘security and companionship’ I did already talk about my thoughts a little, but I figured I’d talk a little more before moving on to Monty. So I already mentioned that I believe that Will has fairly low self-esteem, and this makes him seek out someone to take the responsibility for his actions, give him validation, and treat him the way he feels he should be treated. Will, at least during the Mystery Manor Arc, blamed himself for the treatment he received from Monty. Now his friendship with Monty involving some part seeking validations may seem counterintuitive, as Monty rarely offers Will any validation, but this may be because he blames Will for it. Will, already thinking he is stupid, and generally negatively of himself, believes this. He constantly asks Monty for validation, and Monty keeps him around with the promise of his friendship and the eventual benefits that would come with that. Will believes in Monty, desperately, I mean he has to. He is so paralyzed by fear about making his own decisions, that Monty seems like a safe-haven. Will seems to be deeply lonely, and may even feel ignored or shunned by his peers. He’s sweet, and yet his peers just do not seem to care-- he’s a background character in his own story! Now this may just be a byproduct of him literally being a side character, but I believe that in episode 80 it was shown that even when the story is being told by him, he’s still treated this way. This would most likely make Will feel deeply lonely. So he seeks companionship, and is willing to give pretty much anything for it. This combined with his dependance, and willingness to put up with mistreatment, makes him the perfect target for Monty. Monty is shown time and time again to be a manipulator, and Will is both willing to be hurt and hurt others for the things Monty will offer him (even if he doesn’t actually end up receiving it). Now what could have made Will into this sort of person outside of just his personality? Sadly, we don’t really know (though we could be finding out soon), but we can theorize! My guess is that growing up Will had an extremely close bond; one upon which he was dependant, one that would have normalized the hostility he faces from Monty, and one that might have made Will into the person he is right now. It’s possible (depending on how closely they follow the source material, which I definitely have thoughts about but I’m waiting to learn more about him) that Will might have lost his parents at a young age, and this might have also influenced him greatly. In summary, Will may not be used to kindness, or to friendships that don’t expect him to fulfill this kind of role. It may be that this is simply what Will is used to and expects, which is sad! I definitely think that Will, alongside Morella, is the most likely to switch sides. In fact I think he’ll have to (see my episode 80 theories). Now I hope this has thoroughly explained my perspective on your questions!

Montresor

Ok, so part of the reason this analysis took so long was that I was having a lot of trouble with Monty. I just couldn’t seem to figure him out- I’d think one thing then think of something that contradicts it a minute later. So after much thought I’ve come to the conclusion that Montresor’s currency may be respect. Now I originally wrote this off as impossible, as in his relationship with Lenore he’s interested specifically because she does not show him respect- in fact she antagonizes him. However, he also states that a large portion of his interest in her is ‘taming’ her (yuck). This may mean that what he desires from this relationship is respect, it's the respect she’ll give him once he breaks her. Monty specifically has a very dog-eat-dog world view, and thinks there are two types of people; winners and losers. He says he himself is a winner, and that the losers are just there to populate their games. Monty may actually be a dark foil to Annabel. Monty views life as a game, and one that is inherently competitive. He also treats others as pawns like Annabel, manipulating and using them to his advantage. He was also the one to first peg Lenore as a true threat in episode 32, where he made Annabel and Lenore compete over Morella. He knew to look out for Lenore, and I think part of what draws him to her is part of what draws Annabel to Lenore- she doesn’t play by the rules of the game. She is a challenge to Montresor, and one he is determined to beat. Another thing I noticed is that while Monty may be reckless, he’s not stupid. He most definitely does have a plan. He is able to compete with big players like Annabel, Lenore, and Prospero and you’ve got to have some sort of strategic ability to do so. He also is very good at picking people. Specifically people that help serve his larger goal- in fact I wouldn’t be surprised if he even has a goal outside of getting that second chance at a life. Monty is a manipulator at his core, and that is part of why it was so hard to understand his currency (I’m still not 100% on the one I chose). Monty often uses different tactics with different people, and acts according to the bounds of that relationship. However, I do feel that what Monty wants ultimately is respect. Annabel gets the best responses from him when challenging his reputation (possibly lowering the respect he receives from others) and when she respects him. He reacts negatively when she disrespects or tells him what to do (such as in the hallway). There is also his track record with insults. He hates them, and takes them extremely personally. He is also very vindictive, and it seems the easiest way to get on his bad side is to disrespect/insult him. He also is one to hold a grudge it seems based on his comments on ‘keeping a ledger’ in the Mystery Manor arc. However, yet again this circles back to Lenore. Why does he keep interacting with her, and is fascinated by her, if he hates disrespect? He wants to prove her wrong. He knows both Annabel and Lenore look down on him, but Lenore does so openly and he is allowed to take out his frustrations on her because she is on the opposite team. Lenore’s respect means more because he had to earn it. In my opinion Montresor suffers from the ever-so-common in toxic men cocktail of an inflated yet fragile ego, ruthless world view, and a deeply buried kernel of self-hatred. Montresor isn’t just fun to hate because he’s evil- but because there is an element of realism to his characterization.

Now we get on to the ‘why are they like this’ portion of the analysis (I would analyze Monty’s spectre but it has less to do with this than Will’s and I’ve already been working on this a few days and I’m tired). The reason I feel Monty wants respect (as well as control) so badly in his relationships, is that there was a period of time where he did not get it. Monty was a cowboy in the wild west, and as much as the image of a cowboy may be glorious, it really was just another working-class job with a ton of physical labor. In fact during the time period (we think) Monty was alive, he’d be in the same category as coal-miners. He would have moved a lot, and had to do some very dangerous jobs. He also would have been fairly poor, as stated before, being a cowboy was not particularly lucrative. He also would have to have regularly come into contact with rich ranchers, who may not have been particularly respectful. This may contribute to why Monty acts with such particular vitriol towards Duke, who epitomizes the idea of east coast/foreigner who disrespects him and his background (particularly by calling him a ‘stupid, backwoods hick’) This most likely was a sore spot for Monty during his life- also side note I noticed that people tend to act in accordance to their lives and experiences in them despite not remembering them fully, which is interesting. The point is that as a cowboy Monty would not have gotten the respect he felt he deserved, and that may have influenced what he looks for in relationships aka his ‘currency’. The reason he wants to gain Lenore’s respect and ‘tame’ her is in order to prove himself. Montresor has been underestimated by almost everyone he’s come into contact with. They assume, due to his personality and hot-headed nature, that he is much less intelligent than he is. I think this even applies to the audience- I mean I underestimated him at first! It’s easy to see that Annabel is intelligent; she is cold, calculated, and a strategist at heart. But Monty? No. The thing is I think this was a common theme in his relationships in life, and he resents people underestimating him due to his background. So, he seeks to earn and take respect from the people he thinks are a threat/look down on him. He also has a very ruthless view of the world, one that usually comes from a harsh life, and seeing as we knew he was a cowboy it's very possible that he had a couple bad experiences that made him think this way. It could also be that someone taught him this was true (such as a mentor, or a combination of the two- someone he cared about betrayed him while expressing this sentiment). This could just be how he is, but I find this unlikely. Something caused him to think in this manner. I personally think that the betrayal angle is very interesting, and plausible. So, we know that Monty believes there are two types of people: winners and losers. He thinks of himself, Lenore, and most likely Annabel as winners. He thinks of both Ada and Will as losers most likely- useful to further his chances. He uses them to advance his plans, but I’m not sure he really cares (I do think it's possible he does care and just doesn’t show it, but based on his behavior… it's not likely.) about them. He keeps them around him for their skills, and possibly to boost his ego, but would sacrifice them in a heartbeat. They give him respect, but it's not the same because he didn't have to earn it. They have a blind faith in him. He wants to prove those he thinks sees themself as above him wrong, and he wants their respect more than anything. This makes Monty a very compelling villain, and a fun character to analyze! His unique combination of a high/fragile ego, and possibly some self hatred in there, makes him hard to predict, and even harder to control.

#nevermore #nevermore webcomic #nevermore webtoon #nevermore spoilers #nevermore theory #montresor nevermore #will nevermore

45 notes · View notes

riddlerosehearts · 1 year

Text

not to be a hater (though this is more hating on how fandom treats sapphic ships and female characters than anything) but last night i felt bored and deranged and kept thinking about my changing opinions on ATLA ships, so i sorted the mai/ty lee tag on AO3 by kudos and kept track of how long it took me to find an actual mai.lee fic, usually just by looking at tags and descriptions but sometimes taking a peek at the work itself... and it took 53 fics lol. 53 fics down the list of most kudos'd fics in the mai/ty lee tag, to find a 3k oneshot that is actually about them. on some of these i would click the "entire work" button and search for their names, just to find zuko and sokka's names mentioned 700 times each while mai and ty lee's would be mentioned maybe 10 times each. ugh. their tag already only has 871 fics to zu.kka’s almost 6k to begin with.

like, to be fair, from what i could tell based on their tags and descriptions, only 33/52 of the previous fics--so around 60%--were entirely/primarily focused on zuko or zu.kka (or the set of harry potter/zuko crossover fics i found). the other 19 fics seemed to be the odd zu.tara, zuk.ki, or azu.tara fic, or even gen fic about azula, katara, toph, or the whole gaang, that included mai.lee in the background. so not every one of the top fics in the mai/ty lee tag is actually focused on male characters. but still, to see so many of them be like that... i tried sorting by date updated and most of the stuff on the front page wasn’t about them either. :/

idk i just kinda feel like this backs up what i said before about mai.lee mostly just getting popular because zu.kka got popular and its fans wanted to get mai out of the way, and not because they actually care about the girls and their dynamic. NOT saying everyone who ships zuko and sokka is like this of course, but i think it also shows in the fact that zuko/sokka/suki has become a semi-popular ot3 whereas i have never once seen mai shipped with zu.kka, as part of an ot3 or even ot4. she just gets paired off with ty lee and then the two of them get a secondary role at best (in several of the fics i opened up, mai and ty lee were tagged but literally not even mentioned or there was just one line saying they were dating) in every fic. people just don’t seem to actually like her and to be honest, i don’t like her much either, although i tried to get myself to. i tried to more closely examine her character and see the good in her and i started thinking mai.lee would be a cute ship and seeking out content for it about a year before the ATLA renaissance of 2020. content was scarce but a lot of the oldest fics for them on ao3 are, at least, actually about them even if they’re just short drabbles. so after the renaissance i was excited to come back to tumblr after a hiatus and discover that they were finally a popular ship and people were seeing how good they could be together, but then every time i went to look for fanworks about them, on ao3 or here on tumblr, i realized everything i’m saying in this post. they’re a wlw ship, so of course they’re not actually popular, that would be crazy. of course their “popularity” is entirely owed to the fact that a mlm former rarepair (yeah, zu.kka was not that popular pre-renaissance, people who wanted an mlm ship used to prefer jet.ko) that involves mai’s canon love interest blew up. and i just hate that this sort of thing seems to happen in just about every fandom. i wish the ATLA fandom could’ve been better about it.

#blehhh. don't mind me--just ranting about how people don't actually care about wlw ships #i'm sure not every zu.kka and/or mai.lee shipper is like this. in fact i know some wonderful zu.kka fans #but if mai.lee fandom at large actually gave a shit about mai i bet i could've grown to really like her #and sadly it feels very much like they don't but idk what i expected tbh #ngl i think the renaissance only served to make the ATLA fandom 20x more insufferable overall #although i am grateful for all the new fanworks and actually decent and normal fans it brought in #also to be clear i used to hate mai but i don't really anymore. just think she's kinda boring #and also that mai.ko isn't good for either party because bry.ke can't write romance #she deserves a cute gf who loves her but idc about mai.lee anymore :/#especially since a lot of its fans seem to really hate azula too

5 notes · View notes

dextixer · 2 years

Text

RWBY - Rushing the show is a bad and indefensible choice for the series.

RWBY as a show has received many critiques over the years, some warranted and others not so much. I myself have pointed out many of what i perceive to be problems in the series. While many of us could point at certain issues like "Too many characters" or "Wrong characters are being focused on", many of the problems that any of us can perceive are usually just symptoms of a larger core problems of the show, some of them have been covered in the past by many various OP's but there is one that seems to strangely receive a lot of opposition, and that is the point that the show is being rushed.

I guess i wanted to make this thread to better explain this position/argument and why i find opposition to it lacking?

The Problem

I guess that first of all the perceived problem itself has to be covered. It is no secret that there have been some complaints/arguments about time spent in various volumes. This mostly started to crop up in Volumes 4-5. Some people felt that Yangs recovery arc was a little bit on the short side for example. Then we also had Haven and Mistral itself, but we explored so little of it that it was dissapointing for a good ammount of people. These problems were noticed but not exactly treated as "pressing" ones. Surely, Atlas will be okay, right?

Sadly, it was not. Admittedly we got more of Atlas than we did of Mistral, but the experience still felt cut short. Weiss subplots felt rushed, characters like Blake fell by the wayside, at the end of V8 we are not even sure about the status of characters like Maria and Pietro.

Atlas in being 2 volumes instead of more WHILE adding additional characters to explore created a problem of just how much time they had for each character. And in a show with around 4 main characters and as many secondary character (supposedly) hangers on? The time limit was too strict.

Maybe this would not sting as much if the protagonists could return to Atlas and have more time for extra character building or even exploration of Atlas Culture, but at the end of V8 Atlas is gone, so we are not coming back there.

While some people advocate for time to be taken away from characters like the Ace-Ops, i disagree. I disagree because it would just result in less story and because there is simply in my opinion a better alternative in the form of an extra volume. Something that the Mistral arc also could have benefited from.

And if i am not mistaken the writers themselves know how limited their time is as they have complained about it. They know it is a problem yet fail to adress it time and time again.

The Opposition

I never found this argument to be too controversial in my opinion. Its a simple solution, the creators of the show decide on an extra volume and then use that extra time to fully flesh out every character/story they wish at that point since there is time to do so now.

Lets take V7-8 for example. There is no reason why Salem could not just not arrive for an extra volume or simply set-out from her base later to have an extra volume without Salem.

And yet, every time i bring this up, there seems to be severe opposition to this opinion.

Now, i understand the point that for example the people with the argument of "Just trim the fat" are making. That is an entirely way to view as a fix to the shows current problems even if i disagree.

However some people hold the opinion that the writers of RWBY just CANNOT have an extra volume because of various statements going "thats not how animation goes". Sometimes with little to no explanation. From what i understand the claim is that RWBY simply cannot afford to create an extra volume.

This seems to stem from a maddening myth of RT being an "indie" company, just recently i received a comment on tumblr saying as much, "RWBY is made on a shoestring budget and a very tight schedule". The truth is that RT has no been "indie" for a long time now. They are a corporation of relatively high means, RWBY is also their flagship show, a show that brings them the money.

How can people to this day argue or think that RT is some kind of "good guy" and "underdog" company that is still being worked on in someones garage is mistifying to me.

RT has the money AND the time to create an extra volume. At least they SHOULD. But even this claim of mine receives opposition, some people argue that for example the show has to end eventually, so it would be bad to slow down, others argue that the show would somehow fail if that was the case.

This also annoys me because some people in the fandom engage in a weird kind of double-think.

On one hand people believe that RT and RWBY are doing well considering the news about collaborations, advertisements and the like, it is on its A game.

Yet at the same time those same people seem to weirdly imply or even claim that RT and RWBY just "cant afford" to do better than they are doing right now.

These claims are in opposition to one another, because at the end of the day from my perception either you want the show to get better and thus argue for an extra volume, or you somehow believe that an extra volume would kill the show, in which case the company/show are weak.

Management is the problem

At the end of the day most problems with any product occur at the level of management, and in my opinion this situation is no different, at least not fully. More often than not products have problems because the manegerial staff emposes unreasonable demands onto the workers of lower ranks. And when those demands are rushed out or sometimes not completed succesfully it can and does lead to worse products of any kind.

BUt RT should not have this problem as its directors are also its main writers. This is not an example of writers being prevented from bettering the show because management runs them like dogs. The writers ARE the management.

The writers decide how long the show takes, they decide how many episodes or volumes there are. The lenght of episodes, arcs. They are the ones in control of all of that.

And yet they still rush the show which in my opinion is simply a boneheaded decision.

Some people however claim that i am wrong, that i just simply dont understand how any of this works. And yet my opinion has been echoed by many game developers and even makers of any other kind of media. Anthem, Warcraft 3 reforged are the greatest examples of this as the developers of the game came out and said clearly that their failures were due to management cutting budget and the like.

Once again, problems that RT should NOT have, and yet it does.

And i do not think RT should be excused for any of their perceived failures.

This does not seem like a story of corporate overlords looking down on their employees and asking them for impposible. In this case the management and the MAIN creators of the show are the SAME.

End

At the end of the day i think that CRWBY should slow down and fous on their characters and the world itself rather than rushing to the final confrontation against Salem.

And i think that the community should stop giving free passes to the show and its management.

1 note · View note

cinaja · 3 years

Text

For the record:

Feysand and Nessian both have pretty exactly the same problems, down to the sexual assault, the age gap and general toxic elements. If you hate Feysand for these things while shipping Nessian, it's not actually about not wanting toxic relationships, you just don't like Feysand.

Nesta is only two years older than Feyre, meaning she is only two years ahead in her education, which puts her at a primary school level of education. This means Nesta is no more qualified to be a ruler or hold a court positon than Feyre is. If you say Feyre is unqualified to be High Lady but want Nesta to become queen, it's not actually about qualification, you just don't like Feyre.

As members of the Inner Circle, Mor, Cassian and Azriel are all complicit in the Night Court's general politics, including the treatment of the Illyrians and the Hewn City. If you place all the blame on Mor and call her horrible while simultaniously excusing Azriel and Cassian and talking about how you want them to have a good redemption, then you don't care about a terrible leadership being shown as good, you just don't like Mor.

#some people seem to base their entire opinions on every character around how they treat Nesta #except for Cassian #who treats her worse than anyone else #but gets a pass bc he's the love interest #and if you're going to do that #fine #but maybe acknowledge it's not about morals #AND DON'T POST IN THE ANTI TAGS!!!#anti acotar #anti nessian #anti feysand #anti rhysand #anti cassian #anti feyre

100 notes · View notes

bottleblondefeelingconned · 2 years

Text

I've been a fan of manhwas for a while now, particularly the villainess and isekai genre, but there's something I'd really like to see more of.

Now, you don't have to agree with me, we're all allowed to have different tastes, but there are scenarios where the MC has transmigrated into a different world where (most of the time it's family) the people are just the absolute worst, and I really wish the MC was just allowed to permanently hate them.

Like, I genuinely like wmmap, but Claude is an absolutely atrocious father (and just a shit person all around). Athy's plan was literally to manipulate Claude into liking her in order to avoid being murdered by the guy. I don't know about most people, but parents who kill their kids are shit people in my opinion. At the beginning of the story Claude watched as Athy nearly drowns, and then several chapters later, it was a big, dramatic moment for Claude to ✨not let his daughter drown✨ as if that's not baseline behaviour from a parent. And the fandom acts like Claude doing the bare minimum makes him Best Dad Ever, and it's really scary how people are fanning over something really toxic. Athy didn't have parents in her previous life, that's why Claude's miniscule actions mean so much to her, but to the average person who has an Actually Good Dad, the man is quite honestly pathetic. (Gallahan superiority). Most people in Athy's situation would hate Claude, and they have every right to, because the smallest action that displeases the man would get you executed. A relationship where love is based on fear isn't healthy at all. If I was the MC in a story like that, my dad would literally astral project himself across universes just to sucker punch him.

And you've got other series, like The Strongest Characters in the World are Obsessed With Me, The Villainess is a Marionette, or Daughter of the Emperor, among many others, where the MC's family is just shit, and treats them horribly. And the plot is always that the MC grows to genuinely love them, as if those people actually deserve it.

I'd love for a story where the MC knows that they have to manipulate their family to love them in order to prevent themselves from getting fucking Murdered, and the knowledge that "this person will 100% kill me if I piss them off", combined with their general shitty attitude toward the MC, means that they continue hating them throughout the whole story. Just internally roasting them and talking shit the entire time. Because I for one know my worth, and I'm not going to settle for some emotionally constipated homicidal asshole who treats me like utter dogshit 99% of the time, but oh, he loves me because he gave me his hand to help me on a carriage. It's bullshit. It's unhealthy. And it's scary how so many people seem to idolise relationships based on this dynamic. And don't make me get into the utter shitstorm that is the male lead love interest in these stories.

That's why stories like Death is the Only Ending for the Villainess, the Villainess Reverses the Hourglass, Cheating Men Must Die, Untouchable Lady, The Villainess Imprints a Traitor and The Only Way to Protect the Female Lead's Older Brother are so great, because the MCs are women who know their worth, know they're being treated poorly, and know that they don't deserve it. And it's good to see. It's fine to hate people who treat you wrongly, and it's okay not to love people who claim they love you but have hurt you. It's okay to have self-worth, and to put yourself first, I promise. The sad part is just how rare these stories seem to be. There are thousands of manhwas on these genres, and the fact that I can only list six of them, makes me really worried for the majority of girls who read these stories and think ✨he tried to kill me but I can fix him ✨ even in a platonic or familial setting, is a healthy relationship.

Sidenote: thank god to stories like Into the Light Once Again (second life I will fistfight her original relatives) and I'll be the Matriarch in this Life. I love seeing actually good, not just decent, fathers. I feel like a lot of people who are into some of these stories have daddy issues, so read these if you wanna see what being a Dad means, check these out. There's also Father I Don't Want to Get Married, where the MC's dad realises that he's fucked up, and actually takes steps to amend it. He feels realistic, and not just a pure garbage heep. My dad is better though.

In conclusion:

1. Most of the families (prominently fathers and older brothers) suck

2. The MC should be allowed to just hate them and feel no affection for them whatsoever because they're awful people and in order to be genuinely loved at the very least you shouldn't be a cunt

3. I love my dad. He is awesome, showed me how a good dad should be, and would either stab half the fathers on this list if they treated me like in canon, or by god he'd go down swinging

#manhwa #isekai #villainess #who made me a princess #wmmap #the strongest characters in the world are obsessed with me #villainess isekai #the villainess is a marionette #daughter of the emperor #death is the only ending for a villainess #the villainess reverses the hourglass #cheating men must die #untouchable lady #the only way to protect the female lead's older brother #into the light once again #ill be the Matriarch in this life #you guys have daddy issues and bad taste in men and it shows

827 notes · View notes

pumpkinpaix · 3 years

Note

Pleeeeeeease get into the class one at some point because I very much want to understand the class dynamics happening in the story but I have yet to find a meta that dives into it

god anon you want me dead don’t you alsjdfljks

referring to this post

okay, so -- my specific salt about class interpretations in mdzs are very targeted. I can’t pretend to have a deep understanding of how class works in mdzs generally because uhhhhh yeah i don’t think i have that. i’m just not familiar enough with the genre and/or the particulars of chinese class systems. but! i can talk in general terms as to why I feel a certain way about the class dynamics that I do think I understand and how I think they relate to the themes of the novel! i’m gonna talk about wei wuxian, the daozhangs, xue yang, and 3zun with, I’m sure, a bunch of digressions along the way.

the usual disclaimers: i do not think you are a bad person if you hold opinions contrary to my own. i may disagree with you very strongly, but like. this isn’t a moral judgment, fandom is transformative and interpretive etc. etc. and i may change my mind. who knows what the future will bring!

OKAY so let’s begin!

here’s the thing about wei wuxian: he’s not poor. I think because characters use “son of a servant” kind of often when they’re trying to insult him, a lot of people latch onto that and think that it’s a much stronger indication of his societal status than it actually is. iirc, most of the insults that fall along the “son of a servant” line come after wei wuxian starts breaking severely from tradition. it’s a convenient thing to attack him for, but doesn’t actually indicate anything about his wealth. (exception: yu ziyuan, but that’s a personal familial issue) this is in direct contrast to jin guangyao who is constantly mocked for his family line, publicly and privately, no matter what he does.

so this, coupled with all the jokes about wwx never having any money (wei wuqian, sizhui’s “i’ve long since known you had no money” etc.), plus his like, rough years on the street as a child ends up producing this interpretation of wei wuxian, especially in modern aus, as someone who is very class conscious and “eat the rich”. but the fact of the matter is, wei wuxian IS rich. aside from the years in his childhood and the last two years of his life in yiling, like -- wei wuxian had money and status. he is gentry. he is respected as gentry. he is treated as a son by the sect leader of yunmeng jiang -- he does not have the jiang name, but it is so very clear that jiang fengmian favors him. wei wuxian is ranked fourth of all the eligible young masters in the cultivation world -- that is not a ranking he could have attained without being accepted into the upper class.

wei wuxian’s poverty does not affect him in the way that it affects jin guangyao or xue yang. he is of low-ish birth (still the son of jiang fengmian’s right hand man though! ok sure, “son of a servant” but like. >_> whatever anyways), but for most of his life he had money. he, jiang cheng, and their sect brothers go into town and steal lotus pods with the understanding that “jiang-shushu will pay for it”. this is a regular thing! that’s fucking rich kid behavior!!! wei wuxian is careless with money because he doesn’t have to worry about it. he still has almost all the benefits of being upper class: education, food security, respect, recognition etc. I think there may also be a misconception that wei wuxian was always on the verge of being kicked out by yu ziyuan, or that he was constantly walking on eggshells around her for fear of being disowned, but that is just textually untrue. i could provide receipts, but I admittedly don’t really feel like digging them up just now ;;

even in his last years in yiling, he was not the one who was dealing with the acute knowledge of poverty: wen qing is the one managing the money, and as far as we know, wei wuxian did little to no management of daily life during the burial mounds days -- mostly, he’s described as hiding in his cave for days on end, working on his inventions, running around like a force of chaos, frivolously making a mess of things -- it’s very very cute that he buries a’yuan in the dirt, but in classic wei wuxian fashion, he did Not think about the practical consequences of it -- that A’Yuan has no other clean clothes, and now he’s gotten this set dirty and has no intention of washing them. is this a personality thing? yeah, but I think it’s also indicative of his lack of concern over the logistics of everyday survival, re: wealth.

furthermore, i think it is important to remember that wei wuxian, when he is protecting the wen remnants, is not protecting common folk: he is still protecting gentry. fallen gentry, yes! but gentry nonetheless. wen qing was favored by wen ruohan, and wen ning himself says that he has a retinue of people under his command (the remnants, essentially). their branch of the family do not have the experience of living and growing in poverty -- they are impoverished and persecuted in their last years, but that’s a very different thing from being impoverished your whole life. (sidenote: I do not believe wei wuxian’s primary motivation for defending the wen remnants was justice -- i believe he did it because he felt he owed wen ning and wen qing a life debt, and once he was there, he wasn’t going to stand around and let the work camps go on. yes, he is concerned about justice and doing the right thing, but that’s not why he went in the first place. anyways, that’s another meta)

after wei wuxian returns, he then marries back into gentry, and very wealthy gentry at that. lwj provides him all the money he could ever want, he is never worried about going homeless, starving, being denied opportunities based on his class and accompanying disadvantages. who would dare? and neither wei wuxian nor lan wangji seem to have much interest in shaking up the order of things, except in little things like the way they teach the juniors. they live in gusu, under the auspices of the lan, and they live a happy, domestic life.

were his years on the street traumatizing? yes, of course they were, there’s so much delicious character exploration to be done re: wei wuxian’s relationship to food, his relationship to his own needs, and his relationship to the people he loves. it’s all important and good! but I feel very strongly that that experience, while it was formative for him, did not impart any true understanding of poverty and the common person’s everyday struggles, nor do I think he ever really gains that understanding. he is observant and canny and aware of class and blood, certainly, but not in a way that makes it his primary hill to die on (badum-tss).

this is in very stark contrast to characters like jin guangyao and xue yang, and to some extent, xiao xingchen and song lan. I’ll start with the daozhangs, because I think they’re the simplest (??).

I think both xiao xingchen and song lan have class consciousness, but in a very simplified, broad-strokes kind of way (at least, given the information we know about them). we know that the two of them share similar values and want to one day form their own sect that gives no weight to the nobility of your lineage and has no concern with your wealth. we also know that they both disdain intersect politics and are more concerned with ideals and principles rather than status. but, I think because of that, this actually somewhat limits their perception and understanding of how status is used to oppress. as far as we know, neither of them participated on any side in sunshot and they demonstrate much more interest in relating to the commoners. honestly, i hc that they were flitting around trying to help decimated towns, protecting defenseless villages etc. I ALSO think this has a lot of interesting potential in terms of xiao xingchen and wei wuxian’s relationship, if xiao xingchen is ever revived. regardless of whether you’re in CQL or novel verse, xiao xingchen really doesn’t know wei wuxian at all, other than knowing that he’s his shijie’s son. he knows that cangse-sanren met with a tragic end, like yanling-daoren before her, and that he wants to be different. but here is cangse-sanren’s son, laying waste to entire cities, desecrating the dead. I would very much like to get into xiao xingchen’s head during that period of time (and i think, if i do it right, i can write some of it into the songxiao fixit), but that’s neither here nor there, because i’ve wandered off from my point again.

i would posit that song lan is used to an ascetic lifestyle, and xiao xingchen probably is too -- but that’s different from poverty because there’s an element of choice to it. I also think that neither of them is particularly worldly, xiao xingchen especially. he lived on an isolated mountain until he was like, seventeen, and he came down full of ideals and naivete about how the world worked. I think that both of them see inequality, that they are angered by it, and that they want to do something about it -- but their solution is neither to topple the sects, nor is it to reform the system. rather, it seems to be more about withdrawing and creating their own removed world. I think that the daozhangs embody a kind of utopianism that isn’t present in the minds of any of the other characters, not even wangxian. honestly, baoshan-sanren’s mountain is a utopian ideal, but one that is not described. it exists outside of and beyond the world. i have a lot of jumbled, vague thoughts about utopianism generally, mostly informed by china miéville and ursula k. le guin, and I don’t think i have the ability to articulate them here, but i wanted to. hm. say something? there is something about the inherent dystopianism contained within every utopia, that utopias are necessary, but also reflections of the existence of terrible things in their conception. idk. there’s something in there, I know it!! but i suppose what I want to say is -- i do not think the daozhangs understand class and social hierarchy very deeply because they don’t see a need to examine it deeply. for their goals, the details aren’t the point. they’re not looking to reform within the system, they’re looking to build something outside of it. I think they spend a lot of time concerned with alleviating the symptoms of social oppression, and their values reflect the injustices they witness there.

regardless, even if their story ends in tragedy and there is a certain amount of critique re: the utopian approach, i think the text still emphasizes that xiao xingchen left a utopia and that he thought that people mattered enough for him to try, and that was an incredibly honorable, kind, and human thing to do.

YEAH SURE THE DAOZHANGS ARE THE SIMPLEST ok ok RETURNING to class and moving forward: xue yang.

i also don’t think xue yang has class consciousness lol, or not in any way that really matters, but I do think poverty impacted him in a much stronger way than it impacted wei wuxian. wei wuxian spent some years on the street as a child. xue yang grew up on the streets. chang ci’an’s horrific treatment of him was directly due to his class and social standing: chang ci’an is a nobleman and xue yang is not even worth the dirt beneath the wheels of his cart. what I think is the seminal point though, is that this does not make xue yang think particularly deeply about systemic injustice, because xue yang is so self-centered, self-driven, and individualistic. he is not even slightly concerned about how poverty and class might affect other people -- they’re other people. what he takes away from his experience is not an anger at being wrongfully cheated by a system, but an anger at being wrongfully cheated by a specific man.

xue yang is not particularly concerned with the politics of the aristocracy -- he has no obvious ambitions other than, “i want to eat sweets whenever i please”, “i want to hurt anyone who wrongs me”, and “i want to be so strong that no one can hurt me”. like, he just doesn’t care -- it’s not the kind of power he wants. he sneers at people for like, personal reasons, not class reasons -- “you think you’re better than me” re: xiao xingchen and song lan. to him, all people -- poor, wealthy, noble, common -- are essentially equal, and they are all beneath him. after all, what does he care what family someone comes from, how much money they have? everyone bleeds when you cut them. some of them might be harder to get to than others, but xue yang does not fear that sort of thing. it’s just another obstacle he needs to vault on his way to getting revenge and/or a pastry.

ANYWAYS onto jin guangyao (wow this is hm. getting rather long ahaha oh dear): I would argue that the two characters with the most acute understanding of class/societal politics and the injustice of them are jin guangyao and lan xichen. i’ll start with jin guangyao for obvious reasons.

where xue yang took the damaging effects of poverty as personal slights, I think jin guangyao is painfully aware that there is nothing personal about them, which is, in some ways, much worse. why are two sons, born on the same day to the same father, treated so differently? just because.

he watched his mother struggle and starve and work herself to the bone in a profession where she was constantly disrespected and abused for almost nothing in return, while his father could have lifted her out of poverty with the wave of a finger. why didn’t he? because he didn’t like her? no -- because he didn’t care, and the structures of the society they live in protect that kind of blase treatment of the lower class.

“so my mother couldn’t choose her own fate, is that her fault?” jin guangyao demands. he knows that he is unbelievably talented, that he has ambition, that he has potential, and that all of it is beyond his grasp just because his father didn’t want to bother with it. his mother’s life was destroyed, and his own opportunities were crippled with that negligence. it isn’t personal. that’s just the way things are. your individual identity is meaningless, your humanity does not exist. when he’s kicked down the steps of jinlin tai, it’s just more confirmation that no matter how talented or hardworking he is, no one will give him the time of day unless he finds a way to take it himself and become someone who “matters”.

jin guangyao’s cultivation is weak because he had a poor foundation, and he had a poor foundation because he was denied access to a good one. he copies others because that’s all he can do at this point, and he copies so well that he can hold his own against some of the strongest cultivators of his generation. he’s disparaged for copying and “stealing” techniques, but -- he never would have had to if only he had been born/accepted into the upper class. the fact is that i really do think jin guangyao was the most promising cultivator of his generation that we meet, including the twin jades and wei wuxian: he had natural talent, ambition, creativity, determination and cunning in spades. in some ways, I think that’s one of the overlooked tragedies of jin guangyao: the loss of not just the good man he could have been, but the powerful one too. imagine what he could have done.

jin guangyao spends his entire time in the world of the aristocracy feeling unsteady and terrified because he knows exactly how precarious his position is. he knows how easy it is to lose power, especially for someone like him. he’s working against so many disadvantages, and every scrap of honor he gets is a vicious battle. jin guangyao fears, and I think that’s something that’s lacking in xue yang, wei wuxian and the daozhangs’ experiences/understandings of poverty. i think it’s precisely that fear that emphasizes jin guangyao’s understanding of class and blood. jin guangyao exhibits an anxiety that neither wei wuxian nor xue yang do, and it’s because he truly knows how little he is worth in the eyes of society and how little there is he can do to change that. to me, it very much feels related to the anxiety of not knowing if tomorrow you’ll have something to eat, if tomorrow you’ll still have a home, if tomorrow someone will destroy you and never have to answer for it. it’s the anxiety of knowing helplessness intimately.

moreover, jin guangyao is the only person shown to use the wealth and power at his disposal to take concrete steps to actually help the common people typically ignored by the powerful -- the watchtowers. they’re described in chapter 42. it’s a system that is designed to cover remote areas that most cultivators are reluctant to go due to their inconvenience and the lack of means of the people who live there. the watchtowers assign cultivators to different posts, give aid to those previously forgotten, and if the people are too poor to pay what the cultivators demand, the lanling jin sect pays for it. jin guangyao worked on this for five years and burned a lot of bridges over it. people were strongly opposed to it, thinking that it was some kind of ploy for lanling jin’s personal benefit. but the thing is -- it worked. they were effective. people were helped.

i believe CQL frames the watchtowers as an allegory for a surveillance state/centralized control (i think?? it’s been a minute -- that’s the hazy impression i remember, something like a parallel to the wen supervisory offices?), but I personally don’t think that was the intent in the novel. the watchtowers are a public good. lanling jin doesn’t staff them with their own sect members -- they get nearby sects to staff them. it’s a warning network that they fund that’s supposed to benefit everyone, even those that everyone had considered expendable.

(did jin guangyao do terrible things to achieve this goal? yeah lol. it’s not confirmed, but his son sure did die... suspiciously...... at the hands of an outspoken critic of the watchtowers........ whom he then executed....... so like, maybe just a convenient coincidence for jin guangyao, two birds one stone, but. it seems. Unlikely.)

lan xichen is the only member of the gentry that ever shows serious compassion for and nuanced understanding of jin guangyao’s circumstances. lan xichen treats him as his equal regardless of jin guangyao’s current status -- even when he was meng yao, lan xichen treated him as a human being worthy of respect, as someone with great merits, as someone he would choose as a friend, but he did so knowing full well the delicate position meng yao occupied. this is in direct contrast to nie mingjue, who also believed that meng yao was worthy of respect as a human being, but was completely unable to comprehend the complexities of his circumstances and unwilling to grant him any grace. you know, the difference between “i acknowledge that your birth and status have had effects upon you, but I don’t think less of you for it” and “i don’t consider your birth and status at all when i interact with you because i think it is irrelevant” (“i don’t see color” anyone?)

to illustrate, from chapter 48:

大抵是觉得娼妓之子身上说不定也带着什么不干净的东西，这几名修士接过他双手奉上来的茶盏后，并不饮下，而是放到一边，还取出雪白的手巾，很难受似的，有意无意反复擦拭刚才碰过茶盏的手指。聂明玦并非细致之人，未曾注意到这种细节，魏无羡却用眼角余光扫到了这些。孟瑶视若未见，笑容不坠半分，继续奉茶。蓝曦臣接过茶盏之时，抬眸看他一眼，微笑道：“多谢。”

旋即低头饮了一口，这才继续与聂明玦交谈。旁的修士见了，有些不自在起来。

rough tl:

Probably because they believed that the son of a prostitute might also carry some unclean things upon his person, after these few cultivators took the teacups offered from [Meng Yao’s] two hands, they did not drink, but instead put them to one side, and furthermore brought out snow white handkerchiefs. Quite uncomfortably, and whether they were aware of it or not, they repeatedly wiped the fingers they had just used to touch the teacups. Nie Mingjue was not a detail-oriented person and never took note of such particulars, but Wei Wuxian caught these in the corner of his eye. Meng Yao appeared as if he had not seen, his smile unwavering in the slightest, and continued to serve tea. When Lan Xichen took the teacup, he glanced up at him and, smiling, said, “Thank you.”

He immediately dipped his head to take a sip, and only then continued to converse with Nie Mingjue. Seeing this, the nearby cultivators began to feel somewhat uneasy.

all right, since we’re in full cyan-rampaging-through-the-weeds mode at this point, i’m going to talk about how this is one of my favorite 3zun moments in the entire novel for characterization purposes because it really highlights how they all relate to one another, and to what degree each of them is aware of their own position in relation to the others and society as a whole.

1. nie mingjue, who is a forthright and blunt person, sets meng yao to serving tea and is done with it. he notices nothing wrong or inappropriate about the reactions of the people in the room because it’s not the sort of thing he considers important.

2. meng yao, knowing that his only avenue is to take it lying down with a smile, masks perfectly.

3. lan xichen, noticing all this, uses his own reputation to achieve two things at once: pointedly shame the other cultivators in attendance, and show meng yao that regardless of others’ opinions, he considers him an equal and does not endorse such behavior--and he does it while taking care that no fallout will come down on meng yao’s head.

is this yet another installment of cyan’s endless lxc defense thesis? why yes it is! no one is surprised! but this is my whole point: both meng yao and lan xichen understand the respective hierarchy and power dynamics within the room, while nie mingjue very much does not. this is not because nie mingjue is a bad person or because nie mingjue is stupid--it’s a combination of personality and upbringing. nie mingjue is straightforward and has no patience for such games. but then again, he can afford not to play because he was born into such a high position: that’s a privilege.

to break it down: meng yao knows that he is the lowest-ranked person in the room, sees the way people are subtly disrespecting him in full view of his general who is doing nothing about it. in some ways, this is good -- nie mingjue’s style of dealing with conflict is very direct and not at all suited to delicate political maneuvering. after all, the way he promoted meng yao was actually quite dangerous to meng yao: he essentially guaranteed that his men would bear meng yao a grudge and that their disrespect for him would only be compounded by their bitterness at being punished on his behalf. (it’s like, why often getting parents or teachers to intervene ineffectively in bullying can just be an incitement to more bullying -- same concept) meng yao’s reaction during that scene shows that he’s pretty painfully aware of this and is trying to defuse the situation to no avail. nie mingjue gives him a bootstrap speech (rip nie mingjue i love u so much but. sir) and then promotes him, which is pretty much the only saving grace of that entire exchange, for meng yao at least.

lan xichen, on the other hand, understands both that meng yao is the lowest-ranked person in the room and that any direct attempt to chastise the other cultivators in the room will only serve to hurt meng yao in the long run. he knows that if this were brought to nie mingjue’s attention, he would be outraged and not shy about it -- also bad for meng yao. so he uses what he has: his immaculate reputation. by acting contrary to the other cultivators’ behavior, he demonstrates that he finds their actions unacceptable but with the plausible deniability that it wasn’t directed at them, that this is just zewu-jun being his usual generous self. this means that the other cultivators have no one to blame but themselves, nothing to do but question their own actions. there is nowhere to cast off their discomfort. meng yao didn’t do anything. lan xichen didn’t do anything -- he just thanked meng yao and drank his tea, isn’t that what it’s there for? he doesn’t disrupt the peace, he doesn’t attack anyone and put them on the defensive, but he does make his position very clear.

i know this is a really small thing and i’m probably beating it to death, but I really think this shows just how cognizant lan xichen is of politics and emotional cause and effect in such situations. certainly, out of context I think the scene reads kind of cliche, but within the greater narrative of the story and within the arc of these characters specifically, I think it was a really smart scene to include. it also showcases lan xichen’s style of action: that he moves around and with a problematic situation as opposed to moving straight through.

not to be salty on main again, but this is why it’s very frustrating to me when I see people call lan xichen passive when he is anything but. his actions just don’t look like traditional “actions”, especially to an american audience. it’s easy to understand lan wangji and wei wuxian’s style of problem-solving: taking a stand, moving through, staying strong. lan xichen is juggling an inconceivable number of factors in any given situation, weighing his responsibilities in one role against those in another, and then trying to find the path through the thicket that will cause the least harm, both to himself and the thicket. lan wangji and wei wuxian are not particularly good at considering the far-reaching consequences of their actions -- again, not because they are bad people, but because of a combination of personality and upbringing. they’d just hack through the thicket, not thinking about the creatures that live in it. that is not a terrible thing! it isn’t. it’s a different way of approaching a problem, and it has different priorities. that’s okay. there are advantages and disadvantages on both sides, and where you come down is going to depend on your personal values.

okay we’ve spiraled far and away from my original point, but let’s circle back: i was talking about class.

I think it’s undeniable that class, birthright, fate etc. are some of the driving forces of thematic conflict in mdzs, and the way each character interacts with those forces reveals a lot about themselves and also about the larger themes of fate, chance, and what it means to be righteous and good and how that is and isn’t rewarded. a lot of the tragedy of mdzs (the tragedy that isn’t caused by direct aggression on the part of one group or another) stems from the injustices and slights that people suffered due to their lot in life. it isn’t fair. none of it is fair! we sympathize with jin guangyao because we recognize that what he suffered was unconscionable, even if we don’t excuse him. i sympathize A Lot with xue yang as well for similar reasons, though I understand that’s a harder sell. this is a story focused on the mistakes of an entrenched, aging gentry and the effects that those mistakes had on their children, and a lot of it has to do with prejudice based in class and birth status. whether the prejudice was the true reason or whether it was just a convenient excuse, the fact remains that the systems in place rewarded and protected the people in power who used it to cling to that power. mdzs is also a story of how the circumstances of one’s life can offer you impossible choices that you cannot abstain from, and it asks us to be compassionate to the people who made terrible choices in terrible times. it’s about the inherent complexity in all things! that sometimes, there are no good choices, and i don’t know, i’d like to think that people would show me compassion if I had to make the choices some of these characters did. not just wei wuxian, mind you, every single one of them. except jin guangshan because I Do Hate Him sorry. and i guess wen ruohan. i think that’s it.

good. GOD this is clocking in at //checks notes -- just over 5k. 8′D *stuffs some weeds into my mouth like the clown i am*

(ko-fi? :’D *lies down*)

2K notes · View notes

entity-of-the-opera · 3 years

Text

The Feminization and Fetishization of John Laurens in the Hamilton Musical and its Fandom

In this I will be talking about a few things:

The whole “turtle boi” thing

His role in the musical

The feminization of him in the fandom

The fetishization of him (and his relationship with Hamilton)

The shredded bits of personality he has in the musical

His historical personality being taken from him and instead added to Hamilton’s character

I will not be putting any art of him in here to respect the artists’ privacy, but if you’ve been in the Hamilton fandom or at least heard of the issues I’m talking about, you’ll probably know what drawings I mean. Also, no hate to anyone or any artists who I may indirectly mention, or to anyone in the Hamilton Musical fandom. I understand that not everyone in the fandom is like this, but I will just be using the broad term “the fandom” for simplicity.

[cw: mentions of alcohol and alcoholism]

“UwU Turtle Boi John Laurens”

This image of him likely stemmed from the one drawing he did of a softshell turtle. But how the fandom took that and blew it up into him being obsessed with turtles and other sea creatures is beyond my knowledge. A lot of art depicts him with turtle stuffed animals or riding turtles or just general turtle-lover stuff. Not only are these wrong, but they’re also pretty weird. They often tie into the strange feminization of him, which I will discuss later.

His Role in the Musical

Laurens in the musical acts like Hamilton’s sidekick. He follows him around most of the scenes where they are together. He is almost always at Hamilton’s side, and when he is not or he is at the side of another character, he ends back up at Hamilton’s side fairly quickly. This seems like it makes sense, right? Hamilton is the main character, of course, everyone else is going to be behind him or beside him in some way. But it feels very forced, like Lin-Manuel Miranda purposefully made it so Hamilton was above everyone, no matter the cost. Laurens’ character suffered from this, and any kind of standing or power he held just from his personality alone was gone. What he is to Hamilton is like what Patroclus was to Achilles; a sidekick, overshadowed by the other’s glory and popularity.

An example of this is the Laurens-Lee duel scene. Historically, Laurens was the “trigger happy” one. When the first shot was fired between himself and Lee, he wanted to go again. Hamilton was not very happy that the duel was happening. When both sides (Hamilton and Laurens, Lee and his second Evan Edwards) arrived, he and Edwards tried to get Laurens and Lee to just apologize and be on their way. Laurens refused. When Laurens wanted to shoot again, Hamilton prevented him from doing so. In the show, however, the roles seem reversed.

The Feminization of Him in the Fandom

In almost every Hamilton musical fanfic or story I have read (and I have read quite a bit from my time in this fandom) Laurens is so feminine-- especially in lams fics. He acts feminine, he dresses feminine, he is described in the fics as feminine, he carries around his cute uwu turtle stuffie wearing his cute feminine uwu turtle pyjamas. It’s sickening. John Laurens was a brave soldier and a talented artist and this is how the fandom sees him? As some freckled gay baby twink?

Not only is this disrespectful to John Laurens, it is also disrespectful to Anthony Ramos, who played him in the OBC.

The Fetishization of Him and His Relationship with Hamilton

This, the feminization of him and the “UwU Turtle Boi” character are all very similar. You could argue that this and the “UwU Turtle Boi” character are the same, or that this and the feminization of him are the same. You wouldn’t be wrong; they are all very similar and overlap a lot. Because I covered the “UwU Turtle Boi” character already and have no more to say here about it, I will talk about how the fandom treats his relationship with Hamilton.

There are two very opposite sides of the “was lams real” spectrum: “it was not real, shipping founding fathers is gross,” and, “they were gay!!! Laurens was gay for Hammy!!! Read the letters!!!!” Both sides’ beliefs are valid; you are allowed to think what you want about this topic. It is a somewhat controversial topic that has no clear answer, and therefore is always being discussed. However, just because your belief is valid, doesn’t mean that the way you chose to phrase it is necessarily okay. I get that most of the people who say the second opinion tend to be young girls who may not know better, but the way that something is phrased is very important.

Read these two different phrasings of the same opinion, and think to yourself, “Which one sounds more fetishize-y?”

“I believe that Hamilton and Laurens were in a relationship based on evidence from the letters they sent each other.”

“Hammy and Laurens were gay! Read the letters! He says ‘I love you!’ They were super gay!”

Too many fangirls have called Laurens things like “gay boi” or “smol gay cinnamon roll.” I’ve also seen a very concerning amount of people call him their husband or hubby or dead boyfriend. I don’t think I need to explain how disgusting that is.

His Terrible Personality and Character

His entire character can be boiled down to “tyranny bad, alcohol good.” He’s loud and rowdy and a very boisterous person, shouting and running around and causing a ruckus. It is unlikely that the real Laurens was like this. Seeing as he came from a family of wealth and standing, he would have likely been taught to behave properly and be polite. He was rash at times, especially during battle, but other than that he seemed very professional. His rowdiness makes sense in some scenes when he’s in the war, but other than that part of the show, it doesn’t fit him.

Alcohol is a very big part of his personality for some reason. In his first (real) scene in Aaron Burr, sir, he’s talking about alcohol and drinking and even bragging about how much he drinks. At the very beginning of Satisfied, he’s offering drinks to other people and is very clearly drunk. As far as we know, the real Laurens was not a heavy drinker.

His lack of character can be explained, though. While writing the personalities of the characters, whoever was doing it took Laurens’ historical personality and gave it to Hamilton instead, leaving Laurens with almost nothing.

His Historical Personality Being Added to Hamilton’s Character

I’ve already talked about the Laurens-Lee duel, but I have yet to bring up what happened after it. In the show, Hamilton is brought into Washington’s office and Washington gets into an argument with him, which ends in Washington sending Hamilton home. Besides the fact that the timeline of these events is incredibly off, this is not at all what happened. After the duel, Hamilton wrote up a report on what happened to be given to Washington either the day of or after the duel. When Washington found out what happened, he was furious. Not at Hamilton, but at Laurens. Lin-Manuel Miranda took this from Laurens and changed the story so that it was Hamilton who got chewed out because Hamilton is the main character, not Laurens.

Conclusion

Lin-Manuel Miranda just tore up Laurens’ personality, leaving him as a rowdy alcoholic who eye-fucks Hamilton for the entirety of Act I. The fandom then took this empty shell of a character, combined it with random historical facts about him, and created a turtle-loving twink. Disgusting. Everything about this is so gross.

#achilles speaks #achilles writes #disclaimer: this is all my opinion #john laurens #hamilton musical #musical john laurens #hey babes #look what i did #i had to look up uwu turtle boi art for this rip #pls dont let this flop i had to watch the musical again for this and i stayed up til 4am writing most of it #hamilstans pls dont come for me

249 notes · View notes

daturanerium · 3 years

Text

i've been thinking about griddlehark recently, especially since i've listened to the gideon audiobook for the first time. i love them lots! but i had forgotten just how terrible harrow was to gideon in the beginning, and how blindly devoted gideon was to harrow (even when they were mortal enemies). i'm not sure if i'd be happy with them becoming canon without completely addressing that, so i'm going to talk about what i would like to see happen in alecto to deal with the power imbalance.

as someone who's been in a very similar position to gideon (being a punching bag to someone i'm devoted to out of love) i can speak from experience when i say that it sucks. i currently do not have much of a relationship with that person anymore, but gideon clearly wants to pursue one with harrow--whether that be platonic or romantic.

right now griddlehark are suffering from a severe power imbalance with harrow coming out on top. even during htn, harrow made choices for gideon without consulting her first or considering how it would affect her (mainly the lobotomy, which clearly bothered gideon based on how she talked about it in act five--or rather, didnt). harrow tormented gideon for her entire life. i feel like people tend to brush over this or treat it as a child's rivalry instead of treating it as it was (or how i read it to be): constant, unrelenting abuse. harrow canonically tried to kill gideon multiple times throughout their childhood. by the time we reach gtn, it almost seems like tormenting gideon is a game for harrow, considering the way she handled gideon's escape attempt. she pulled it away at the very last second for no other reason (that we know of) than to make gideon feel the worst. obviously we know now that harrow is fucked up in her own way. growing up mostly without parents, with incredibly high expectations based around being a literal war crime and the only surviving necromancer in the royal line, she's desperate to find and cling onto any control she can get over anything and anyone. she's gone through an incredible amount of character development within the last two books. i'm a huge fan of that! i think it's very safe to say that harrow cares about gideon as an equal and wants her friendship--the entirety of htn is basically a tragic love letter to her. but that doesn't make the lasting impact of how she acted go away.

on the other hand, gideon has apparently always been devoted to harrow: on page 332 of gtn she says that she was "hungry for the Reverend Daughter's occupation" in her youth, and strongly implies that she endured harrow's ceaseless beatings and torment because it was the only thing gideon received other than people blindly hating her or ignoring her. harrow was fascinated and obsessed with her in a terrible, violent way, but at least it was something. this is, of course, worsened after gideon walks in on harrow after The Incident. that, mixed with the overhanging inherent power imbalance of gideon being harrow's/the locked tomb's indentured servant since birth, means that gideon has never known a life free of harrow's control over her. being devoted to harrow is gideon's norm--she's literally never known anything different. and, on top of that, she's never expected anything in return. hoped, maybe, but never expected. gideon tries to leave but is stopped every time by harrow; the only way gideon is able to experience her first bout of "independence" is through caanan house, which was an opportunity given to her by harrow. harrowhark has been a constant in gideon's life since she was one year old. gideon relied on her for some semblance of normalcy and a twisted form of recognition. gideon goes through a lot of character development in caanan house as well, and we get to watch her and harrow start to deconstruct their corrupted relationship and reform it into something better and healthier. but even then, gideon still ends up making the ultimate sacrifice for "the Ninth": aka harrow, since she states not five pages before that she doesn't actually care about the Ninth at all and is only doing this for her (that is open to interpretation, but i think it's safe to say that gideon's main reason for jumping was to save harrow regardless of how you interpret her last words). later, at the end of htn, gideon still doesn't expect much from harrow in return. "harrowhark, i gave you my whole life and you didn't even want it." comes to mind. it's not about whether or not the statement is true, it's about what gideon believes based on harrow's past actions. the idea of harrow refusing gideon's sacrifice is more believable to her than harrow succumbing to her grief. i'm not even sure if gideon knows about the lobotomy. if someone told her, would she believe them?

so, right now, we have one person desperate for control and the other hopelessly devoted to a fault. both harrow and gideon are far different women now than they were at the beginning of gtn! they're in the middle of their character arcs right now. here's how i would like to see griddlehark rekindle their relationship in a healthy way:

gideon spends a lot of time harrow-free. she learns what life is like without harrow present. she gets to discover herself without harrow there. gideon still cares about harrow, obviously, and will spend time trying to find and reconnect with her. i hope that in the meantime she gets to find herself as an individual! she needs to see that she is more than just "harrow's mortal enemy" or "harrow's cavalier". she is someone outside of her relationship with harrow, whatever that relationship may be. when she reunites with harrow, i hope that it's a choice that gideon makes, not because harrow asks for her.

when reunited, harrow takes full responsibility and accountability for her past actions against gideon. this has sort of happened, but only in the sense of harrow's self-loathing: she gets angry during the pool scene in gtn, but that's based around "i was awful to you, why are you being kind to me"; not really an apology. later, she asks gideon if she forgives her and gideon says yes--but harrow never apologized. in my opinion, no forgiveness is true if there's no apology. i'd like to see harrow fully recognize her past actions--and, more specifically, how they affected gideon. she's focused a lot on how they impacted herself, but even in the pool scene (as much as i love it) gideon's feelings were mostly sidelined. by harrow taking accountability, both of them can continue their path to healing and growing their relationship. (also, harrow Officially releasing gideon from her duty to the locked tomb as an indentured servant would be really nice. i know with everything going on it's technically moot but i think it would still mean a lot, especially on the road to equalizing their relationship)

gideon and harrow acting as equal partners! we caught the beginnings of this in the second half (especially the end) of gtn, but they haven't really had a chance to flesh (heh) it out since. i'm really looking forward to that!

i really love these characters. they're some of my favorites, ever--and that's saying something, because i've read a lot of books. harrow especially has had some of the most enjoyable character development i've read in a long time. we're in the middle of the series and there's still lots of loose ends to tie up! i just hope this is one of them.

#i'm nervous to post this lollllllll #i'm open to discussion!#also just in case this wasn't clear i LOVE harrow so much. this is definitely not harrow h*te. just ~nuance~.#the locked tomb #griddlehark #harrow the ninth #harrow the ninth spoilers

214 notes · View notes

shoichee · 3 years

Note

ALSO CAN I ASK FOR SOME RANDOM GOM HCS U HAVE? like just random ones u have or if u want like some toxic hcs abt them :D

I’m assuming that I can include their negative traits of their personalities as well 👀 Also including Momoi in this… lots of analyzing for this hc, so I used my brain here pls appreciate AGAIN these are all headcanons/interpretations of possible toxic hcs about them and only a few are canon

[Headcanons]

Kuroko Tetsuya

Kuroko is the hardest person to find a “negative/toxic” trait in, and it doesn’t seem like he has any

kind, understanding, hardworking, and compassionate; he’s everything a good-natured protagonist is

but he’s only like this to people/hobbies he cares about/close with; anything else he’s quite apathetic and also very passive/neutral about

the biggest hint to this is when Akashi criticizes Kuroko for cherry-picking who the GoMs should “go all out against” and who to casually toy with

and Akashi is absolutely correct

most of the series is portrayed through Kuroko’s perspective, and Akashi is the first direct outside perspective who comments on his actions/attitude

it’s obviously not that Kuroko didn’t “notice”... he clearly sees and knows what these GoMs are doing; after all, he had a conversation with Aomine about how observant he is to everything around him

of course, if you were close to him, all your opinions and issues matter to him

it’s the fact that what’s not really important to him is suddenly now important just because someone he knows is involved

just an example: if someone was advocating climate change, he has no opinion on it until someone he knows cares about the issue

in other words, he has a subtle hypocritical view on things, especially when he interacts with others

another clear negative trait could be that he’s too idealistic or perhaps naive, seeing things in a clear black-or-white picture and not necessarily a gray area

WE know, as an audience, that the GoMs honestly needed therapy and a proper adult to guide their out-of-control talents

but Kuroko, in his eyes, had viewed them as “bad” and “evil” in their ways of basketball until they changed after their respective matches

he’s probably someone who doesn’t yield to other opinions once he forms his own, and this may make him unable to consider things in other people’s perspectives

which is again, ironic: someone who doesn’t have generally a strong stance but once they do, it’s very unyielding, which further proves Akashi’s comment about Kuroko’s tendency to nitpick which to care about

a final hc about a potential flaw he might have here in a different ask!

Kise Ryota

y’all… it’s as canon as day that he has a mean side

straight from the author himself, it’s confirmed that Kise is only kind to those who he respects, and to the rest, he’s cold-hearted

in the manga, it’s very clear that he’s super judgmental on every first impression on people he meets, boxing them into categories based on the way they look, act, and speak

only when they surpass his preset expectations (low or high depends on his preliminary judgments of them) is when he opens his mind to the rest of their personality

this is a very close-minded way of thinking, and I hope I don’t need to explain why LOL

this can be interpreted as him being two-faced by the majority of the people in his school

his way of speaking can definitely be very cruel and crass, and to sensitive people, his words can easily shatter hearts

Kise’s negative/toxic traits are pretty straightforward here, so let’s move on

Midorima Shintarou

his harsh words can be considered a “negative” part of his personality, but I think it’s a lot more than just that

it’s confirmed in the series that he’s a bystander and almost always minds his own business

on one hand, one can say he’s self-driven and that he constantly strives for self-improvement

on the other, it can be interpreted as him being very dangerously ambitious and selfish, in which most actions he takes are for the sole reason of self-improvement and not for altruistic reasons

for example, when he helped Kuroko and Kagami in the training camp, it was under the reasoning that them becoming stronger would be a good challenge for himself to test and learn

that’s not to say that he can’t have friends, but most friendships he’s built are with capable people who can potentially provide him with some new beneficial skill/goal to strive towards

after all, he’s only learned to trust Takao as a friend only after seeing him as someone capable

because he’s so focused on himself, he’s extremely likely to turn a blind eye to injustice, most also likely to use Oha Asa to justify their “misfortunes” as he continues on his day

he’s not cold-hearted, but altruism comes by Midorima a lot rarer than the average person

now, we know that his Oha Asa aspect is used to balance his serious side as the “comedic side” of him, but if we really think about it, his obsessions with the horoscopes could be a huge obstacle in the future, where he may refuse to listen/depend on others in favor of his own intuition and the stars; after all, no one knows everything, and depending on the stars as one’s next source of advice and guidance isn’t a sound decision to commit themselves to

he seems like the person who overthinks and jumps to conclusions when it comes to social situations, but instead of confronting the person, he turns to fate and fortune if Takao isn’t near to help

Aomine Daiki

I wouldn’t be surprised if Aomine had a skewed sense of beauty standards from all those magazines he consumed and from being around Momoi for the majority of his life

of course anyone can distinguish pieces of media from reality, but during the most impressionable years of life, without experiencing other types of people and physiques, he would have limited knowledge on what “beauty” is and whatnot

this probably would be more of a problem in his adolescence than adult

a very given negative trait is his short temper plus his tendency to turn to physical violence when someone nags him to a certain point, seen with how he’s treated Wakamatsu in the beginning (though this seems to almost disappear by the end of the series)

what I’ve noticed in every scene he’s in, is that everything seems to revolve around him and his hobbies of basketball and Japanese idols

what I mean is that everytime we see Aomine, it’s always Momoi approaching to Aomine or just him always being the center of attention; never once has he approached Momoi for anything and it’s always been the other way around

in other words, people have to cater to him in order to get along with him/be in good graces (additional example: Imayoshi letting him do as he pleases to get him to be cooperative and participate in the games)

we’ve actually never seen Momoi’s hobbies outside of being a manager for her basketball teams and just anything basketball-related

he can be quite apathetic, choosing to only pay attention and try in things he’s interested in… which is basketball and those magazines

he seems to mature in the Last Game though, so I’m not quite sure to what extent these headcanons would apply to older Aomine (these also don’t really apply to Puremine)

Momoi Satsuki

the author probably also included this type of anime trope as comedy, but belittling another female for her body is definitely a no-go in reality; I feel like this is something most people gloss over really lightly

her body comments on Riko are actually what made me skeptical of her character at first before the show really shows her entire personality

that being said, it seems that she always takes the opportunity to look down on other girls (especially to those she is a stranger to) as a sort of “competition” when there’s boys around

definitely at certain moments, she screams a “pick-me girl” type of person (real phenomenon, you can search this up!)

while Kuroko doesn’t seem to actively mind this, I think she also has no good sense of boundaries and what’s considered appropriate touch and consent; people can chalk this up to “oh it’s just infatuation,” but this definitely isn’t okay if we really think about this

her life also seems to revolve around either Aomine or Kuroko, and based from that, I’d feel like she’d have a difficult time forming her own identity/life separate from her “manager life,” especially once she graduates from Touou

can definitely be interpreted as too clingy at certain moments, while others may think it’s her way of showing that she cares

Murasakibara Atsushi

most people would chalk up Murasakibara as “lazy,” and on the surface level, it does appear to look that way…

I think his true negative trait is that he has a lack of intrinsic motivations to drive him to do things

it’s different from being lazy; someone can be lazy while still having a goal, and certainly someone can be lazy while they’re motivated by thoughts of “I want to learn more,” “I want to get stronger,” etc. (you guys, it’s me right now in college)

and he doesn’t have that

part of this was contributed to the fact that he’s already so gifted with genetics and thus, there’s never been a goal for him to have to work towards to when he’s already at the top

he doesn’t actively seek out, and while that may be a characteristic of sloth, it’s not exactly right either

he willingly does things if people around him give him the motivations/reasons to do so; a person of sloth wouldn’t do anything even with all the motivations and goals handed right to their face

snacks/food are examples of extrinsic motivations that fuel him to carry on daily life

Himuro is always the main motivator for Murasakibara to come out and watch matches, and he also does whatever Akashi orders in both Teiko and present days // a person who can give the giant the motivation to do tasks would get along with him the most

searching out for a challenge against his basketball skills is something that’s never crossed his mind

why? he grew to be like the way he is because of the lack of results from his “search” of a challenge throughout his games

again, it’s only when Murasakibara gets handed a silver-platter of a challenge, Jason Silver, that actively gets him pumped up and raring to go

as such, Murasakibara is equivalent to a rusty machine, extremely difficult to start up and find compatibility with, but very powerful and efficient once he finds that spark

Murasakibara finding any partner or friend in the future would be extremely difficult because he ticks a different tune from the rest

Akashi Seijuro

his entire Bokushi side was a giant-ass red flag for very obvious reasons LOL anyways, moving on…

it’s difficult to pinpoint a negative characteristic for Oreshi because he’s the pinnacle of a gentleman character… but that technically is also his negative trait

for him to maintain that perfect image for himself and others, he has always carried himself in such a way that doesn’t allow for errors or expressions of “weakness”

thus, bottling up his frustrations and emotions to the point of no return is something very familiar to Akashi, and I’d feel like Bokushi is the result of his overflowing emotions left unchecked in the first place

I also predict that if Akashi continues to carry himself without letting himself wind down and feel emotions on the spot rather than locking it up inside him, a day will come when he splits into two halves again with a “new” Bokushi to deal with his current life (and let the current Oreshi take a backseat in his psyche to take a break from the turmoil)

also will tend to overwork himself to manage people’s expectations as well as his own, and he’s not one to depend on people not because he sees them as inferior or incapable, but because he’s doing this out of habit from being in positions of authority and responsibility for much of his life

and so, he may tend to hide important things or just not speak about his problems in general to those close to him because he feels like he can do it all himself and spare everyone the work and stress associated with them (a leader mentality)

throughout the majority of his life being calm and calculated, his emotions would definitely escape from him in forms of uncontrollable lashes of anger… before he would realize what he’s done… that is, assuming that another Bokushi hasn’t form within his subconscious yet

292 notes · View notes

sk1fanfiction · 3 years

Text

the many faces of tom riddle, part 4

-attachment, orphanages, and yet more child psych: time to add yet another voice to the void-

FULL DISCLAIMER THAT THIS IS JUST MY OPINION OF A CHARACTER WHO DOESN’T HAVE THE STRONGEST CANON CHARACTERIZATION, AND THUS ALL THIS IS BASED ON MY CONCEPTUALIZATION.

I'm going to be super biased, because my favorite portrayal of Tom Riddle is actually Hero Fiennes-Tiffin as eleven-year-old Tom Riddle, in HBP and I get to chat about child psych in this one, sooo here we go.

First of all, I’m just so impressed that a kid could bring that much depth to such a complex character.

This is the portrayal, I feel, that brings us closest to Tom’s character. Yes, Coulson’s brought us pretty close, but by fifth year, the mask was on.

We don't really get to see Tom looking afraid very often, but it's fear that rules his life, so it's really poignant in our first (chronologically) introduction, he looks absolutely terrified.

The void being the fandom's loud opinions on a certain headmaster. I wouldn't call myself pro-Dumbledore, but I'm certainly not anti-Dumbledore, either. (Agnostic-Dumbledore??)

Since I'm not of the anti-Dumbledore persuasion, I decided to poke around in the tags and see what the arguments were, so I don't make comments out of ignorance.

Most of the tag seems to be more directed towards his treatment of Harry and Sirius, but a few people mentioned that Dumbledore should have treated Tom with ‘exceptional kindness’ and tried to ‘rehabilitate’ him.

As I said in Parts 2 and 3, I am 100% in favor of helping a traumatized kid learn to cope, and I don’t think Tom Riddle was solidly on the Path to Evil (TM) at birth, or even at eleven. Not even at fifteen.

Could unconditional love and kindness have helped Tom Riddle enough for the rise of Lord Voldemort to never happen? Possibly, but...

Yes, I'm about to drag up that Carl Jung quote, again.

“I am not what happened to me, I am what I choose to become.”

The problem with this is that if you’re going to blame Dumbledore for this, you also have to blame every other adult in Tom’s life: his headmaster, Dippet, his Head of House, Slughorn, his ‘caretakers’ at the orphanage, Mrs. Cole and Martha, and possibly more. In fact, if we're going to blame any adult, let's blame Merope for r*ping and abusing Tom Riddle Senior, and having a kid she wasn't intending to take care of.

Furthermore, you cannot possibly hold anyone but Tom accountable for the murders he committed. (I should not have to sit here and explain why cold-blooded murder is wrong.) And if you like Tom Riddle's character, insinuating that his actions are completely at the whim of others is just a bit condescending towards him. He's not an automaton or a marionette, he's a very intelligent human being with a functioning brain, and at sixteen is fully capable of moral reasoning and critical analysis.

I've heard the theories about Dumbledore setting the Potters up to die, and I'm not going to discuss their validity right now; but he didn't put a wand in Tom's hand and force him to kill anyone. Tom did it all of his own accord.

And while yes, I have enormous sympathy for what happened to Tom as a child, at some point, he decided to murder Myrtle Warren, and that is where I lose my sympathy. Experiencing trauma does not give you the right to inflict harm on others. Yes, Tom was failed, but then, he spectacularly failed himself.

We also have no idea how Dumbledore treated Tom as a student.

In the movies, it’s Dumbledore who tells Tom he has to go back to the orphanage, but in the books, it’s Dippet. We know that Slughorn spent a lot of time around Tom at Slug Club and such, yet I don’t really see people clamoring for his head.

I regard the sentiment that Dumbledore turned Tom Riddle into Lord Voldemort with a lot of skepticism.

But let's hear from the character himself -- his impression of eleven-year-old Tom Riddle.

“Did I know that I had just met the most dangerous Dark wizard of all time?” said Dumbledore. “No, I had no idea that he was to grow up to be what he is. However, I was certainly intrigued by him. I returned to Hogwarts intending to keep an eye upon him, something I should have done in any case, given that he was alone and friendless, but which, already, I felt I ought to do for others’ sake as much as his."

Now, assuming that Dumbledore's telling the truth, I'm not seeing something glaringly wrong with this. No, he hasn't pigeonholed Tom as evil, yes, I'd be intrigued, too, and it's a very good idea to keep an eye on Tom, for his own sake.

“At Hogwarts,” Dumbledore went on, “we teach you not only to use magic, but to control it. You have — inadvertently, I am sure — been using your powers in a way that is neither taught nor tolerated at our school."

Again, it seems like he's at least somewhat sympathetic towards Tom, and is willing to at least give him a chance.

More evidence (again, assuming Dumbledore is a reliable narrator):

Harry: “Didn’t you tell them [the other professors], sir, what he’d been like when you met him at the orphanage?” Dumbledore: “No, I did not. Though he had shown no hint of remorse, it was possible that he felt sorry for how he had behaved before and was resolved to turn over a fresh leaf. I chose to give him that chance.”

Now, I think Dumbledore is pretty awful with kids, but I don't think that's malicious. Yeah, it's a flaw, but perfect people don't exist, and perfect characters are dead boring. I am not saying that he definitely handled Tom's case well, I'm just saying that there's little evidence that Dumbledore, however shaken and scandalized, wrote him off as 'evil snake boy.'

It's also worth taking into account that it's 1938, and the attitudes towards mental health back then.

Why is Tom looking at Dumbledore like that, anyway? Why is he so scared? What has he possibly been threatened with or heard whispers of?

"'Professor'?" repeated Riddle. He looked wary. "Is that like 'doctor'? What are you here for? Did she get you in to have a look at me?"

"I don't believe you," said Riddle. "She wants me looked at, doesn't she? Tell the truth!"

"You can't kid me! The asylum, that's where you're from, isn't it? 'Professor,' yes, of course -- well, I'm not going, see? That old cat's the one who should be in the asylum. I never did anything to little Amy Benson or Dennis Bishop, and you can ask them, they'll tell you!

Tom keeps insisting he's not mad until Dumbledore finally manages to calm him down.

I'm really upset this wasn't in the movie, because it's important context. Instead we got these throwaway cutscenes of some knick-knacks relating to the Cave he's got lying around, but I just would have preferred to see him freaking out like he does in the book.

There was extreme stigma and prejudice towards mental illness.

'Lunatic asylums,' as they were called in Tom's time, were terrible places. In the 1930s and 40s, he could look forward to being 'treated' with induced convulsions, via metrazol, insulin, electroshock, and malaria injections. And if he stuck around long enough, he could even look forward to a lobotomy!

So, if you think Dumbledore was judgmental towards Tom, imagine how flat-out prejudiced whatever doctors or 'experts' Mrs. Cole might have gotten in to 'look at him' must have been!

Moving on to the next few shots, he is sitting down and hunched over as if expecting punishment or at least some kind of bad news, Dumbledore is mostly out of the frame. He’s trapped visually, by Dumbledore on one side, and a wall on the other, because he’s still very much afraid. uncomfortable, as he tells Dumbledore a secret that he fears could get him committed to an asylum (which were fucking horrible places, as I said).

It brings to the scene that miserable sense of isolation and loneliness to that has defined Tom’s entire life up to that point (and, partially due to his own bad choices, continues to define it).

And, when Dumbledore accepts it, his posture changes. he becomes more confident and more at ease, as he describes the... utilities of his magical abilities.

"All sorts," breathed Riddle. A flush of excitement was rising up his neck into his hollow cheeks; he looked fevered. "I can make things move without touching them. I can make animals do what I want them to do, without training them. I can make bad things happen to people who annoy me. I can make them hurt if I want to."

Riddle lifted his head. His face was transfigured: There was a wild happiness upon it, yet for some reason it did not make him better looking; on the contrary, his finely carved features seemed somehow rougher, his expression almost bestial.

I do think Harry, our narrator, is being a tad bit judgmental here. Magic is probably the only thing that brings Tom happiness in his grey, lonely world, and when I was Tom's age and being bullied, if I had magic powers, you'd better believe that I'd (a) be bloody ecstatic about it (b) use them. And, like Tom, I can't honestly say that I can't imagine getting a bit carried-away with it. Unfortunately, we can't all be as inherently good and kindhearted as Harry.

Reading HBP again, as a 'mature' person, it almost seems like the reader is being prompted to see Tom as evil just because he's got 'weird' facial expressions.

So... uh...

Nope, let's judge Tom on his actions, not looks of 'wild happiness.'

To his great surprise, however, Dumbledore drew his wand from an inside pocket of his suit jacket, pointed it at the shabby wardrobe in the corner, and gave the wand a casual flick. The wardrobe burst into flames. Riddle jumped to his feet; Harry could hardly blame him for howling in shock and rage; all his worldly possessions must be in there. But even as Riddle rounded on Dumbledore, the flames vanished, leaving the wardrobe completely undamaged.

Okay, one thing I dislike is Tom's lack of emotional affect when Dumbledore burned the wardrobe, in the books, he jumped up and started screaming, instead of looking passively (in shock, perhaps?) at the fire. Incidentally, I can't really tell if he's impressed or in shock, to be honest. I think they really tried to make Tom 'creepier' in the movie.

This is one of the incidents where Dumbledore's inability to deal with children crops up.

I think he was trying to teach Tom that magic can be dangerous, and he wouldn't like it to be used against him, but burning the wardrobe that contains everything he owns was a terrible move on Dumbledore's part. Tom already has very limited trust in other people, and now, he's not going to trust Dumbledore at all -- now, he's put Tom on the defensive/offensive for the rest of their interaction, and perhaps for the rest of their teacher-student relationship.

Riddle stared from the wardrobe to Dumbledore; then, his expression greedy, he pointed at the wand. "Where can I get one of them?"

"Where do you buy spellbooks?" interrupted Riddle, who had taken the heavy money bag without thanking Dumbledore, and was now examining a fat gold Galleon.

But I'm not surprised Tom is 'greedy.' He's grown up in an environment where if he wants something, whether that's affection, food, money, toys, he's got to take it. There's no one looking after his needs specifically. I'm not surprised that he's a thief and a hoarder, and I don't think that counts as a moral failing necessarily, and more of a maladaptive way of seeking comfort. It would be bizarre if he came out of Wool's Orphanage a complete saint.

Additionally, I think given that the Gaunt family has a history of 'mental instability,' Tom is a sensitive child, and the trauma of growing up institutionalized and possibly being treated badly due to his magical abilities or personality disorder deeply affected him.

And there are points where it seems that Dumbledore is quick to judge Tom.

"He was already using magic against other people, to frighten, to punish, to control."

"Yes, indeed; a rare ability, and one supposedly connected with the Dark Arts, although as we know, there are Parselmouths among the great and the good too. In fact, his ability to speak to serpents did not make me nearly as uneasy as his obvious instincts for cruelty, secrecy, and domination."

"I trust that you also noticed that Tom Riddle was already highly self-sufficient, secretive, and, apparently, friendless?..."

And while this is all empirically true, these are (a) a product of Tom's harsh environment, and (b) do not necessarily make him evil. But the point remains that child psych didn't exist as a field of its own, and psychology as a proper science was in its infancy, so I'd be shocked if Dumbledore was insightful about Tom's situation.

But I've gone a ton of paragraphs without citing anything, so I've got to rectify that.

Let's talk about Harry Harlow's monkey experiments in the 1950-70s.

If you're not a fan of animal research, since I know some people are uncomfortable with it, feel free to scroll past.

Here's the TL;DR: Children need to be hugged and shown affection too, not just fed and clothed, please don't leave babies to 'cry out' and ignore their needs because it's backwards and fucking inhumane. HUG AND COMFORT AND CODDLE CHILDREN AND SPOIL THEM WITH AFFECTION!

I will put more red writing when the section is over.

This is still an interesting experiment to have in mind while we explore the whole 'no one taught Tom Riddle how to love' thing and whether or not it's actually a good argument.

Andddd let's go all the way back to the initial 1958 experiment, featured in Harlow's paper, the Nature of Love. (If you're familiar with Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, him and Harlow actually collaborated for a time).

To give you an idea of our starting point, until Harlow's experiment, which happened twenty years after Dumbledore meets Tom for the first time, no one in science had really been interested in studying love and affection.

"Psychologists, at least psychologists who write textbooks, not only show no interest in the origin and development of love or affection, but they seem to be unaware of its very existence."

I'm going to link some videos of Harry Harlow showing the actual experiment, which animal rights activists would probably consider 'horrifying.' It's nothing gory or anything, but if you are particularly soft-hearted (and I do not mean that as an insult), be warned. It's mostly just baby monkeys being very upset and Harlow discussing it in a callous manner. Yes, today it would be considered unethical, but it's still incredibly important work and if you think you can handle it, I would recommend watching at least the first one to get an idea of how dramatic this effect is.

Dependency when frightened

The full experiment

The TL;DW:

This experiment was conducted with rhesus macaques; they're still used in psychology/neuroscience research when you want very human-like subjects, because they are very intelligent (unnervingly so, actually). I'd say that adult ones remind me of a three-year old child.

Harlow separated newborn monkeys from their mothers, and cared for their physical needs. They had ample nutrition, bedding, warmth, et cetera. However, the researchers noticed that the monkeys:

(a) were absolutely miserable. And not just that, but although all their physical needs were taken care of, they weren't surviving well past the first few days of life. (This has also been documented in human babies, and it's called failure to thrive and I'll talk about it a bit later).

(b) showed a strong attachment to the gauze pads used to cover the floor, and decided to investigate.

So, they decided to provide a surrogate 'mother.' Two, actually. Mother #1 was basically a heated fuzzy doll that was nice for the monkeys to cuddle with. Mother #2 was the same, but not fuzzy and made of wire. Both provided milk. The result? The monkeys spent all their time cuddling and feeding from the fuzzy 'mother.' Perhaps not surprising.

What Harlow decided next, is that one of the hallmarks being attached to your caregiver is seeking hugs and reassurance from them when frightened. So, when the monkeys were presented with something scary, they'd go straight to the cloth mother and ignore the wire one. Not only that, but when placed in an unfamiliar environment, if the cloth mother was present, the monkeys would be much calmer.

In a follow-up experiment, Harlow decided to see if there was some sort of sensitive period by introducing both 'mothers' to monkeys who had been raised in isolation for 250 days. Guess what?

The initial reaction of the monkeys to the alterations was one of extreme disturbance. All the infants screamed violently and made repeated attempts to escape the cage whenever the door was opened. They kept a maximum distance from the mother surrogates and exhibited a considerable amount of rocking and crouching behavior, indicative of emotionality.

Yikes. So, at first Harlow thought that they'd passed some kind of sensitive period for socialization. But after a day or two they calmed down and started chilling out with the cloth mother like the other monkeys did. But here's a weird thing:

That the control monkeys develop affection or love for the cloth mother when she is introduced into the cage at 250 days of age cannot be questioned. There is every reason to believe, however, that this interval of delay depresses the intensity of the affectional response below that of the infant monkeys that were surrogate-mothered from birth onward

All these things... attachment, affection, love, seeking comfort ... are mostly learned behaviours.

Over.

Orphanages, institutionalized childcare, and why affection is a need, not an extra.

His face is lit the exact same was as Coulson’s was in COS (half-light, half-dark), and I said I was going to talk about this in Part 3. I think perhaps it's intended to make Fiennes-Tiffin look more evil or menacing, but I'm going to quite deliberately misinterpret it.

Now, for some context, Dumbledore has just (kind of) burned his wardrobe, ratted out his stealing habit, and (in the books only, they really took a pair of scissors to this scene) told him he needs to go apologize and return everything and Dumbledore will know if he doesn't, and, well, Tom's not exactly a happy bugger about it.

But interestingly, in the books, this is when we start to see Tom's 'persona,' aka his mask, start to come into play. Whereas before, he was screaming, howling, and generally freaking out, here, he starts to hide his emotions -- in essence, obscure his true self under a shadow. So this scene is really the reverse of Coulson's in COS.

And perhaps I'm reading wayyy too much into this, but I can't help but notice that Coulson's hair is parted opposite to Fiennes-Tiffin's, and the opposite sides of their faces are shadowed, too.

Riddle threw Dumbledore a long, clear, calculating look. "Yes, I suppose so, sir," he said finally, in an expressionless voice.

Riddle did not look remotely abashed; he was still staring coldly and appraisingly at Dumbledore. At last he said in a colorless voice, "Yes, sir."

Here's an article from The Atlantic on Romanian orphanages in the 1980s, when the dictator, Ceausescu, basically forced people to have as many children as possible and funnel them into institutionalized 'childcare', and it's absolutely heartbreaking.

There's not a whole lot of information out there on British orphanages in the 30s' and 40s', but given that people back then thought you just had to keep children on a strict schedule and feed them, it wouldn't have a whole lot better.

The only thing I've found is this, and it's not super promising.

The most important study informing the criteria for contemporary nosologies, was a study by Barbara Tizard and her colleagues of young children being raised in residential nurseries in London (Tizard, 1977). These nurseries had lower child to caregiver ratios than many previous studies of institutionalized children. Also, the children were raised in mixed aged groups and had adequate books and toys available. Nevertheless, caregivers were explicitly discouraged from forming attachments to the children in their care.

Here's a fairly recent paper that I think gives a good summary: Link

Here, they describe the responses to the Strange Situation test (which tests a child's attachment to their caregiver).

We found that 100% of the community sample received a score of “5,” indicating fully formed attachments, whereas only 3% of the infants living in institutions demonstrated fully formed attachments. The remaining 97% showed absent, incomplete, or odd and abnormal attachment behaviors.

Bowlby and Ainsworth, who did the initial study, thought that children would always attach to their caregivers, regardless of neglect or abuse. But some infants don't attach (discussed along with RAD in Part 2).

Here's a really good review paper on attachment disorders in currently or formerly institutionalized children : Link

Core features of RAD in young children include the absence of focused attachment behaviors directed towards a preferred caregiver, failure to seek and respond to comforting when distressed, reduced social and emotional reciprocity, and disturbances of emotion regulation, including reduced positive affect and unexplained fearfulness or irritability.

Which all sounds a lot like Tom in this scene. The paper also discusses neurological effects, like atypical EEG power distribution (aka brain waves), which can correlate with 'indiscriminate' behavior and poor inhibitory control; which makes sense for a kid who, oh, I don't know, hung another kid's rabbit because they were angry.

Furthermore...

...those children with more prolonged institutional rearing showed reduced amygdala discrimination and more indiscriminate behavior.

This again, makes a ton of sense for Tom's psychological profile, because the amygdala (which is part of the limbic system, which regulates emotions) plays a major role in fear, anger, anxiety, and aggression, especially with respect to learning, motivation and memory.

So, I agree completely that Tom needed a lot of help, especially given the fact that he spent eleven years in an orphanage (longer than the Bucharest study I was referring to), and Dumbledore wasn't exactly understanding of his situation, and probably didn't realise what a dramatic effect the orphanage had on Tom, and given the way he talks to Tom, probably treated him as if he were a kid who grew up in a healthy environment.

In case you are still unconvinced that hugging is that important, there's a famous 1944 study conducted on 40 newborn human infants to see what would happen if their physical needs (fed, bathed, diapers changed) were provided for with no affection. The study had to be stopped because half the babies died after four months. Affection leads to the production of hormones and boosts the immune system, which increases survival, and that is why we hug children and babies should not be in orphanages. They are supposed to be hugged, all the time. I can't find the citation right now, I'll add it later if I find it.

But I think it's vastly unrealistic to say that Dumbledore, who grew up during the Victorian Era, would have any grasp of this and I don't think he was actively malicious towards Tom.

Was Tom Riddle failed by institutional childcare? Absolutely.

Were the adults in his life oblivious to his situation? Probably.

Do the shitty things that happened to Tom excuse the murders he committed, and are they anyone's fault but his own? No. At the end of the day, Tom made all the wrong choices.

And, for what it's worth, I think (film) Dumbledore (although he expresses the same sentiment in more words in the books) wishes he could go back in time and have helped Tom.

"Draco. Years ago, I knew a boy, who made all the wrong choices. Please, let me help you."

#tom riddle #the many faces of #tom marvolo riddle #character analysis #character study #albus dumbledore

138 notes · View notes

worstloki · 3 years

Note

please read the article 'How White Fandom is Colonizing "Character-Coding"' by Shafira Jordan and quit while you're ahead

Okay, so I read it and see the problem, and I’ll try to address all their points in order because I don’t wholly agree with the article. I know it’s a lot to read so I’ve put tldr; sections at the end of each :)

Misusing the Term Reinforces Negative Stereotypes for Marginalized People

The article essentially argues that labeling characters which are villainous as POC-coded is bad because they’re not morally pure and doing so "reinforces the idea that people of color are naturally dangerous and not to be trusted.”

Which is fair as you don’t want all the representation to be of ‘bad’ characters, but I also don’t believe all representative characters have to be ‘good’ either as it would be equally racist to divide good/bad in such a way. Not that I would place Loki under ‘bad’ to begin with, but arguing that characters shouldn’t be labelled as POC-coded for reasons unrelated to what’s presented in the narrative or because they did bad things is :/ even if lack of good representation is a prevalent issue in current Western and influenced media.

Ideally there should be a range of representative characters that fall into ‘good’, ‘bad’, and ‘anywhere in-between’ because variety and complexity in character types should, in theory, be treated as common practice (which can only happen with a multitude of representation!).

And a bit unrelated but... within the fictional context of Thor 1, all the Jotnar (sans Loki) are presented to the audience as ‘bad’ by default. They desperately want to get their Casket back to the point of attempting stealing it (from the ‘good’ characters), they fight the heroes and even when the gang and Thor (’good’ characters) are enjoying or going overboard with taking lives it’s inconsequential, Laufey wants to kill the opposing king (who just happens to be a ‘good’ character) and will resort to low-handed methods to do so, etc. The narrative itself is from the frame of reference of the ‘good’ and we only see warriors of Jotunheim though so we understand why it’s like this, because regardless of their race/experiences the narrative carries, even if it most definitely would be seen as racist from our real-life perspectives if the ‘monstrous’ race were presented by actual people of colour, even if it would make sense for the people on on different realms living in different environments to be different from each other, and realistic even for that to be the root of some conflict.

tldr; not using a specific label to prevent negative presentations of the characters seems a bit strange to do when the coding would be based off the text, but with limited representation available I see why it would be done, even if I still believe minority-coding is free game to expand/interpret.

Improperly Labeling a Character as “POC-coded” Suggests the Experiences of All People of Color are the Same

The article argues that labeling Loki as POC-coded “suggests that all people of color have the same experiences, when in reality, people of color come from different places, have different cultures, and have different traditions.” And while it’s true that the term doesn’t go into detail about which particular experiences (and these experiences can vary vastly due to diversity!) the appropriate measure would be to remove the umbrella term POC altogether as people of colour tend to also vary. But that’s also exactly why it’s an all-encompassing general term? It’s a way to denote anyone who isn’t “white” and has the associated cultural privilege that comes with the concept of white supremacy.

And, obviously, in the fictional setting presented, the concept of white supremacy is not prodded at, but cultural supremacy is definitely one that makes recurring appearances, right next to the parts about Asgard being a realm built on imperialism with ongoing colonial practice.

My take on this is that Loki’s narrative features a struggle with identity after finding out he’s of a different race and was being treated differently his entire life and being Jotun was presumably a part of the reasoning even if he didn’t know it. He’s basically treated as of less worth for inherently existing differently. I do believe that racism is a common-enough POC experience, but that while Loki was born with blue skin he passes/appears white which is why I don’t say that Loki is a POC, just that he has been coded/can be interpreted this way.

There’s also the entire thing with Loki trying to fit in and prove he belongs by trying to fit the theory and be The Most Asgardian by committing genocide (which ultimately makes no difference as he’s still not the ‘acceptable’ version of Asgardian), and the denial/rejection of his birth culture in destructively lashing out towards them (which even Thor is confused by because Loki isn’t typically violent), and the fact his self worth plummets and he is passively suicidal upon finding out he’s Jotun (internalized racism? general drop in self-worth after finding out he’s adopted and has been lied to? Bit of both?), but what do I know, I’m sure none of those are, at their base, common experiences or relatable feelings for anyone or decent rep because we see such themes on-screen presented wonderfully in different lights all the time.

tldr; every set of experiences could be different, some types of discrimination could overlap, if you limit an umbrella term to only very specific circumstances then it’s no longer an umbrella term.

Suggesting that White Characters are Meant to be Seen as People of Color Ignores the Actual Characters of Color that are Present in these Stories

I don’t agree with most of this section, but that may just be the way the arguments are put together, which I don’t blame the author for.

“ Implying that Loki is a person of color completely ignores Heimdall and Hogun, the only Black and Asian Asgardians who appear in the movie. ”

Characters such as Hogun and Heimdall which are played by actual people of colour have smaller roles in the films and any prejudice they could face for being POC in-universe isn’t made apparent, while Loki at the very least comes to the realization that something he couldn’t change (race, parentage,) was having him treated differently his whole life and had to come to terms with it. The Vanir/Aesir are also both treated similarly on-screen, and Heimdall having dark skin isn’t plot relevant, whereas Jotnar are treated as lesser consistently and are relevant through the movie (breaking into the vault, Thor and co. attack Jotunheim, Loki’s deal with Laufey, the attempted regicide (and the successful one XD), destroying jotunheim, Loki saying he’s not Thor’s brother,).

I also see including characters as POC-coded as... more representation? In all canon-compliant interpretations of the characters Hogun being Vanir is always explicitly mentioned because it’s a fact that just is, up to the appearance and even the world-building of Vanaheim in some fanworks use particularly East Asian culture as inspiration. I have never come across a Marvel fandom Heimdall interpretation where he’s not Black... but because these characters are more minor/side-characters of course they get less attention!

“ In Loki’s fandom, Heimdall’s name sometimes gets thrown in to suggest that it was he all along who was the real villain due to his “racism” against Loki and the rest of the Jotun. It is, of course, ironic to suggest that somehow the only Black Asgardian to appear in the movie can oppress the privileged white prince. “

I... don’t know where to start with this. But the example of theorizing given in the article wasn’t suggesting Heimdall was bad or trying to explain his actions in Thor 1 by saying he is Black... and just looking at a character’s actions shouldn’t be done less or more critically because of skin tone in my opinion. Heimdall may have been trying to do what was best and protect the realm but if the audience didn’t know that Loki was up to dodgy things then the coding would be switched around because he was trying to spy and committed treason and then tried to kill Loki. People... can hold feelings towards others... regardless of skin... and suspect them... for reasons other than skin... although I do still have questions about whether Heimdall knew Loki was Jotun or not. (Even if I personally don’t think it’d make a difference to how he’d treat Loki?)

Some Loki fans have also suggested that because Jotuns have blue skin that this alone makes him a person of color (even if the audience is only allowed to see Loki in his true Jotun form for mere seconds of screentime). This, again, shows a lack of understanding when it comes to race. It doesn’t matter what skin color the Jotuns have.

Race can differentiate between physical and/or behavioural characteristics!! Not being blue all the time doesn’t make him any less Jotun!! He’s got internalized stuff to work through and is used to being Aesir!! At least 1 parent is Jotun so even if Loki was passing as Aesir he’s probably Jotun!! (I don’t know how magic space genetics work for sure but Loki being Jotun was an entire very important jump-starting point in Thor 1!!). It’s a fantasy text and typically things like having different coloured skin indicates a different race or is sometimes if a species has multiple then is just considered a skin colour. That’s how coding works!! The Jotnar are very specifically the only race we see in the movie with a skin-tone not within the ‘normal’ human range, which alienates them to the audience from the get-go!! They’re an “other” and on the opposite side to the ‘good’ characters.

Both Loki and his birth father, Laufey (Colm Feore), are played by white men, and it is impossible for a white man to successfully play a character of color.

The specification of men here bothers me, but yes, you don’t get ‘white’ people to play characters of colour if it can be avoided. (And it can be avoided.)

This also connects with the previous point made that people of color come from various places. There is nothing specifically about the Jotun that could be traced to any specific person of color, and even if there were, there would be no way for white men to portray them without being disrespectful.

This is where arguments about the definition of coding and how specificity/generalizations and do/don’t come in. I know I’m subjective and lean towards the more rep the better, but while I agree ‘white’ people wouldn’t be able to respectfully play a POC I don’t think that rule should have to carry over into fantasy-based fiction. I know texts reflect on reality and reality can reflect within texts, but if contextually there is racial discrimination and there are similar ideas which resonate with the audience’s own experiences I’d say it’s coded well enough to allow that.

tldr; Thor 1′s narrative revolves mainly around Thor and Loki, of which race is kinda kinda a significant theme in Loki’s part of the story. Not so much explored with less-developed side characters such as Heimdall and Hogun, even though their actors are actual people of colour.

How Much of this is Really Well-Intentioned?

In the fantasy space viking world Heimdall and Hogun don’t face any on-screen prejudice and their appearance is not mentioned (which is nice, for sure! good to have casual rep!) but adding on to the roles they play in the narrative the explicit fantasy-racism in the movie isn't aimed at Asian/Black characters, but towards the Humans -to a lesser extent- and the Jotnar, including Loki, who only just found out he comes under that bracket.

The article mentions how fandom space toxicity often “reaches the actors who portray the characters,“ which is true, and it’s shameful that people have to justify their roles or presences are harassed for the pettiest things like skin tone/cultural background, but I don’t see coding characters as removing the spotlight from interesting characters such as those which are actually POC, rather expressing a demand for more rep, since well-written complex characters which are diverse are often absent/minor enough in the media, and therefore can get easily brushed aside in both canon and fandom spaces.

tldr; It’s obviously not a replacement for actual representation, but, if a character is marginalized and can be interpreted as coded, even if they would only be considered so within the context of the textual landscape, I don’t see why spreading awareness through exploring the coding as a possibility for the character shouldn’t be done, even if the media is being presented by people who are ‘white’ or privileged or may not fall into the categories themselves, as long as it’s done respectfully to those it could explicitly represent.

#please don’t patronize me by asking to quit while i’m ahead #it doesn't help anyone #so anyway i've summarized my opinion on the coding thing here for the many anons whose answers could be answered in this ask alone #i think i covered everything?#the article started out okay but I found it kinda :/ in places even though there were valid concerns #I do believe that in-universe context and creators of the media should be taken into account #and that if marginalized themes can be touched on by non-marginalized groups then... great? fictional texts can help people understand #i do also think that rep being presented should if not on-screen have people working on the product to support and ensure it's done well #the world is cold and harsh and cruel and i just wanted a desi Loki AU but here we are #I've got to try and summarize how I think Thor 1 presents Loki's part of the narrative well with POC-coding there because of fantasy-racism #even if the POC-coding is ignored the themes of racism are far too apparent to ignore #loki spends the entire film being a multi-dimensional character and having an entire downfall fueled by grief and a desire to be loved #I don't think attaching a label to such a character would be a negative thing... but perhaps for casual watchers it'd be a bit :/#apparently not everyone takes into account the 1000+ years of good behavior around that 1 year of betrayal/breakdown/identity crisis/torture #MetaAnalysisForTheWin #MAFTW #ThisPostIsLongerThanMyLifeSpan #TPILTMLS #AgreeToDisagreeOrNot #ATDON #poc-coding #yes i ignored everything not about loki in the article what about it #hmmm I know people are going to disagree with me with what should and shouldn't be allowed #I know some people are okay with it but some don't like the poc-coding thing #and that's fine #completely understandable #makes me uncomfy to talk about fictional space racism in comparison to real life but I do think that lack of rep is why coding is important #for some people coding is all that they get #but also!! @ifihadmypickofwishes suggested the term racial allegory and I do believe that is also suitable here!! so I’ll try using that too #rather than poc-coding even though I still believe it applies

141 notes · View notes

bigskydreaming · 3 years

Note

Dick has said it out loud explicitly, to Damian, that the mantle of Robin was his to pass on. Why do people still feel entitled to talk over him?

IMO? For the exact same reasons that people harp on so much about it being a retcon that Robin was Dick’s mother’s nickname for him and that originally he based the name on Robin Hood. To be perfectly honest that doesn’t make a damn bit of difference in regards to the fact that either way the point is still that Dick created Robin and it wouldn’t exist without him.....but the constant attempts to minimize its emotional significance to Dick and any kind of special attachment to it that he has and that the others can’t claim to share....

IMO these are just attempts to distance Dick from the mantle and make him seem less relevant or important to its very existence....freeing up people to focus on the importance of Robin as a symbol and a mantle to everyone else but without having to attribute any special credit or significance or respect to Dick as the originator of the mantle and the character that the other Robins are literally the legacy characters of.

It’s pretty annoying and very shortsighted IMO as actually, emphasizing the connection Robin has to Dick’s first family just enhances the weight and poignancy of Dick ultimately giving each of the other Robins his blessing when he didn’t have to and thus literally choosing them as his new family even without having to rely solely on a connection to each other via Bruce.

Of course people don’t seem to really want to do that either....given how rarely Dick’s blessing even gets acknowledged amid all the angst about who replaced who and who was fired and who wasn’t. It’s kinda ironic...I know so many fans HATE the version where Bruce fires Dick and so whatever they can not to acknowledge it and dismiss it as a retcon....and the ironic thing is? I get it. I totally see why it’s not something they want to run with and to be quite honest I can take it or leave it myself. I like exploring versions of events where Dick was fired, I like exploring ones where he wasn’t. Both have room for digging and delving imo.

My only beef with people who are soooo loud and quick to always dismiss the firing as just a retcon that doesn’t count.....is that in the pre Crisis version of events where Dick voluntarily gave up Robin and decided it was time to move onto a new identity....he gave Robin to Jason himself. The significance of that version of events isn’t JUST that it was Dick’s own choice to move to a new identity and that there was no conflict between him and Bruce about it...it was equally of significance that the Robin mantle was still viewed as inherently his, made by him, and his and his alone to pass on to a successor.

There is no version where Dick gave it up voluntarily but had no role in choosing Jason. The very premise of that mix and match honestly makes no sense because why make such a fuss about Bruce not having overstepped and fired Dick when it was never his place to say what he could claim as his identity or mantle on his OWN (fire him as his partner, sure that was always Bruce’s right, but tell Dick he couldn’t be the hero persona he created for himself? Fuck off Bruce LOL).

But my point is that mix and match makes no real sense because why preserve Bruce’s character from stepping between Dick and the mantle he created to honor his first parents....only to then turn right around and have Bruce still treat it as a Wayne family hand me down that Dick had outgrown when it was only EVER a Grayson family hand me down whose only connection to the Wayne family was through Dick being a member of both families and a bridge connecting them?

Whether Bruce fires Dick as Robin and gives it to Jason or JUST gives it to Jason without Dick making that choice....the one isn’t any better than the other because in both cases the actual offense is still the same: it was never Bruce’s to do ANYTHING with other than what Dick wanted done with it. Take on a new partner? Sure. But give him the mantle made of Dick’s work, Dick’s past, Dick’s every action as Robin? Nope.

So really the mix and match only serves one real purpose, for anyone who is intent on dismissing the firing as just a retcon but sees no need to uphold Dick choosing to give Robin to Jason instead of Bruce doing that...when Bruce doing that is literally part of the exact same retcon they’re so intent on discarding!

The only real purpose that mix and match serves is to keep Bruce centered in the Robin succession with his choice to give it to Jason being the basis of Jason associating Robin with Bruce. It keeps Bruce as the person Jason thinks of and feels connected to every time he thinks of why he’s Robin at all....because Bruce is the one who gave him the symbol that was already well known and full of meaning when Jason stepped into those shoes.

And then of course at the same time the mix and match also ‘lessens’ Bruce’s offense to Dick in taking Robin against his wishes WHILE also suggesting that Dick has less basis of feeling resentful of Bruce passing it on to someone else without his say so because it’s not like he was using it anymore right? And that was his own choice right?

But so what if it was? That doesn’t make it any less his creation and his legacy. It doesn’t make it any less a Grayson family connection and somehow more a Bruce Wayne family connection.

And that’s my beef. That’s the big irony of how flat out counter intuitive the mix and match retcon thing is and always has been. It only accomplishes half its objective....keeps the later Robins more connected to Bruce via it than they are to Dick via it....because it ultimately still runs through Bruce. But it fails to accomplish its secondary objective simply because refusing to acknowledge that Robin is intrinsically tied to Dick Grayson and not Bruce Wayne like....doesn’t actually make it any less true.

And that’s why imo the question should never have been “does your fic go with the version where Dick gives up Robin or the retcon where Bruce fires Dick” ...no, the right question in my mind should have always been “does your fic go with the version where Dick gives Robin to Jason or the retcon where Bruce gives it to Jason.”

And here’s the sticking point:

People always point to Bruce and Dick’s initial connection as the basis of their entire Dynamic Duo partnership. They understood each otrher via their parallel experiences losing their parents to murder. Bruce saw himself in a young Dick Grayson and he wanted to help Dick figure out a way forward to life after his parents’ death by drawing upon his own experiences.

But at the same time, they aren’t the same. Even with Bruce guiding Dick forward through his trauma and grief by following a map made of his own prior experiences, the end result was not the same for both....but it still used some of the same road marks on their respective journeys.

And this is why the Dynamic Duo were always emphasized as partners, as complementing each other, balancing each other....things they could only do because they were not the same and even using similar coping mechanisms to deal with their PARALLEL tragedies....produced entirely different results.

Both used their tragedies, their traumas, their PAIN to fuel their pursuit of justice and desire to help protect people. Both built new personas for themselves to use in their shared missions here....personas which embodied what they wanted to accomplish in these guises while at the same time reminding them why they were doing this.

But the personas they created ended up looking very different despite being born of similar crucibles...because they prioritized different things....and because they were honoring different people.

No matter how much Bruce and Dick have in common due to circumstances they are very different people who are both products of the families and places they come from....and thus even when using similar PROCESSES to build something out of their parallel tragedies, what emerged from the fires once they were done creating from their traumas.....don’t look the same. Aren’t interchangeable.

And neither are their creators.

Bottom line, it in my opinion flat out does not work to attribute more connection to Robin and the succession of that mantle to Bruce than Dick.....because Bruce would never, COULD never create that specific mantle out of his grief and pain any more than Dick ever would or could have created Batman out of his. Because they are too different. They needed different things out of their journeys forward, they were commemorating having had different journeys behind them, they were walking a shared path side by side but you can’t switch the clothes they made to wear going forward anymore than you can switch their footprints beneath their feet....they don’t fit into what the other made because it wasn’t made BY them and it wasn’t made FOR them.

So riddle me this, Batfandom: how does it make sense to focus on their parallel tragedies and how they moved forward from those in similar ways and on a shared trajectory, emphasizing how this is the entire basis of the Batman and Robin partnership from its very inception.....

Only to then view the role Bruce’s grief, his loss, his pain played in birthing the Batman mantle as something sacrosanct, undeniable....these things go hand in hand, there’s no separating them even when others end up wearing the Batman mantle as well, even through multiple generations....

But at the EXACT SAME TIME....treating Dick’s grief, HIS loss, HIS pain and the role all THAT played in birthing the Robin mantle....as something that barely comes up as a footnote the second you put the costume on anyone other than Dick? Something the others never even feel inclined to THINK about when reflecting on the mantle they’re wearing and where it came from and why it exists?

Why is the one rated as so less significant than the other....if the entire point of Batman and Robin is that both heroes were born from the ashes of tragedies so similar they understood each other in ways most other mentors and sidekicks never came close to?

How’s that work exactly?

Look, you’ll never catch me arguing that Bruce isn’t and shouldn’t be central to the Batman mantle, mythos, succession, etc. And I loved Dick as Batman too. But it ultimately should always come back to Bruce no matter how many people add to it in their own ways. Because it’s not just about what Bruce made.....it’s why he made it that matters too. The act of creating Batman is as important to the story of Batman as the created Batman.

And those very same reasons are precisely why Bruce shouldn’t be regarded as central to the ROBIN mantle, succession, etc.

To dismiss the Graysons as not being definitive to the greater Robin mythos is to say Thomas and Martha Wayne bear no special significance to the Batman mythos.

I love that being Robin connects these siblings and ties them all together as part of the same family. I love it being a shared family tradition that encompasses all of them and marks this family of choice as having been specifically chosen by not just it’s patriarch but each other.

But it’s not Bruce’s family tradition and it’s not a Wayne or even a Batman hand me down.

Because it doesn’t even come from Bruce’s family.

It comes from Dick’s. He brought it with him. It’s what connects him to what came before life with Bruce because as everyone knows but so many people often forget to give MEANING....

Dick Grayson, for as much as he is Batman’s son and is undeniably Bruce’s family, had a life of his own before he ever met Bruce.

He didn’t begin with Bruce Wayne. He didn’t come from Bruce Wayne.

And neither did Robin.

60 notes · View notes

filipinoizukuu · 3 years

Note

I saw your post about the FA's translations, and I totally agree. Sometimes, when they do not translate accurately, is to make it sound better or cooler in English, but it just ends up taking away a lot from the context and characters. We know how one of the most affected character interpretations is Katsuki's, a main character, no less. And Izuku and Katsuki's relationship too, which is something super super wrong, considering is deeply intertwined with the main plot of the series, thus if someone misinterpreted their dynamic, this person would miss a bigass chunk of the message the story has.

Here is the panel you mentioned before btw

I remember when I read this, only 10 or 11 chapters into the manga (?), and I was like "...I'm...pretty sure this guy didn't say that" khshsjdhs

OK FIRST OF ALL LMAO HELLO MANG!! THANK YOU SO MUCH AND DW ABOUT IT I TOTALLY GET WHAT YOU MEAN !!

(this is your warning for a long post ahead!)

In any case, I still think you're very correct on this! Not to ramble a bit, but Horikoshi's particular talent in developing the plot of MHA is actually very very brilliant and there are a lot of blink-and-you'll-miss-it details that together, assemble the big picture of what MHA is.

Translations are such an integral part of being able to understand foreign media. MHA or otherwise. The simplest of details say a lot about a character and often times make or break a series because everyone knows that strong character dynamics are what carry even the shittiest of plots.

First and foremost, I want to clarify that because of the nature of fan translations and the fact that most of it is volunteer work/ written out of pure enjoyment of the manga--we shouldn't judge these fan translators too harshly (if at all) for interpreting it the way they want to. FA, as far as I can tell, is a fan-based group that works out of donations.

The first thing I wanna bring up is that when it comes to fandom and its works, there are two types: Curatorial and Transformative. Now, the transformative part is something that must be very familiar to a lot of you. Fanfiction, fanart, and most headcanons fall under Transformative Works (i.e. AO3) because they are all about transforming the canon world to fit each individual's personal preferences. Meta-analysis posts and Character Breakdowns are also classified under this.

Curatorial on the other hand are fandom interactions made with the explicit purpose of being as close to canon material as possible. This is working out the logic of quirks, for example, or memorizing as much canon content about your favorite villain as possible. These are more cold, hard undeniable facts that lend themselves to the DIRECT VISION the creator/author had while making this media. If you were to ask me my opinion on this, this would be the moment where I tell you that the Curatorial side of fandom is where fan translations should (for the most part) fall under.

What people need to know though is that oftentimes, fan translations do not.

Translating isn't and has never been a one-is-to-one process. There are hundreds of thousands of aspects in a language that make it so that it isn't perfectly translatable. Colloquialisms to sayings to dialects, to just plain-out words that don't have a proper English translation to them! Manga is made by and for a Japanese audience, so obviously in a lot of instances, there will be cultural nuances that will not be understood by anyone who hasn't immersed themselves in Japanese culture/language.

So what does this mean then for fan scanlations?

It means that a vast majority of translators teach themselves to only get the essence of the message. They take the dialogue as they understand it and translate it to something of their interpretation. When language and cultural barriers exist, translators do what they can in order to make it understandable to the general populace. This means making their own executive decisions on how they see a character speaking. In example, if they see Todoroki using very direct and impersonal Japanese--one translator might interpret it to mean that Shouto is stiff and overly formal, while another may see it as him being rude and aloof.

The problem is, translators are fans just like us.

Like with the image Mang posted above, the translator based the usage of curse words off of their understanding of Bakugou's character. The lack of foul language in the original Japanese might have made the translator think "Oh. There just aren't enough Japanese cusses for his character." And took that as an initiative to make Bakugou's lines more colorful and violent because this was working off of the image Bakugou had had at this point in canon.

But Codi! You may cry. Wasn't it proven multiple times that Bakugou prefers concise and short lines? They should've known better!

Yes. Maybe they should've known better. But tell me honestly in your first watch-through of MHA, did you perfectly understand Bakugou's character either? Did you catch the whole 'direct and no flowery language' aspect of his language when you first saw Season 2?

Most people don't. I only really understood this fact after I'd read multiple discussions of it and even double-checked the manga myself. These are the kinds of things that only become noticeable with a sharp eye and some time to scrutiny. But the fact of the matter is that when it comes to fan translations, the clout and recognition are always going to go to who can post the quickest.

Am I excusing erroneous translations? A bit, I guess. It's hard for us to go in and expect translators to catch all these errors before release when we ourselves only catch these errors like 4 months in with a hundred times more canon context than these scanlation groups did at the time of its release.

Still, there are plenty of harms that come with faulty translations.

When a translation is more divorced from the original's meaning than usual, it creates a dissonance between what is actually happening versus what the audience sees is happening. This looks like decently-written character arcs being overruled and rejected by most of the readers because of how 'jarring' and 'clumsy' it seems. By the time translators had caught on to the fact that Bakugou was more than just a ticking time bomb, we were already several steps into showing how significantly he cares for Deku.

The characters affected most by these translation errors are often those with the most subtle and well-written character arcs. A single mistake in how the source material is translated can make or break the international reception of a certain character to everyone who isn't invested enough in them to look deeper into the canon source.

It creates hiccups in plots. Things that seem out of character but really aren't. Going back to MHA in specific, the way that inaccurate translations hurt both the 'curatorial' and 'transformative' parts of the fandom is that people have begun to cite them as proof of the main cast's characterization.

Bakugou and Todoroki are undeniably some of the biggest examples of mistranslation injustices.

Katsuki, in a lot of people's minds, has yet to break out of the 'overly-aggressive rival' archetype box that people had been placing him in since Season 1. One of the most amazing aspects and biggest downfalls of Hori's writing was that at first, nearly every character fit into a very neat stereotype for Shonen Animes (Deku being the talking-no-jutsu sunshine MC, Uraraka being the overly bubbly main girl, Todoroki being the aloof and formal rival). He made the audience make assumptions about everyone's characters and then pulled the rug beneath our feet when he revealed deeper sides of them to play around within canon.

What made this part about Horikoshi's set-up so good though were the many clues we were given from the very beginning that these characters were more than what they acted like. Even from the very first chapters, for example, we learn that Katsuki (as much as he acts like a delinquent) dislikes smoking because it could get him in trouble.

That is just a single instance of MHA's use of dialogue to subtly divert our expectations of a character.

Another example is when they replaced 318's dialogue of the Second User saying that Katsuki "completes" Deku with him saying that Katsuki merely "bolsters" him. This presents a different situation, as that line was meant to reinforce the importance of those two's relationship as well as complete the character foils that MHA is partially centered around. By downplaying their developed connection, it becomes harder for the MHA manga scanlations to justify any future significance these two's words have on each other without mottling the pacing of the story.

AKA, it butchers the plot.

With every new volume, there are dozens and dozens more of these hints and bits scattered around! So many cues and subtle foreshadowing at the trajectory of everyone's character arcs--yet mistranslations or inaccurate scans make it so that we don't notice them. This is what I mean when I said that some character arcs are being done great injustices.

Until now, many people can't accept that Katsuki Bakugou cares for anyone other than himself (much less his rival and MC, Izuku Midoriya), nor can they accept that Todoroki would ever willingly work by Endeavor's side. The bottom-line then becomes that because of people missing heavy bits of characterization that become very plot-significant in the future.

When it comes to the point where people can no longer accept or fit their interpretation of the earlier manga events to what is happening in canon, the point of a translation fails completely because it has lead people to follow an entirely different story.

TL;DR - Fan scans are hard. Translating is hard. Don't get too mad at fan translations, but also maybe don't treat them as the catch-all for how characters truly operate. Thanks.

Side note: DO NOT harass FA for any of these things. FA is actually a pretty legit and okay source for scans (they've been operating since like 2014 ffs), but regardless of that they still don't deserve to get flack for their work. You can have any opinion or perspective of canon that you want, I don't care. These are just my two (more like two million tbh) cents on translations. I suggest reading takes from actual Japanese audiences tbh if you wanna know more about the source material of MHA. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

#IM SO SORRY MANG I RLLY WENT ON A RAMBLE FOR THIS #asks #mang #bnha #mha #my hero academia #boku no hero academia

34 notes · View notes

disfordevineaux · 4 years

Text

Character Parallels: Chase vs Julia

First off, let me start with:

SEASON 3 SPOILER WARNING.

This is somewhat a continuation from my original Chase Devineaux Case Study I did a while back. Feel free to read it to fully understand the context behind my opinions and thoughts on Chase, Julia and such discussed below. Let’s begin.

Although Season 3 was short, it was still a season that provided us with a new potential story catalyst to propel the plot in the form of major character development.

A bit of context:

Throughout the series, Chase Devineaux was always sceptical and often outright against the idea that Carmen Sandiego could have ulterior motives (due to his ill-fated meetings with the said person driving that home and on the surface she literally is stealing), an idea his previous partner, Julia Argent, was the spokesperson for. To quote a long story short, Chase was not too pleased or in agreement with the idea proposed by Julia: Carmen Sandiego isn’t the real enemy. Others shunned this idea too (Zari & Chief) and consistently was never outright ‘proved’ from a physical evidence standpoint. Both stood on opposite ends of the ‘who really is Carmen Sandiego’ spectrum. This was the major theme of division between Chase and Julia, a plot point further driven by the unlucky streak he suffered when dealing with Team Red, and VILE. Mostly he, and ACME, could not separate the entities completely, even up until the end of Season 3.

In the S03E04, ‘The Masks of Venice Caper’, after 3 seasons of being moments away from Carmen Sandiego at every step, Chase succeeds. After a long and clearly exhausting chase throughout the streets of Venice, he is able to finally catch up.

He leaps aboard after making the jump and officially bears witness to the handing over of goods, something which Julia was only ever afforded. Chase is blindsided at her easy surrender, simple innocent explanation and instantly clean escape. He does not go after her, instead stands bewildered at what she said, leaving him with the important line of: ‘Jules would understand’, (because she would with her prior knowledge and experience), to digest what just occurred.

This was not what he was expecting, as on other occasions they met him with hostility or evasion without explanation. Instead, he is treated as if he were Julia, filling the role as a substitute, as she is no longer on the scene to be the recipient of the ‘handoff’. At this moment, thanks to Carmen’s finale line, it all clicks. Previous conversations run through his mind, visibly questioning, as he makes the connection before being interrupted by Agent Zari, congratulating him on stopping the robbery.

The confirmation that he finally gets it is reaffirmed by a theme of a ‘silent partner’ which he now uses himself with commenting, awkwardly, that ‘I did not do it alone’ (A call back to S01E09, see below). This is the formal affirmation that he now understands that Carmen is not the enemy. There was no way he would have ever connected the dots without visual verification, experiencing it for himself first hand, a situation Julia experienced multiple times by fortune, something people forget when watching him grapple with his inability to detain the ‘thief’. Julia was provided with many chances throughout season 1-2 to work with or in situational coincidence with Carmen and aid in the protection of potential goods in harm’s way. (Most notably S02E04)

Julia’s departure, though disappointing to fans (and myself), was a crucial plot device to enable Chase to be finally exposed to the events which would lead him to change his mind for the better. Unless by some miracle he was chosen as the recipient of Team Red’s well wishes with Julia on the scene and/or in tow, it would have taken far longer for the realisation to be made. An understanding that is only able to be fully recognised by Julia and Chase. The only two people around long enough and familiar enough with Carmen Sandiego and the entire case to be in any position to come to the right conclusion about her intentions.

As many may say, seeing is believing. And seeing was what he needed to believe, both Chase and Julia needing that direct witnessing to understand. Seems the red lining of his original coat meant something after all.

(Do note: Julia was more inclined and susceptible to a conflicting opinion due to her heightened observation skills from the get-go but still needed visual confirmation, which she got, to stand strong with her diverging opinion on Carmen Sandiego.)

The Parallels:

In the next and final episode of S03E05, "The Jolly Good Show Caper", we are greeted with a callback to S01E03’s episode "The Sticky Rice Caper". Instead of Chase and Julia being on their way to interrogate Gray in the Paris Interpol office, Agent Zari and Chase are walking through the halls of the Italian Interpol office to interrogate their latest captured VILE operative, Neal the Eel. From a clearly visual standpoint (see below), the makeup of the scene and placement of characters is a direct callback to the dynamic between both Chase and Julia, and now between Chase and Zari.

S01E03 VS S03E05

Chase now takes the place of Julia, physically and mentally, who listens to a rundown of the situation, proposes a vague counter-argument which is disregarded by Zari. Chase is now wanting to look beneath the surface of the robbery or incident (like Julia always did), unlike before. Similar to the situation in S01E03, Zari is unwavering in her opinion that Carmen and the new detainee are in cahoots, Chase stating that his previous statement was merely ‘entertaining all possible angles’, a comment he further elaborates on to Chief at the end of the episode.

S03E05:

S01E03:

After coming to the interrogation room, Zari dramatically pushes it open in the same style as Chase did seasons earlier, halting her statement to reveal the suspect has ‘escaped’. Zari is stumped, Chase not too phased at this revelation and quickly checks the documents to understand what has occurred, once again.

S03E05

S01E03

Chase again, takes the stance of the ‘Julia’, all-knowing and proceeds to correctly recount the possible scenario that they have found themselves in, having experienced this once before. This ‘recounting of events’ is confirmed to the audience by Chase’s voice monologuing of sorts over an escaping by boat, Neal.

S03E05

S01E03

This scene is interesting for obvious reasons: it’s a direct call back to a later episode and the dynamic within. It is also a pivotal moment we see that Chase was always fully aware of what is happening around him, and really only required the correct pieces to fall into his lap at all the right times to now be the new ‘Julia’ in the dynamic. That style of a sequence of events is what helped Julia see the truth in Carmen’s actions in the first place. Chase has always been cognizant of the events around him, even if they could be contradictory to his main beliefs. Actively choosing not to present it to the audience, in favor of the popular opinion presented by and through ACME, their agents their leader that Carmen Sandiego is the enemy. Half of this being pressure, wanting to succeed in his work, gain praise for it and lack thereof witnessing first hand some sort of ‘positive’ reaffirmation of Carmen’s good intentions and that he really thought he was right. We see this through his sheer self disappointment and embarrassment when facing Chief after mistakes he had no true control over.

Towards the end of the same episode. Carmen is ‘captured’ in London. Agent Zari and Chase receive this development while travelling, Chase jumping out of his seat surprised, shocked, concerned that she was detained saying ‘that is terrible!’. Zari is notable taken aback, Chase quickly tries to collect himself and adjusts his statement and ends with ‘that. we were not the ones to make the arrest.’ Time has passed since the escape of Neal, Chase left to stew with his changing opinions and it clearly appears as if he no longer wishes for Carmen’s capture in the traditional sense, knowing that what she has been doing, is not criminally based. It’s unsure what his plans are when facing Carmen once again, but it at the very least no longer her capture.

Not only are Chase and Julia’s mindsets on the same path, but Chase is also no longer the driver between the pair. A fun nod to how Chase always drove, if dangerously at times.

After events unfold, Chase and Zari soon discover the planted crown jewels in Roundabouts office after a tip off, they run to retrieve them and Chase stops to glance out the window, witnessing Carmen Sandiego flying away from the scene. This is important, if a small detail, in once again showing us he has changed. He is far more observant and is the new candidate to witness the usual things Julia would if she were there. He stopped, was in the right place at the right time, recognised first hand the role Carmen plays in the grand scene of things, as a protector who runs interference.

When things have seemingly been resolved, Chase and Zari are in conference with Chief who details how she deems that it was all an elaborate plan where Roundabout and Carmen were in cahoots. In what is shown to be his first moment ever displaying his new and differing opinions to Chief on the events prior, he details how, maybe, Carmen left the items here for them to discover purposefully. Chief glares at him silently, Chase displaying an awkward reluctant smile, then ignores his opinion moving on. She informs him that it is his job to interrogate Roundabout for answers on how Carmen is connected to him, disregarding his prior though they are not united until Zari receives a phone call. They are informed that Roundabout never reached the destination and has escaped.

S03E05

A Sum Up:

In conclusion, Chase has officially changed opinions on Carmen Sandiego and has fallen into the role Julia left for him when she departed from ACME. Even with the pre-existing knowledge of the hacking by Player and all other indiscretions against him perpetrated by Team Red. He has been through a journey and come out the end with a new perspective

Agent Zari has now acted as both Julia’s and now Chase’s, well ‘Chase’, when it comes to the dynamic of the pairing. In many instances when consulting Chief, Julia has been informed to essentially ‘do her job’ or is only half-listen too, in a subtle way, instead of coming up with theories that don’t necessarily correlate with the majority. This all comes ahead in S03E02 ‘The Day of the Dead Caper’, where Chief is finally blunt with Julia (see below). The same thing has now befallen Chase (see below), except with little to no lead up to instant rejection. All of Chief’s patience for differing opinions was used up, all on Julia it appears.

S03E05

S03E02

The summation of all this produces a new defender of Carmen Sandiego; Chase Devineaux. The likely future outcome will be Chase attempting to contact, seek an audience with Carmen as Julia once attempted, and would succeeded in part from time to time. It is unlikely how well this will go considering Chase and is usually outwardly expressive with his determination to arrest her. One can only hope he is given a chance to rectify his past miscalculations and is able to further support these new set beliefs to ACME, Carmen Sandiego and himself.

One can also hope Julia returns, maybe by a proposition from Chase, who will no doubt have trouble enacting his new purpose of true justice, and seeking answers/help from Carmen Sandiego. This would also promote a chance for an adult discussion, an apology, one sorely lacking in Season 3 between them. With this new air of familiarity between their opinions on Carmen, a rare opinion it appears, a chance for a reformation of a proper team dynamic is possible.

They lacked a connection throughout season 1 and 2 which aided in their bitter union, both full-heartedly, if not realised or intentional, determined to have their opinion victorious over the other to themselves and to those around them. Chase far more openly critical and cynical, Julia keeping such comments more hidden and modest, but also far more willing to stand up for herself to and in front of Chief. (Prominent examples seen in S02E02,4 & 8, S03E02) Chase was aware of his poor behaviour but found it justified in a sense that he truly believed she was misguided, that he was correct about Carmen Sandiego, now knowing she clearly was right all along. (This does not excuse/justify his rudeness in any sense, but can explain it.)

They would be a great team, now finally on the same page but unfortunately separated. Julia has the nohow and Chase possess the drive to make it happen. They do share those traits, each more natural at one over the other. Neither are willing to give up without a fair fight, and proudly declare and justify themselves at every turn, both proud individuals. (Julia far more modest in comparison). If they worked together, who knows the possibilities, if they can change ACME’s stance on Carmen Sandiego or if they decide to abandon it altogether and aid the other fighter of VILE, Team Red. Either way, it was clear Julia could not do it all on her own and I’m sure we will see Chase realise and suffer the same fate. Hopefully reasoning that he needs help, not getting it to form anyone else, remembering Julia, seeking her out and bringing her back to ACME.

Her reason for leaving ACME was that her heart was no longer in it, her passion snubbed out. Her work now directly contradicts her beliefs which are doubted by all those around her at every turn.

A sad but visibly true thing as no one else in ACME was willing to consider her way any longer, her opinion not shared by anyone else, a very demoralising thing to go through. She was always fighting and standing up on her own.

With Chase now sharing this opinion, the burden of seeing and knowing the truth, it will be easier to stand behind with full conviction, to attempt to highlight the innocence Carmen Sandiego has hidden in plain sight, together. Only time will tell how it all plays out.

#season3spoilers #welp #thats was longer than i wanted it to be #HOPE YALL LIKED IT?#chase devineaux #julia argent #carmen sandiego #carmen sandiego netflix #if i come back and read this and find any mistakes i will murder someone #cs chase devineaux #cs julia argent #cs 2019 #cs #cs chief #cs agent zari #agent zari #cs roundabout #disfordevineaux #text

340 notes · View notes

retro-scorpio · 3 years

Text

The Arcana Meets The Devildom (Part Six)

Lucio’s Relationship With The Other Obey Me Characters

Lucifer: Despite the similarity of their names, the two men are two entirely different people to the point where Lucifer really doesn’t want anything to do with Lucio (although Lucifer’s opinion of Lucio is nowhere near as bad as that of the Lucio Haters). At least with Mammon, Lucifer can trust his brother to not mess up the important things (like looking out for the other brothers when he’s not around). Lucio, meanwhile, finds Lucifer to be way too uptight for his tastes and feels like he has had a stick up his ass for far too long. Obviously, Lucio receives help from Lucifer to return home to Vesuvia, but it’s more through the relationship the Avatar of Pride has with Julian and less through Lucifer’s feelings about Lucio.

Mammon: When Lucio and Mammon are together, they are a worse duo than Asra and Solomon. At least Asra and Solomon look out for other people besides themselves from time to time (especially Luke). Lucio and Mammon, meanwhile, are a pure force of chaos who bring out the worse in each other. Never, under any circumstances, allow the Avatar of Greed and the Vesuvian count to enter a Devildom casino, for they will cause thousands of Grimm of physical and emotional damage (that Lucifer will have to pay for, much to his dismay). Mammon and Lucio are as thick as thieves, and they bond over how they’re often the scapegoat for everything that goes wrong, even if they aren’t the ones who started it or did anything wrong.

Levi: Lucio and Levi really don’t have anything to do with each other. When Lucio is over at the House, Levi is either in his room or at RAD (and based on the things Levi has heard about Lucio, the Avatar of Envy would like to keep it that way; there’s no way he can deal with two Mammons).

Satan: Satan is torn about how he feels about Lucio. On the one hand, Satan hates how Lucio leaves his room a worse mess (than it already is) every time he’s in there to attempt to help Julian and Asra with research, and Lucio is so boisterous that it’s much harder to get any reading, academic or otherwise, done. There’s also a part of Satan that, while he hates to admit it, takes Lucifer’s opinion of people very seriously, and he feels pressure to not be overly fond of Lucio as a result of Lucifer’s words about and actions towards the Vesuvian count. On the other hand, the Avatar of Wrath finds Lucio to be very fascinating. Lucio may tell tall tales about his life in Vesuvia, but tales are tales, and Satan finds them very entertaining. Plus, Satan can’t deny that Lucio has a certain charm about him that draws people to him (even if the attention isn’t always good). It’s not like Satan has a crush on Lucio, though. There’s no way a quiet man such as himself could develop feelings for someone loud and bent on destruction, right?

Asmo: Some would say that this is a perfect match, for Lucio are Asmo are both vain creatures that put themselves above all others. However, this similarity is the very thing that causes them to initially bump heads whenever they so much as meet each other’s glance. Their arguments can be boiled down to who is adored the most, and they constantly feel the need to show up one another. After a while, though, Asmo and Lucio slowly become more friendly towards each other when they realize that they are both very insecure about people’s perception of them, and they try to help each other to work through their insecurities. Eventually, they can occasionally be seen in Asmo’s room, exchanging beauty secrets.

Beel: Beel and Lucio don’t see each other a whole lot, and so they fade into each other’s background. As long as Lucio doesn’t eat any of his food, Beel’s just fine with Lucio’s presence at the House.

Belphie: Belphie’s greatly amused by Lucio’s antics, and the Avatar of Sloth may or may not instigate things with Lucio for his own amusement. It takes Lucio a while for him to realize this about the youngest demon brother, but when he does, he (oddly) begins to respect the power that Belphie has. They have been found napping together on numerous occasions, although neither one of them can remember how they ended up in the same room, much less practically on top of each other (which makes Satan blush if he is the one to find the duo napping).

Simeon: Like Satan, Simeon has a bit of a crush on Lucio. Unlike Satan, though, Simeon feels more comfortable with expressing his feelings towards the Vesuvian count. In the back of his mind, Simeon knows that Lucio isn’t the best type of partner for him to have, but there’s nothing wrong with fantasizing every now and again, right? Lucio is completely oblivious to Simeon’s feelings towards him, and Simeon’s perfectly content to keep Lucio in the dark (unlike Asmo when it came to Julian). Besides, it would seem as though Lucio has his eyes on someone else, and Simeon’s not about to get in the way of his friend and roommate’s fun.

Solomon: Out of all of the possible romantic relationships that blossom out of Julian, Asra, and Lucio’s arrival to the Devildom, no one, and I mean no one, expected Solomon and Lucio to be the first pairing to actually hook up with each other (away from the prying eyes of everyone else). It seems unlikely that Lucio would ever be attracted to someone who was as similar to Asra as Solomon is, and yet the bruises and light scratch marks all over Solomon’s neck, arm, and back tell a different story. Perhaps it’s Solomon’s brand of slyness that draws Lucio in. As for Solomon, he can’t deny that the Vesuvian count’s quite handsome, and he has left some marks of his own on Lucio’s body. Solomon knows how Simeon feels towards Lucio, and he has thought about adding the angel into the mix. However, he must be very careful not to let Asra know of any of this, for Asra would most certainly turn against him and probably curse him for hooking up with the man that took his parents away from him.

Luke: While there are no romantic feelings involved, Luke is in a similar predicament to Satan when it comes to deciding how to behave towards Lucio. Luke wants to be a good angel, and he believes that good angels don’t spend any time with the likes of Lucio unless it’s to help convert them and help them see the good of God. However, Lucio is just too entertaining for Luke to simply ignore. He does feel a bit more comfortable after he and Simeon have a talk, but there’s still a part of Luke that feels like he’s breaking the rules whenever he has (innocent) fun with Lucio. Meanwhile, Lucio treats Luke in a similar fashion to Little D.

28 notes · View notes