I'm not in 100 years reading wind, so what's the nightstar stuff as well as the harelight execution scene?
The Nightstar Stuff is that they're constantly making it clear they KNOW that cats can lie about getting the 9 lives, they KNOW that a murderer can receive the lives, and they KNOW that StarClan has never rejected an evil cat before... but then they handwave it away because they don't wanna do anything.
Nightstar/Nightpelt gets namedropped six times and vaguely alluded to a dozen more, but it means nothing to the story. You could have just forgotten him entirely and the plot would happen the same way.
Most of this book is the leaders finding excuses to sit on their butts, but I really only need to share one exchange to demonstrate just HOW stupid this is,
"I'd like to think that the ancestors would speak up." A+ logic Squirrelflight. Just believe that reality won't happen. If you cover your eyes it makes the maneating lion bowling towards your face go away. Soblem prolved.
86 notes
·
View notes
There's something sort of distorted with how grief is currently being seen and dealt with on the island + Qsmp.
I've been thinking about this for a while during the missing egg arc, but Bagi implying that Foolish wasn't that attached to Leo has finally pushed me into putting the thoughts into words.
I really don't like how several of the islanders - especially the new ones - view grief and expressions of grief. It's like they expect all grief to be big and loud and performative, and otherwise, it isn't as significant, or as important. Like how Bagi's expectations for sadness seem to be shaped by Bbh's very visual, obvious deterioration, and disregards that MAYBE, just MAYBE, not everyone is going to shove their feelings in your face when they barely know you? That some people may break down privately, where you are not privy to their thoughts, and you are not entitled to a public performance of that grief in order to verify that they do, in fact, care?
It's not just islanders who haven't spent much time with the eggs either - Forever himself said he thought that, ASIDE FROM BAGHERA AND BBH, everyone was simply moving on and living life without the eggs. Funnily enough, these are both players with skins that specifically denote emotional turmoil :). Does grief have to expressly visualised for people to acknowledge that it's there? That was particularly jarring as a Philza main, who's character was and is currently going through a drealisation and mental deterioration arc after going to suspicious coordinates (the birdcage) FOR THE SAKE OF HIS EGGS.
Most annoyingly it also bleeds into the fandom sometimes, despite the fact we have the benefit of meta awareness. I've seen posts or comments about how 'oh, bbh is the only one truly miserable about the eggs' 'other islanders aren't suffering about the kids like ___".
It's just striking having watched Fit, a person whom canonically struggles with outward expressions of vulnerable emotion due to his background but clearly deeply misses Ramon, who would fall into this 'unaffected' category because he's not giving showy public displays or monologues about his feelings. Or Phil, who to members of the island who haven't reached out to him on those topics, seems largely still like a strong rock to lean on because he plunged himself into propping up other islanders the moment he returned - but behind closed doors fell apart at Tallulah's letter and is clearly rapidly deteriorating as a character. Or Foolish, who maintains an upbeat character, retains his capacity to carry on moving, and lives as brightly as he can while SIMULTANEOUSLY being completely broken up internally about his daughter. You can see it in the way they talk about their kids, how they rush to collect any clues whenever they pop up, how many of them seem to be living in limbo, incapable of new changes and beginnings.
And alright. So that's not explicit to those other characters. But it should not have to be visually explicit for them to not degrade their grief. The assumption should not be that grief is either public or nonexistent. You are not entitled to flashy displays of feeling. Forthright and in your face emotion is not the baseline requirement for distress. Demeaning someone's attachment to their child because they aren't grieving in the RIGHT way for YOU, one that isn't visible enough to YOU, isn't excusable because 'oh I can't really see how that person is feeling though'. It's basic social understanding.
And of course they are aware of the mental and emotional states of their friends - who are also very visual with their grieving - above others, because those people are ALSO the ones that those like Bagi and Forever consistently interact with for prolonged periods of time. Have they actually really, deeply talked with all the other islanders about their internal state? No, of course not, they don't spend that much time with them and aren't that close. That's not bad or anything, that's life and relationships and very normal. But then what grounds do those assumptions of 'oh, there are parents who don't care' actually have? They themselves should be capable of acknowledging that they don't actually have insight into these other people, and they should not be using the expressions of grief from say Baghera and Bbh as a cudgel to cheapen and diminish that of others.
110 notes
·
View notes
since we all appear to be talking about izzy 'calling the police' on stede id like to offer my silly little two cents:
its not like the navy wasn't actively looking for him anyway??????
at most, izzys actions sped up badminton catching up with stede, but its made very clear that badminton wanted Stede dead well before this, and was willing to use whatever he could to find him- whos to say jackie wouldnt have cut a deal on her own? that any other pirate thats seen them being unsubtle in a port wouldn't take the opportunity to make a quick buck over a guy who is Nobody and holds no influence that could lead to any consequences for them?
in reality izzy is probably the only person who would receive negative repercussions to selling out stede, given his personal connection with ed- any other pirate would probably have gotten away unscathed, anonymous. they likely wouldnt have even been present like izzy was. izzy had personal stakes, anyone else would have taken the money and ran
the way i see it, with or without izzy the events of episode 10 probably would have happened in some degree, izzy just expedited the timeline
75 notes
·
View notes