#this is my first time drawing other people that isn’t harvey lol | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

surveys-at-your-service · 4 years

Text

Survey #278

“they will seduce you, get through the door; then they bite you in the neck, leave you bleeding on the floor.”

Do you believe in dream symbolism? If so, do you ever look up what certain things in your dreams may mean? Some, yes, others, no. A lot just seem way too random to have stories behind them, but just as well, some dreams are obviously stemmed from our experiences, fears, desires, etc. Who was the last person who exploded on you? What was the reason? I have no idea, but probably Mom. Is there a certain name that keeps popping up in your life, like a name that many people you know have? No. What is something you have a "love/hate relationship" with? What do you hate about it, and what do you love about it? The first thing that comes to mind is technology. I grew up way too dependent on in despite my mom being a good mother that really tried to limit my time of it. It just never worked. Almost everything I do involves a computer. Through the Internet though, I’ve made spectacular friends, discovered great things (coughcoughmark), it helps me through depression and stuff… but I nevertheless hate how attached I am to it. Sometimes I feel like I’m so disconnected from the “real” world, “real” experiences, but then again, I also believe tech is a part of the “real” world. Idk how to really explain it; I have such mixed feelings. Do you like things that are cliché or not? What kinds of things that are regarded as "cliché" do you like? Sure, especially romantic cliches. I’m just such a sucker for that kind of stuff. What was the last quote you read somewhere, and who said it? “Speak your mind even if your voice shakes,” Ruth Ginsburg. We truly lost a hero. Have you heard any song mash-ups (when they put two or more different songs together) that you like? If so, which? Oh, quite a lot, I love those! The first one that comes to mind is “Centuries” by Fall Out Boy and “Radioactive” by Imagine Dragons. How many boyfriends/girlfriends have you had in 2014? Well, this is old. But anyway, I had one. How often do you say ‘lol’ in a computer or text conversation? Quite a bit. Idk, it just changes the tone of what you’re speaking. Whose hoodie did you wear last? My own. Have you ever listened to music you hated just to fit in? Ha ha… not devoutly, but I’d explore “cool” metal bands to try to get into. I didn’t make myself listen to them if I didn’t like ‘em, though. What’s an interesting fact about you that not many people know? Hm. Well, I don’t consider it “interesting,” but very few people (besides the Internet lmao) know that I essentially stole my then-best friend’s boyfriend by mutual flirting to the point he broke up with her and wanted me instead. I cut that shit the fuck out once he told me he loved me. It’s one of the things I’m most ashamed of. What do you want to do after high school? I’m long past high school, and let’s just say things are NOT going as planned lmao. At all. I had such, such a different vision. Do you do anything embarrassing when no one is home? No. If you had the chance to move to a completely different state/country, would you? I deadass want to move to Canada but am unwilling to move so far from my family. How old were you when you stopped believing in Santa? I don’t know age; it’s funny, I tend to remember things by school grades versus my age. Even in this situation, though, I’m not positive. Towards the end of elementary school, maybe? Do you have any saved texts? Yes, from Sara and Ashley. Do you ever play online games with your friends? Which one(s)? Once upon a time, my friend/”big brother” Sam and I would play WoW together every day and just chill out over Skype. He helped keep me company during my worst depression. We haven’t played together in quite a long time, though. I should message him. Which emoji did you use most recently? The upside-down smiley face on Facebook. Who was the last person to cry in your presence? Mom, probably. Or one of my nieces or nephew. Do any of your friends have small children? Yes. One of my closest friends had her son not even two weeks ago. Do you ever wear accessories in your hair? Which ones? No. What kind of fruit do you like? A good chunk of it. Strawberries, apples, grapes, pineapple, bananas, peaches… Is there anything you've always wanted to do that you've never told anyone? *shrugs* Maybe. Do you flush the toilet with your hand or your foot? ”I use my hand at home and in other people’s bathrooms, but I use my foot in public washrooms.” <<<< Same. What is your Myers-Briggs Type Indicator? (Ex: ENTP): INFP. Do you read any blogs? If so, which ones? No. Would you rather have curvy legs or skinny legs? I’d prefer to have an in-between. What is your favorite game show? Family Feud with Steve Harvey. How many times a day do you use the restroom? Hm. Depends on how much I drink. What was the last thing that made you cringe? Idr. What is your favorite ‘80s movie? I’m not sure, given how I don’t tend to recognize movies by decades. Do you have your own car? No. I don’t drive. Who was the last person who drew you a picture? I commissioned someone on deviantART to draw My Child Jaw and it is so FUCKING beautiful. Would you rather hold a scorpion or a snake? I love snakes, so guess. How do you usually get your exercise? I don’t, but that’s going to change when we FINALLY fuckin move. I’m going to walk as much as I possibly can because we have a sidewalk. Who are your godparents? Idk if I even have any. Are any of your siblings married? Three are and one is engaged. What does your phone case look like, if you have one? It came with a plain purple one. What is something you can draw really well? I think I’m pretty good at meerkats. Best field trip experience? The zoo in the 5th grade. One and only time I’ve seen meerkats irl. What is the most amount of money you’ve spent on a meal before? Idr. It’s very rare I can pay for anything because I don’t have an income, but with gifted money and stuff, it was probably when I paid for my mom and I to eat at Olive Garden. I don’t recall how much it was, but OG isn’t cheap, so. Who was (or is) the teacher that gave you the hardest time in school? Idk. I had good teachers. What is the strangest thing you’ve ever seen outside of your house? I don’t know. Nothing exciting. Do you ever feel self-conscious when you eat around other people? Not really, no. There are cases where I do, like if I take too big a bite or something, but generally I don’t. Everyone has to eat. What is the worst thunderstorm you’ve experienced? I recall one in particular during my era of being terrified of them when we were on the way home from a friend’s house and there was INSANE lightning. I was crying so much in the back seat. I think I have experienced worse ones, that’s just the one I remember because of how much it terrified me. How quickly can you write an essay? Pretty damn quickly once I get into the groove of it. Have you ever had problems falling asleep in class? No. What bug frightens you most? Oh yikes, idk. A lot of bugs scare me, honestly, particularly if they surprise me. Probably rhinoceros beetles. Are your parents supportive of you? Very. Have you ever participated in a mock trial, or a real trial? No. Have you ever had sex in someone else’s bed/bedroom? lol oops Have you ever had sex on your bedroom floor? How about your living room floor? YIKES this survey getting frisky but anyway idk. When you kiss someone, do you like to play with their hair? Yeah. Do you regret sleeping with anyone? No. Do you ever brush your hair before you go to bed? No…? Your hair is just gonna get messy while sleeping. Have you ever asked anyone out? Do you prefer to do the asking out, or wait to see if the other person will ask? Yes. I don’t really have a preference. Have your parents ever disapproved of anyone you had a relationship with? Not to my knowledge. When’s the last time you ran? HUNNY Brittany doesn’t RUN. Have you ever stayed online for a long time waiting for someone? Oh yes, I did that A LOT with Mini back when we were younger and RPed together like every day. Who or what sleeps with you? Roman, my cat. Would you wear a boy/girlfriend’s clothes? I somehow wound up with quite a few of Jason’s pj pants?????? But anyway yeah sure, I would. If it fit, anyway. Do you return your cart? I am a lazy person. But not that lazy. Do it. What noise do you hear? I’m currently listening to NateWantsToBattle’s cover of “Feel Good Inc.” Would you survive in prison? No. No. I know I’d try to commit suicide. Do you remember the last movie you saw while on a date? The IT remake with Girt. Have you ever cheated on someone? No sir. Do you kiss on the first date? I never have, but not saying I wouldn’t. BUT I most likely would not just because I reserve kisses for someone I really, really like. Usually by the first date I wouldn’t know that yet. Are you into sports? Nope. Have you ever used your bra to hold things like you would a pocket? HAHA I don’t think so. Who knows a secret about you that no one else does? My ex-therapist. What is your longest relationship to date? 3 ½ years. Who ended the last relationship you were in? It was brought up by her, but it came to be a mutual decision. Have you ever gotten back with an ex? No. Who was your first prom date? Jason. Have you ever dated someone more than three years older than you? For less than a day. Have you ever been used? I don’t think so. Do you like when I guy takes you by surprise and kisses you? This is making quite a few assumptions, but anyway, if we’re in a stable relationship, generally yes. It’s cute. Would you be more likely to date a redneck or a goth? My dream partner would be a goth, hnnnnnnnnGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG. Has anyone ever sung to you? Yes. Do you like massages? EW don’t touch me like that unless you’re my s/o. Have you ever been skinny dipping? No. When was the last time you spent the night at someone else's house? The last time I was at Sara’s. What scares you more, spiders or snakes? Spiders. Does it matter if a guy has a sense of humor? If he’s a romantic interest, yeah. Would you ever get implants? No. Have you ever had a crush on a sibling's friend? No. Have you ever dated someone with a child? No. I’m quite sure I wouldn’t. Have you ever dated someone of another race? For less than a day. Have you kissed anyone today? No. What was the last topic you read about? I beliiieeeve… Metallica’s new album. Have you ever participated in a fundraising campaign? I think? Again, I don’t have an income though so I’m unsure. Do you know how to knit? No. What’s your go-to order from KFC? I don’t go there. What was the last album you listened to in full? Oh man, there’s no telling. I generally don’t do that. Do you use pepper to season your food? Sure, that’s a common enhancement. Do you know anyone who has an unusual pet? Probably somebody. Have you ever known anyone who was homeless? My mother, Nicole, and I technically were at one point, we just had spectacular people let us live with them until we got a new place. Did you have a treehouse when you were younger? No. One does not simply build a treehouse in pine trees. Have you ever played Magic: The Gathering? Guys. Guys. For many many months now I’ve been dying to and idk why. That game was one of Jason’s favorite things in the world and so he taught me it how to play, though I never fully got it because there are a LOT of rules. When I had my PS3, I had one of the Duels of the Planeswalkers games, and I miss that shit. What are your thoughts on role playing games? Fun fun. What is a band you can't stop listening to right now? I’ve been seriously into 3TEETH lately, as well as Solence. Have you ever had a panic attack? LOTS!!!!!!!! Have you ever entered a talent competition? Naw, I don’t have an exceptional talent. Are you indecisive? Ridiculously so. Are you smiling in your Facebook profile picture? It’s actually one of my brightest smiles I’ve ever taken a selfie with. I look way happier than I am lmaooo. Describe your hometown. What's it like there? Small, notoriously dangerous. Do you have any expensive hobbies? You could say photography given the various lenses and other materials available, plus editing software subscriptions. What is the oldest online account that you still use? My email, probably. What was the last video game you beat? I wanna say it was the last time I replayed Silent Hill 2. Long time ago. What's your favorite Studio Ghibli film? I actually haven’t seen any. Have you ever been really passionate about something but then lost interest? If so, what was it? Yeah, sure, like various entertainers/bands/musicians, TV shows…

#survey #surveys #quiz #questions #questionnaire

2 notes · View notes

laufire · 6 years

Note

Name a ship that most represents your type of ship.

Isabelle and Raphael from Shadowhunters, hands down. (Beware: this turned into a long post that talks at once about all my current -and some not-so-current- otps).

-LOVE AT FIRST SIGHT. “Why are you helping me?” “I don’t know.” – Shadowhunters

Half my dash must be tiring of hearing this, but I adore this trope. I love how it moves things along: the character is already in love -automatically, the relationship goes into Intense™ territory, you get swept into its groove, whether you like it or not (another reason why these ships, when they raise hate, the RAISE hate xD). Emori and John in The 100, Matt ~sensing Elektra across the room in Daredevil, Wes seeing Rebecca for the first time in HTGAWM, Derek and Jesse in TSCC (I want to start re-watching that show soon so I have that ship very present *sniffs*), Bruce and Selina in Gotham (and IIRC, every BatCat adaptation worth something has this in some form -it is a MUST).

With Rizzy, like with other ships (Caroline and Klaus in TVD, Bellamy and Raven in The 100), it might not be literally at first sight, but the result is the same: they might know of each other, but it is the first time that they really MEET, that something HUGE happens (Raphael feeding on Isabelle, Klaus offering Caroline his blood, Bellamy and Raven’s first time), when you can feel it. I love these cases too, because it offers the possibility of including a messy history/start/etc. (something that you can see at various points of this list lol), while simultaneously giving me the opportunity of experiencing the LAFS moment on present time, instead of in flashbacks (Elektra and Matt) or references (Harvey and Scottie in Suits).

-UNPLANNED, UNFORESEEN, UNWITTING. “But it doesn’t make any sense, it came out of nowhere!!” – the fandom lol

This is somewhat related to the LAFS point, and a criticism I’ve seen time and again about more than one of those ships, but in this case is multiplied by a hundred xD

And I wanted to make a separate point for this because, lbr -you rarely see this complaint (or at least not as generalized) when a PILOT ShowTP goes for LAFS. But that is something I love about these ships: it wasn’t in the original plan, there was no “build-up” that could have pointed at it, and it’s likely that the writing team behind it never had an inkling of the effects the ship could have on the writing. Some of my favourite cases are Bellamy and Raven, Caroline and Klaus, Bonnie and Kai, Emori and Murphy… these ships irremediably alter the foundations of their ‘verse, they re-shape the story. I love that something that came “out of nowhere” can have that effect. I love it.

This meta by @candyumbrella does a great job explaining this (far better than I could, and besides, this post is already getting longer than I expected ^^), and it even does it through Isabelle and Raphael. Her Ted and Tobin’s posts in general have been illuminating wrt how tv writers work, and in relation to this post, I’m more aware now of what makes me ship certain things, why something that on paper should be appealing to me falls flat, etc. I’d recommend them all, but beware because they will take hours of your life XD

-STAR-CROSSED LOVERS. “If it takes fighting a war for us to meet, it will have been worth it.” – Hamilton

Was there anyone who did not FREAK THE FUCK OUT with the “at the brink of war” line? Because I don’t believe them.

Look, it’s obvious. It’s cliché. I don’t care. I live for this trope. Allison and Scott from Teen Wolf was one my favourite instances of this trope (my bbys ;_;); it was one of the things that interested me of Allison/Derek too, as a crack ship; it was the whole premise of Still Star-Crossed and I’m not even gonna pretend I didn’t shamelessly enjoy every second. It was what instantly made Rosita/Waverly my OTP in Wynonna Earp, aka the most impossible out of all my rareships xD. Priya/Sierra and Tony/Victor in Dollhouse (I never know wtf to call the people on this show istg) had this element too, even if it was in a “us vs the world” sense, more than “we’re on different sides of a conflict way bigger than us and everything is stacked against us fuck” lol. Cassian and Jyn could go there too.

And obviously, Isabelle and Raphael as a ship have this written on its DNA, given how the ‘verse positions Shadowhunters and Downworlders. Outside the 219 scene (*_*), I think 213’s meeting in the alley managed to showcase it really well.

-EX-SOMETHING, EX-MAYBE, EX-ALMOST. “Well never be done with each other.” – Shadowhunters

I loooooove exes. Actual exes, proto exes, centuries-old exes. Something I love even more is “bitter exes that still have a special connection no one else gets or beats” (Camille and Magnus, Carlos and Kisa on FDTD, Elektra and Matt, Harvey and Scottie -and on the bitterest, most fucked up side, with ships like Katherine and Stefan on TVD or Derek and Kate on Teen Wolf. I even consider Rosita and Waverly could belong here, idc if it was one simple kiss okay xD). Obviously Isabelle and Raphael aren’t bitter, but they might get there, if I’m lucky! A girl can dream! (weird thing to say about an otp? I don’t care xD)

And one thing that is significant of these types of ships, and obviously of Raphabelle, is that, whether they’re together or not (hell, Izzy and Raphael have never really “dated”), narratively speaking, it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t make any difference. They’re still connected, one simple scene where they merely look at each other across a crowded room can resurrect the ship after years not even speaking to each other. Hell, with Caroline and Klaus it only took one phone call xD

-CAN’T QUIT EACH OTHER. “I’m just asking for a little taste.” – Shadowhunters

I guess this relates somewhat to the previous point, but I wanted to reference the addiction plot because for me it isn’t a bug, it’s a feature xD I’ve seen people say things like “I know they started out as problematic™ with the addiction, but now that they’re over that, they could be a gr10 ship!!”, and fuck that¸ tbh xD They’re a great ship because of the addiction storyline. It adds this messed up layer of wonder, of doubt, over the ship that I love. And obviously, there’s the appeal of “we’re bad for each other but we can’t stay apart!!” angst. My lizard brain likey. And it’s definitely a huge part of the appeal of Matt and Elektra, BatCat in general…

-SHARING SECRETS. “Nobody knows. Except for you.” – Shadowhunters

Things like Isabelle admitting she doesn’t feel strong, Raphael revealing the story about her sister, Bellamy telling Raven about how he felt about his mother’s death, Harvey confessing about Mike’s fraud to Scottie even if he knows it won’t make any difference, or only being capable of admitting to her voluntarily that he’s seeing a therapist… That kind of thing gives me so much joy :D

And lbr, the “except for YOU” part? HUGE draw, yup.

-CHARGED INTIMACY. “#they might as well have been alone #were there other people in the scene? who cares. they were all irrelevant. – @magalimoons lol

Any shipper would know what I’m talking about. That moment where Isabelle leaves mid-conversation with Alec and Meliorn in 214 to go to Raphael, or when they talk at the end of 210, or when they talk in 219. Bellamy and Raven in 413, when he’s telling her how much they need her and everyone and everything else disappears of the room (that’s the scene referenced above lol), or when A.L.I.E. posses Raven, and despite everyone else being one room away without even a door separating them, this feeling of intimacy falls over the scene. Caroline and Klaus looking at each other when he appears during the graduation event in 423, Root and Shaw in PoI. Literally everything about Rizzy in 209.

*Swoons*

–BLOODSHARING. “they have to suck your blood. And then you have to suck their blood. It’s like a whole big sucking thing.” – Buffy the Vampire Slayer

This has been one of my favourite tropes for-fucking-ever, guys. I think my first experience with it was Blade? Or Angel and Buffy? I’d say Blade. In any case: it changed my fucking life. The fact that Rizzy includes it is the cherry on top of this beautiful ship-cake.

On another note: blood transfusions totally count xD Furiosa and Max come to mind, for example.

There are other things that add to the ship for me: Raphael’s aceness (I project a lot onto him even without it so), the weird catholic/heretic themes xD, how beautiful they look together (I once was accused of “only” liking them because they looked hot together, which. LOL at the only, given this post and every other I’ve written about them, but also. OFC I like that they look hot together. That’s not only a good thing, it’s an IMPORTANT thing, among other reasons, because if the writers like your ship, they will look hot together xD).

And it’s not that if it doesn’t have any of those I won’t like a ship XD; in fact, some of my biggest OTPs lack some or even most of these traits (Gabrielle and Xena, Brigan and Fire in the Seven Kingdoms Trilogy, Clark and Lois in some versions), or that there aren’t other romantic tropes I love that don’t fit Rizzy (the Unholy Matrimony trope is one of my favourites, for example), but well. I know what I’m about xD

#rizzy #raphabelle #isabelle lightwood #raphael santiago #shadowhunters #anonymous #talking to the void #my thoughts #sh thoughts #favourites: love at first bite #favourites: love is the drug #favourites: the powah of lurve #you WISH your faves could ever #long post for ts #why is this so long lol

14 notes · View notes

frivoloussuits · 6 years

Text

Suits: What Comes Next?

What can Suits do next, in 7b and 8a and beyond? It’s a question I’ve been thinking about for a while, and while I’ve explored it in fic I think it’s about time I do a proper meta post. Strap in for lots of weird predictions about how Suits can go on, and what the potential pitfalls of each route are.

TLDR: Suits is probably but not definitely doomed. Their safest option, in my opinion, is to decisively break up Donna and Harvey in 7b, give Harvey an absolutely awful time through 8a (maybe 7b and 8b too?), and double down on another ship entirely. This is not their only option; Darvey is still on the table.

Word count: ~3K

Question 1: How can they handle Mike and Rachel’s departure?

First things first, now that Mike’s leaving, the powers that be are losing the core relationship of the show. Assuming the reason Mike’s leaving is that he and Rachel got a better job/life opportunity elsewhere (as opposed to, say, the two of them get killed off), there are two options here:

1.) Brush over Mike and Rachel’s departure as a happy, happy event for everyone involved. The remaining characters move on with their lives with minimal angst. Maybe a new sidekick (Alex? Donna? Louis? someone else new?) fills the Mike-sized hole in Harvey’s plot lines.

Pros: Patrick J. Adams described Suits as a fundamentally “aspirational” show. In his opinion the show can approach darkness, it cannot dwell there. This would allow the show to carry on with its typical plot lines without angst.

Cons: This may feel out of sync with the previous seasons. If everyone can pick up and move on without Mike in a heartbeat, then why were they so dedicated to keeping him around and protecting him for all this time? Also, now that two more members of the original core cast are leaving, Suits is at risk of having too few meaningful plots. Glossing over Mike’s departure would mean dropping a major source of potential drama.

2.) Dwell on the implications of Mike and Rachel’s departure. Harvey’s abandonment issues might come back to the forefront.

Pros: Drama. Tension. Sensible, in-character consequences over the loss of the Mike-Harvey relationship.

Cons: If the show dwells on Rachel and Mike’s departure, so will the audience. And if the audience is upset about the departure, they might end up alienated, sick of the reminders of what’s now missing. Also, as mentioned above, this show doesn’t like serious angst; it might be hard to strike the right tone.

Question 2: How to end 7b?

Patrick J. Adams has strongly hinted that the finale of 7b will include the Machel wedding. 7b is also intended to serve as a backdoor pilot for Jessica’s spin-off show. That’s all well and good, but what happens to our core remaining characters, Donna, Louis, and Harvey?

Suits knows the benefits of ending on a cliffhanger (or some sort of tantalizing promise of new conflict), they've done it every season except maybe 6. I think they have to do this again. Because they’ve now lost half their main cast, they’ll probably try to hook people more than ever and give them an incredibly compelling reason to tune back in. What sort of cliffhanger they might use depends on the answer to . . .

Question 3: What’s the driving tension of Season 8a?

(8b’s also important, of course, but I think it’ll be the ending of the series. And since I don’t have a great intuition for how this show can end without Mike, I won’t make detailed predictions. All I’ll say is that I think at least 2 out of 3, if not all 3, of the Donna-Louis-Harvey group will be happily and stably in love, and I think all three will achieve some level of personal growth. I predict that they’ll all be happy with their careers and that the firm will be doing well. Either that or the firm crashes, in which case Harvey probably throws up his hands and moves out of New York, lol.)

Okay, so fandom loves fluffy slice-of-life stories that don’t have conflict, but mainstream TV shows? Not so much. There ought to be a driving conflict that makes 8a run. I think Suits can have three major types of tension:

External Tension: A mostly-new set of characters invades and raises hell. Examples include the Danbury plot of 6a, the investment banking plot of 4a, and the failed Darby merger from 3.

Pros of external tension: So many options for drama.

Cons of external tension: Meh. Suits has done this a lot already, and how do you top the stakes of Danbury? What new threat can outside characters present that we haven’t already seen? If it’s just that “the firm’s in jeopardy again,” I think a lot of viewers will yawn, but the obvious ways of raising the stakes (disgruntled ex-client attempts murder, someone ends up in the hospital for multiple episodes, Louis makes good on the Daniel Hardman death threat, etc.) would potentially be too angsty and out of place.

Another potential issue is that the end of 7b would ideally introduce this new bunch of external troublemakers, and if 7b’s finale is already packed with the Machel wedding and Jessica’s pilot plots then that’ll be tough.

Old-Conflict-Resurfaces Tension: Oooh, this one could be fun. A decent way for Suits to go out (assuming Season 8 is the end) is to do a fabulous villain team-up. Maybe Daniel Hardman’s working with Travis Tanner, who’s being paid off by Charles Forstman, and so on. More broadly, if Suits can reach into its established rogues gallery and present some old threats as more menacing than ever and weave a credible yet surprising legal plot, that might be a way to go.

Pros: Lots of options for drama, though less than above. Potentially cleaner and more elegant, since Suits doesn’t need to introduce bunches of new settings and characters. If done well, it could viewers guessing all throughout, rethinking old episodes and searching their memories for clues to unravel every new mystery. All in all this could feel like a very fitting end for the show.

Cons: This may be very hard to pull off. It can tip one way and become boring, or the other and become absurd.

Internal Tension: My personal favorite. Something changes among our central trio, and they then generate a driving plot of their own free will.

Pros: Elegant. Minimal set-up (well, no, but the setup is all the character dynamics we’ve learned so well over the past seven seasons). A great way to propel meaningful character change and wrap up the central arcs. I think audiences will care about this tension more than any other kind, because it’s all about Donna, Harvey and Louis, and those central characters are what the general audience cares about most.

Cons: We’ve already seen a lot of Donna, Harvey and Louis. We’ve seen how they react in stressful situations. Pushing them to new limits is hard, there are few events that can still do it. The powers that be would have to be pretty damn careful to keep everyone in-character without just rehashing dramas we’ve already seen.

Question 4: Who is Samantha Wheeler?

For those who don’t know, Katherine Heigl is joining the main cast of Suits for Season 8. She’s playing Samantha Wheeler, a “talented new partner at Pearson Specter Litt who challenges the status quo and will either become the firm’s greatest ally or most powerful enemy.”

It’s possible that Samantha will come crashing in and become the one-woman generator of an “external tension” that drives Season 8a. I’m hard-pressed to come up with what’s so special about this character that she can cause such big waves, but that doesn’t mean it’s impossible.

Pros: New drama. New relationship dynamics. If she’s connected via backstory to one or more of the main characters (and she probably should be, otherwise the audience is at risk of just not caring about her), that could cause drama amidst the Donna-Louis-Harvey group. Also! She might provide new romance opportunities, and god knows Suits likes its love stories. If Darvey and Louis/Sheila are both definitively together by the end of 7, I think Samantha is even more likely to have a love interest.

Cons: Things are already changing a lot from 7 to 8. The audience is at risk of 1.) being confused, 2.) being bored because they’ve already seen too much like this, 3.) feeling alienated because this isn’t what they signed up for, and/or 4.) just not caring. Adding a brand-new main character may exacerbate these issues.

Question 5: WHAT HAPPENS TO DARVEY?!?!?!

The powers that be wrote themselves into an interesting corner with the 7a kiss. The Darvey tension’s been simmering for ages, but it’s finally been pushed so far that Donna and Harvey have to confront it. If the Darvey will-they-won’t-they dance isn’t finished by the end of 7, I think audiences will revolt.

The writers are devoting serious attention to the fallout the kiss; the consequences will propel plenty of 7b drama, and I won’t be surprised if Donna and Harvey spend 5.99 out of 6 episodes feuding. That said, by the time the season is over, the Darvey plot should be decided one way or the other to avoid the aforementioned audience revolt. Working under that assumption, there are two options . . .

1.) Darvey gets together in 7b.

I’m going to quote another Aaron (the namesake of Rick Sorkin?) discussing the long-time workplace romance of another fictional Donna: “They are in a tough spot . . . because she works for him. Besides, sexual and romantic tension is, to me, much more fun than taking the tension away by having the sex and romance.” And while I can’t find the article at the moment, I’ve seen a related quote from Sarah Rafferty, where she said that she hoped Darvey would happen in the very last episodes of the show, if it happened at all.

Why might they say this? Because hardcore Darvey shippers may be thrilled to watch an entire Season 8 of canon Darvey, but I think more casual viewers will lose interest. The unspoken will-they-won’t-they tension has captivated viewers for years, and once that’s gone so is one of Suits’ biggest hooks. If the powers that be still want the Donna-Harvey relationship to draw people in, they’d better cook up something really special to replace the sexual and romantic tension.

Donna and Harvey have prepared for this relationship for so long that a lot of the typical sources in television love stories (one of them is jealous, one of them cheats, they miscommunicate, they aren’t familiar with each others’ priorities) would make little sense; they should be past that by now. If there’s any relationship conflict, that would have to be written quite carefully.

Another option is to let Donna and Harvey be happy together and throw conflict at them from the outside-- maybe someone else comes and tries to break them up, or threaten them professionally, and maybe they close ranks and become a wonderful battle couple.

(Personal note: If Darvey gets together, I’d like to see canon unquestionably establish Donna as Harvey’s equal in 7b and 8. I want to see them contributing equally to their relationship. I want to be convinced that they’ll both be happy in the long term, that this isn’t a relationship where Donna sacrifices for Harvey but has to grovel for his support in return, and I think they’re not there yet. Harvey really isn’t there yet. Getting there could generate plot.)

So these are some options for how canon can keep viewers invested through S8, but . . . I bet they won’t be as compelling for the general audience as the 7-season mating dance.

2.) Darvey gets smashed to hell in 7b.

I know I’m the only one, but I think this is still a real possibility!

At this point, Suits is running into two issues. One, it feels overall predictable and unsurprising. Two, it feels like it’s pushing its characters out of character in order to manufacture surprises (see: Harvey’s sudden infatuation with Paula, rule-obsessed Sheila’s sudden willingness to cheat on her fiance). If they can thwart viewer expectations on one of the biggest questions-- will Darvey happen?-- while remaining true to their characters, that could be pretty damn cool.

It’s also a reasonable option, in my opinion. It could generate plenty of plot for Donna and Harvey in 8a, since they might completely burn their bridges in 7b and have to rebuild from scratch, and it also leaves room for a different central romance!

So there’s this ship that nobody talks about. It’s a m/f ship, which means it’s more likely to be canon on this sadly heteronormative show than, say, Marvey. The characters have had compelling plots and interactions from Season 1. They’ve laughed together. They’ve survived drama. They respect, care about and understand each other. They have the same interests and hobbies. They have hilariously sexual conversations. They have literally said “I love you.”

I’m talking about Louis and Donna.

Yes, I’m serious, and so was Sarah Rafferty when she claimed Donna needs someone more emotionally open than Harvey to be her “life partner,” and so was Rick Hoffman when he said, “I just don’t understand how Louis could not be attracted to a woman like Donna.”

Pros of Lonna: Surprises! Drama! I can see this being the internal tension that drives 8a, and hell, I can’t imagine a better cliffhanger for season 7′s finale than a Lonna moment. This wouldn’t be radically out of character-- I’ve been checking, and there’s a surprisingly large amount of foundational material for this ship-- yet it’d massively upset audience expectations and also the existing relationship dynamics between Donna, Louis, and Harvey.

No, I’m not forgetting Harvey. Maybe he doesn’t want Donna himself, but seeing Louis end up with her would upturn everything he thought he knew about the world. Given that Mike’s also leaving and that he might still be dealing with Paula-related guilt, this plot twist would send Harvey reeling, especially if he and Donna are still working out the fallout from the kiss. If he lashes out and screws up his professional life too, then that can generate legal plots as well as personal drama.

Long story short, Lonna is potentially a massive plot generator.

Cons: The big downside of Lonna is that (besides Rick Hoffman and Sarah Rafferty who have been discussing it at least since Season 2) practically nobody ships it. Louis is so often treated as fodder for jokes, it’s possible that audiences just wouldn’t take it seriously. Also, a lot of Darvey shippers would be furious and heartbroken.

Question 6: What’s my ideal season 7 finale?

Okay, I know nobody is actually asking this, but I want to tell you!

Mike and Rachel dance peacefully at their wedding reception, safe in a happy bubble, oblivious to the world burning down around them. Jessica’s in the Plaza lobby, threatening some poor sucker over the phone in a desperate bid to save her political career. Harvey’s locked in the bathroom, fighting off a panic attack and failing, wondering whether he’s sick because of Paula, or because of Mike, or because Donna’s not speaking to him anymore . . .

Meanwhile, Louis and Donna share a sweet, intimate conversation on a hotel balcony that leads to a sweet, intimate kiss-- only to have Donna pull back, gasping as though she’s been burned.

SUITS RETURNS IN FALL 2018.

(I don’t know about you guys, but I would so tune in for that Season 8.)

#suits #harvey specter #mike ross #donna paulsen #louis litt #samantha wheeler #my meta

5 notes · View notes

rgr-pop · 7 years

Text

READING, continued.

I recently showed somebody Kim Phillips-Fein’s [History of] Conservatism state-of-the-field essay. (I love and will read absolutely any state-of-the-field essay, but this one is actually relevant to my “field.”)

I think we were having a conversation about David Harvey’s Brief History of Neoliberalism. I don’t think there are very many people more right about neoliberalism in a broad sense than David Harvey, or more qualified to talk about it, and my general stance on him is that he is pretty much the best we got. But my (weak, developing) take on this work--that I really wanna test in a closer read, Later--is that some of its claims about the history of neoliberalism (or just, political economy very generally) in the U.S are not quite right. I don’t agree with his timeline, I want more from his specifics. And it’s fine: it’s disciplinary (Harvey is by no means a historian, but there are very, very few historians cited in this History) as well as national[ist] (it’s true that my complaints are that I want this transnational work by a British scholar to be more U.S-centric!)

So what I really want is for more historians to engage more closely with the specific historical arguments he makes. (Which isn’t necessarily, like, a fair thing to do, but I want it.) There are some historians who cite and engage with Harvey regularly, for whom Harvey structures a theoretical framework (among them Tracy Neumann, who you all should know by now I adore). But, to bring this around, historians of Conservatism (or even of Capitalism, to go there) are not necessarily interested in a larger project of advancing arguments about capital for its own sake. (Plz do not quote me on this because I know that I am oversimplifying.)

The clearest example of what I’m gesturing at is Phillips-Fein’s characterization--which I would say is the dominant framing--that the driving question of political history today (or 2011 I guess) is a question of when, how, and whether the New Deal state was dismantled. Most of the historians she is talking about ask these questions with great nuance, some of them transnationally. (Though it is a national question, unlike the question of neoliberalism.) I think what this body of literature can offer the theoretical takes on neoliberalism is a longer view of the mechanisms of capital and their relationship to the state--which should be where and how we ask questions of neoliberalism. I also think that some of these historians need to take geographers more seriously, which means taking Marxist thought more seriously. This is all Harvey gets in this essay:

Theorists of neoliberalism, such as David Harvey, emphasize the failure of Keynesian economic policy and the emergence of a newly aggressive class politics as the result of the economic crises of the decade.

And I don’t even think it’s right, exactly.

When I showed my friend this essay, I also told her that I think it shorts Matt Lassiter’s The Silent Majority in a dire way. I mean, I’m biased, I like this book and Lassiter so much. It gets a spot in the footnotes. (”Political developments in the South, in other words, affected the way conservative activists around the country approached the question of state power.”) From my own (extremely positioned, lol) theoretical perspective, classifying Lassiter’s book as a book about social movements rather than a book about property, about capital, is a mistake. And it’s a big one, I think. Since 2011 History of Capitalism has ascended (and so has Nathan Connolly!) (who did his PhD with Matt Lassiter!), so I don’t think a political historian would write a state-of-the-field essay today without the word “property” in the first paragraph. Or, I dunno, I’m hopeful.

But I had entirely forgotten that Matt Lassiter wrote a response to Phillips-Fein’s essay for the JAH. It is not about what I am pointing to, per se. It’s about the historiography:

Academic historians have spent the past several decades dismantling the myth of the liberal consensus in postwar American politics, exploring the contradictions and limits of New Deal and Great Society policy making, and chronicling the parallel rise of the New Right. In Alan Brinkley's influential formulation, “taking conservatism seriously” is now institutionalized as a guiding principle of U.S. political history—a once necessary though now reflexive corrective to the consensus scholarship that caricatured conservatives as paranoid extremists or ignored them altogether. But in the understandable mission to explain the apparent earthquake caused by Ronald Reagan's election in 1980, the new political history has inadvertently replicated some of the blind spots of the liberal consensus school that it supplanted, especially through a linear declension/ascension narrative that has conflated the fate of the New Deal with the political triumph of the New Right. [...]

The most problematic tendency in New Right historiography is the employment of a teleological approach in which the tropes of the triumph of conservatism or the rightward turn become the narrative climax of broader developments with more diverse causes and consequences, such as the growth of the suburbs and the sun belt, the forces of racial backlash and white privilege, public policies of economic deregulation, the wars on crime and drugs, and the political culture of antitax individualism.

Here is a good take:

It made sense for Lisa McGirr to structure her case study of the New Right in Orange County, California, as a rise-of-Reagan narrative, but it is a misinterpretation to view her Suburban Warriors as a story about suburban politics writ large rather than a focused account of conservative political mobilization. Books such as Robert O. Self's American Babylon and my own work in The Silent Majority look beyond electoral realignment and plotlines of right-left polarization to argue that the politics and policies of “suburban secession” illuminate national and bipartisan/nonpartisan defenses of racial privilege, class exclusion, and homeowner property rights.

I think one thing that I am thinking about is the over-reliance on a model of neoliberalism that is periodizing (ie, wherein neoliberalism is a phase) (we do this with “financialization” as well, but I think that’s workable). I mean, you can argue that it has to be this way--I would argue that you can delineate the period of neoliberalism but that a history of neoliberalism would take a longer look at its devices.

I mean, Lassiter’s essay also straight-up ends in a call for histories of neoliberalism:

In my view, untangling the dilemmas of our own time will require paying much less attention to the free-market mantras of the Tea Party movement or the conventional wisdom of a red-blue national schism, and spending more time exploring questions such as how the $700 billion bipartisan bailout of Wall Street in 2008 illuminates the socialization of risk for major corporations and the privatization of risk for ordinary households, an underlying feature of modern American politics.

One more thing: I opened Andrew Needham’s Power Lines to find to what extent he cites Harvey, and this is the endnote:

In emphasizing infrastructure as a form of capital set in place, I draw upon David Harvey’s broader ideas about urbanization in general as a form of capital accumulation that further facilitates the economic processes of urban life.

nice 😎

#landscapes of production #theory #undisciplining #I actually don't like EVERY incarnation of the city as capital accumulation #but when a historian uses it I melt

12 notes · View notes