#we look at c!wilbur with nuance here though | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

overthinkingfandom · 2 years

Note

"Something interesting that we may see on c!Wilbur’s side is his admiration turning into idealization. He has a tendency to view things in extremes, a kind of black and white thinking. You’re with him or against him. He’s in the role he wants to be or he’s a total failure. You’re someone to be admired or you’re someone to look down on. There’s little in between." Can you give me some examples? what lead to that conclusion? I really enjoy your posts and I'd love to know why you think this way.

Referring to this post.

The most blatant examples come from the Pogtopia arc, when his mental health was in the gutters and this coping mechanisms went up in flames. His "let's be the bad guys" speech is full of them. To give a few examples:

"Our nation is far behind us, Tommy. Let’s blow that motherfucker to smithereens!"

"If we can't have Manburg, no one can."

c!Tommy says he needs a minute to think and c!Wilbur reacts like c!Tommy argued against him.

And that's without even getting into what triggered this entire thing, which is c!Schlatt declaring a festival to celebrate democracy. AKA c!Wilbur getting slapped in the face with the fact that c!Schlatt being the president is 100% legitimate and that by going against him they would be "on the wrong side of history".

Now, there's a bunch of stuff at play here which makes c!Wilbur's reaction to this so extreme, but his black and white thinking is certainly a factor. He can't process the idea in a nuanced way, at least on an emotional level. He can't just be doing something which is a little bit wrong. Either he's completely in the wrong or he's completely in the right. And as he accepted the fact c!Schlatt's presidency is a legitimate one, that only leaves c!Wilbur the option that he's completely in the wrong. (His inability to process being in the wrong comes from a different place though.)

However, we also see this even before Pogtopia. It's harder to spot then, as c!Wilbur's coping mechanisms are more functional so he can manage his symptoms better, but that kind of thinking is certainly still there.

Take for example his conversation with c!Niki on Aug 10th (19:33). In it c!Wilbur confronts her after he discovers she's been talking to c!Eret and even picked a fox with him. During all of it the underlying emotion is pretty clear: c!Wilbur is jealous of c!Eret because he sees him as better. And because he sees him as better, c!Wilbur feels as if c!Niki is going to replace him with c!Eret if only she's given the chance.

Once again there's a false dichotomy in his thought process - where c!Niki can either like him or like c!Eret but not both - as well as immediately jumping to an extreme conclusion by catastrophizing and seeing a simple friendship between c!Niki and c!Eret as evidence that c!Niki is going to replace him.

In addition, this kind of all or nothing thinking is a pretty common symptom in NPD and just in general c!Wilbur shows a lot of NPD traits. Low self esteem, high dependence on external sources of validation, grand internal narratives (either positive or negative), viewing things in the context of how they relate to himself, etc. At the very least he has a very similar personality structure, so I find it a useful framework to analyze the character through.

#asks and answers #blue talks #c!wilbur #sorry for taking so long to answer this #I'm pretty fuzzy while writing this so hopefully it came out coherent #those examples are mainly off the top of my head #so I'm sure there are even more I forgot about

84 notes · View notes

ruby-whistler · 3 years

Text

There are three types of misinterpretation of c!Dream in my opinion; and by that I mean anyone's take ever, whether it's a c!Dream anti or a c!Dream apologist or a c!Dream enthusiast. That's right, I'm making an essay about how in my mind everyone is wrong. This is how I lead debates please don't unfollow me-

1. misunderstanding or overdramatizing evidence

c!Dream apologists; g-guys. I'm not saying he isn't traumatized, but look. I really used to believe he was just everyone's victim and hurt and mentally unstable, and I'm not saying he isn't at all, but I changed my mind because I feel like the evidence doesn't,, point that way at all. Your emotions are valid, but your takes are very removed from what the rest of the fandom thinks because you take little hints and try to make them into some big angsty point within canon.

The evidence we have proves he is more ruthless than anything; even the content creator says that. He doesn't say why he does progressively more ruthless things, and he does say it's for his ideals and out of good intentions, but he doesn't say anything about him being hurt into doing it.

I'm not saying he isn't hurt. But making analysis of an entire character based on something that is barely supported by canon isn't the way I roll and I feel like it's one of the reason why people assume all c!Dream apologist are going to woobify the character,, because some of them really do that.

I don't mind portraying him as hurt by what's happened in canon, because that is a completely safe conclusion, but jumping to the victim side of the scale seems a little bit like painting a completely different picture than what actual canon says. (Note: talking about pre-Pandora c!Dream here.)

There is tragedy in someone being driven by the environment, circumstances and themselves deeper and deeper into corruption, but it feels like by only considering that the entire character is limited to one side of the argument.

I like to also see the side of him that will hurt people because he thinks he has to, because he wants to succeed above all, the side that will ruthlessly murder and manipulate and be calculative and clever and even self-destructive about it because he believes that'll get him towards his ultimately selfless goal.

That's my morally complex bastard.

A lot of people seem to be mistaking or ignoring that for the sake of saying he is just... hurt and that that is an explanation of his actions, and even though they don't use it as an excuse, it feels a little cheap.

And here we come to the core of the problem: an emotional vs. rational explanation for the character's actions.

Because the thing is, with enough evidence, you will see that nearly (we'll get to that in a bit) everything he does can be explained rationally. Everything is connected, everything is the most logical and efficient and merciless route straight from point A to point B, because c!Dream is fascinatingly smart when you look deeper into it.

He knows what he's doing. He knows his actions are awful, and he doesn't care - not because he would be some evil person, but because his mindsets cause him to justify such things, and mindsets are more complicated than feelings.

There is a lot to explore in that direction of the character, but that is material for another essay.

In short, people seem to enjoy removing all of his agency in favor of explaining his actions emotionally rather than from a rational standpoint which results in inaccurate analysis.

Do I think it is completely understandable he attacked L'Manberg?

Absolutely.

Do I think c!Wilbur painted him as a villain to benefit his own power?

Yes.

Do I think he utilized the villain persona as an intimidation tactic and often went overkill with no regard for anything but accomplishing his goals and that he slowly became more and more willing to do bad things of his own accord because he became determined and distrusting of the world to the point of committing horrible actions?

100%.

Analysing that part of the character is the most interesting part, when you consider it - and an important one as well.

2. ignoring evidence

c!Dream antis; please. Stop saying he doesn't care or explaining his actions with obsession or assigning him personality traits or motives that he literally doesn't have in order to demonize him I beg of you.

It's so many basic and easily debunkable assumptions that can be explained with what we actually know of his motives. People will ignore both canon and the authors' words to paint him as some monster with no nuance, which he is not.

We only know so much about him, but people will ignore and deny even the little bit we have for the sake of making him the literal personification of evil and erasing the fact that he is a complex and human character. Just accept he can be accurately analysed beyond hate and let people do it if you don't want to do so yourself.

3. assuming the evidence we have is everything you need to determine a final approach and that nothing outside of the presented evidence exists when certain details prove otherwise

c!Dream enthusiasts; this was the only and biggest problem I've had since being introduced to much more rational interpretations of the character - which is emotions, and one of the biggest reasons why c!Dream gets dehumanized in the first place; the fact that we have little to no showcase or explanation of them in canon.

You see, c!Dream is a reserved character. He likes withholding his plans, withholding his feelings and information from the world.

However, since all we can really get out of watching his actions alone is the rational side (and that is deliberate by both the writer and the character, narratively and personality-wise) people slowly begin to assume there is no emotional side to his actions at all.

Which I find,, untrue. Between the people who erase the rational side of the character and those who erase the emotional side, there is little middle ground, but I don't really find either of them right either.

Because neither would be an accurate representation; just because he doesn't actively showcase his feelings doesn't mean he doesn't have them, and the few inconsistencies that are too small a detail for us to put everything together show that he does have an inner emotional world beyond what we see.

The character does work beyond what we know, and expecting that everything can be explained purely by rationality because that's all we see of him seems a little bit jumping the gun.

It leads to a less person-like view of a character who in reality simply doesn't like showing people the way he feels, and I don't really find that fair to him. It is best to accept there are things we can't say for sure, or to say an emotional interpretation can also be valid at times.

It is both important not to deny him agency and not to deny him the ability to be genuinely hurt by others or changed by his environment.

Both of these can coexist, especially in

the correct interpretation

Ok this is a joke.

I have literally no idea. I'm just throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks - he confuses me beyond belief. The only person who knows about both the emotional and rational side of the character enough to have their interpretation unquestioned is cc!Dream - but when we do try to find answers, it is important for us as well that we do not ignore any aspects or possible aspects of the character, because that is the only way to get useful results out of our analysis.

Sorry this was crit of basically every take about the character I have ever seen but I needed to get my thoughts out.

#dream smp #c!dream #ask to tag as crit #long post #idk i'm big on the c!dream pos #but woobification & dehumanization & demonization are #all equally a problem in the fandom #with the character

192 notes · View notes

darlington-v · 3 years

Note

I know different interpretations of a work are generally enriching and cool... but c!dream villan interpretations is like how to tell me you only watch Tommy without saying you only watch tommy.... which would be fine but its not a great place to be making statements about the whole nature of the dsmp lol

Wild speculation, but sometimes I wonder if like, because the dsmp didn't really start as a narrative, and a lot of fans don't nessecarily enter it expecting a narrative, but then there is one and the fandom is really discourse heavy and everyone is sort of excpeted to have an opinion while maybe not expecting to form one from the begining or not having a ton of experience with narrative in a way that would "expect" them to have an opinion or not take things at face value??, I don't know if I explained that well at all... and I don't really even think thats right nessecarily... but like wow sometimes some of the takes about power and government and villany...

Honestly, it makes sense!!!

I think something interesting is like.... looking at how animatics have shaped the like tone and culture of the fandom essentially. Like, an interesting fact that I didn't really fully grasp until SUPER recently is like...

c!Wilbur out the gate admits he is manipulating c!Tommy. Like his first youtube video on the Dream SMP he admits his goal is to manipulate c!Tommy and people like c!Tommy into helping him achieve a potion ("drug") empire to monopolize on potions because there were a lot of people on the server who like to min-max, which is to put all of your effort into this one specific skill essentially. so like... i know minecraft doesnt have a skill tree but if it did, it would be putting all your points into that one specific branch of a skill tree. So he wanted to exploit the labor of all the TommyInnits to.... maintain a Potion Empire.

THIS IS A LONG POST BC I GOT CARRIED AWAY SO BUCKLE UP

And I don't think a lot of the fandom who joined later on knows this. I certainly didn't until like a week or so ago? Like... I knew c!Wilbur had been manipulative from the start because I'm a mod of (shameless self promo incoming) @dsmpanalysis and we have a lot of different POVs in that mod team and discord and we talk about it really frequently. I joined the fandom as someone who was really big on L'manburg ESPECIALLY crimeboys, and have turned into.... *gestures vaguely to my blog*

And ngl I owe a lot of it to @1-michibiki-1 in terms of c!Dream "Apologism" but all of the mods there have expanded my thoughts and views on the storylines of this narrative.

My application consisted of like largely essays about like... how I think Dream was the villain but he was meant to be the villain because you don't get any insight into his character WHICH.... IS A FAIR ASSUMPTION AT FIRST GLANCE. People are easily villainized when you cannot get a glimpse into their thought process. It's easy to dwindle someone down into this flat character and starting out I knew Dream didn't stream the SMP on purpose.

And I personally came to the conclusion of "Oh! So Dream is supposed to be the villain." However as the story continued and I learned more about what Dream went through I began to realize that... it's more than likely a form of a red herring. My opinions on this were immediately solidified when I watched Ranboo's 2 MIL stream because both Ranboo AND Dream agree on enjoying red herrings.

There have been MANY times were Dream has said that c!Dream is a complex character and he's not a wholly evil guy and there have been times where the narrative has honestly just proved that.

Anyways, what's important though was that... I learned most of this from other people who were more focused on c!Dream rather than myself. Eventually I shifted from c!Tommy to c!Ranboo and c!Techno after c!Tommy betrayed c!Techno and I began to realize.... everything I learned before hopping in wasn't exactly what it seemed.

Part of this is because I'm older, I heavily identify with c!Techno's sense of loyalty and philosophies on government, but I especially identify with the anguish c!Techno voiced in... a lot of lore but especially the lore around Doomsday.

I'm not 16 anymore. I don't always feel wronged by adults, or older people in my case, whenever they absolutely have done something wrong by me, but I do feel wronged by my close friends. I also felt like c!Tommy's sense of loyalty didn't line up with mine after what felt like him constantly flip-flopping and refusing to understand c!Techno's morals on government didn't line up with his.

In short, it was easier to identify with Tommy in these animatics versus in the actual stream content because c!Tommy is played by a 16 year old. I'm not a teenager and my line of thinking doesn't entirely line up with people that age anymore. It's harder to place myself in the same shoes of someone's OC who is played closer to their actual age, because I'm not that age.

Regardless, I was still on the c!Dream is a villain train. I wasn't ever like... c!Dream is repulsive I hate him, but I was like omg hot villain lad go brrr.

Even when the first like... mellohi, panic room, Ranboo lore stream popped up I thought "Oh! c!Ranboo corruption arc?"

And I was excited because I really wanted this shy, nervous character to turn into villain buddies with his good pal c!Dream. I'm a total sucker for villains and corruption arcs and all that good shit.

SO I STARTED GETTING REALLY INTERESTED IN ENDERSMILE. I'VE BEEN ON ENDERSMILE SQUAD OUT THE GATE. NOT THE SAME WAY I AM NOW, BUT I'VE ALWAYS WANTED THEM TO TEAM UP.

So... upon not really keeping up with c!Dream and being relatively??? indifferent? I don't think I started arguments on c!Dream back then, but I might have. But I remember like... starting to participate more whenever c!Dream came up and looking more into Dream's character BUT ESPECIALLY TALKING WITH OUR SERVER'S C!DREAM SPECIALIST MICHI ABOUT DREAM A LOT MORE.

And because Michi has been a watcher since day one and was a DTeam fan rather than a SBI fan, she was able to provide me with more information on how the server worked pre-Tommy but especially pre-Wilbur.

Now, you could definitely argue well Michi probably has clear bias but it made sense to me when I looked back on how the storyline had been constructed and was going along, and everyone in the server talks a lot about our own biases and how we want people to maybe not lean so hard on them. Michi would also provide like anecdotes on what had happened and I'm sure links were probably provided at one point but the point was I felt like Michi had no reason to lie or manipulate how the story was told and if she did, eventually someone would have pointed it out because... Group of like... right now it's around 20 or more analysts but I don't remember how many at the time there were. POINT BEING, WE'VE ALL GOT POINTS TO PROVE AND IN MY EXPERIENCE NOT MANY OF US HAVE BEEN SHY TO PROVE THEM.

So if anyone ever had any differing opinions they would be talked about and we literally had and still have discussions.

REGARDLESS.... I DIDN'T FACT CHECK IN DEPTH BECAUSE I THOUGHT PEER REVIEW WAS ENOUGH WHEN YOU HAVE LIKE HOURS UPON HOURS OF STREAMS TO WATCH.

Anyways. Eventually I started paying closer attention and looking more into c!Dream lore but only recently have I started to triple check before speaking about c!Wilbur lore because I know everyone has biases and while I did trust everyone's thoughts and analysis in the discord, whenever I make essays I typically like it to be largely air tight and if theres a mistake, I want it to be because I forgot not because I just trusted what was said. Plus, I wanted to get down to the specifics of how Wilbur had always started with manipulation on the mind.

SO I WATCHED HIS FIRST VIDEO ON THE DREAM SMP.

AND WHAT I WAS NOT BY ANY MEANS EXPECTING WAS WILBUR TO SAY WORD FOR WORD, VERBATIM,

"SO WHY DON'T I START AN INDUSTRY WHERE I USE THE TOMMYINNITS OF THE WORLD TO WORK FOR ME, TO CREATE THINGS THAT THE MIN-MAXERS OF THE WORLD WILL WANT."

Like... this is in no way an attempt to like hardcore villainize c!Wilbur like everyone does Dream, it's just more so to like REALLY outline how far off a lot of fandom interpretation of c!Wilbur is....

Because of SBI focused animatics.

Now, when I joined I watched A LOT of animatics that really highlighted like... Wilbur being this self-loathing JD-esque, "I destroyed it because I had to because the world was against me because no one loved us, Tommy" type of character. At least... that's what it came across as.

And it definitely highlighted the fact that Tommy was a victim, which he is. He is undoubtedly a victim and no not even any dream apologist can change my mind otherwise. Tommy, despite being an instigator sometimes, didn't deserve the abuse he received.

But these animatics never shown the fact that c!Wilbur started L'manburg as a shady ploy to exploit people like c!Tommy and vilify c!Dream so he could have power.

And that was easy because Dream and Tommy had wars before. They had spars and pranks and here's the plan to take back my disks and here's the plan to out smart the thieving little child etc etc.

And all of the animatics I watched never mentioned this. Neither did the recaps though. The recaps gave the events flat out, there didn't sound like there was bias, and honestly I don't really know if there was rather than like... a lack of nuance. And it's hard to provide a recap with that much nuance in a short period of time for a youtube video, to be perfectly fair.

However, this creates a perfect formula for entirely rewriting the history of a server. c!Wilbur quite literally fucking succeeded TO A META LEVEL. He slandered and ran smear campaigns against Dream and like he even does that with Sapnap in the beginning. But what's crazy is that it transferred over into the meta! Most of this fandom understands Wilbur as a victim of mental illness, and yeah maybe? He definitely wasn't mentally well by the end of pogtopia, but he never started out with honorable intentions. L'manburg was never a victim, only its citizens. The TommyInnits of the world.

I just think it's like... such an interesting case study. Because this is like... an opinion like shared by at least half of the fandom, but the vilifying of c!Dream is shared by MOST of the fandom I would argue. Which is like even more crazy for me because that was c!Wilbur's goal!!!

LIKE I GO INSANE WHEN I THINK OF THIS BECAUSE HIS REACH IS JUST TOO POWERFUL. HE'S NOT EVEN ENTIRELY REAL, JUST A MANIPULATIVE PERSONA OF SOME BRITISH GUY.

And I mean... maybe people who have watched Wilbur's video on the SMP still maintain this idea that Wilbur wasn't always the bad guy, but honestly... I wouldn't be surprised if their introduction was still an animatic. Like bias is hard to check and I'm not going to lie I could have sworn I watched both Wilbur's AND Tommy's video on the SMP in the beginning and yet I STILL was a ride or die for tragic yet on some level still honorable Wilbur and a resilient Tommy.

Like... upon watching Wilbur's first video... possibly again I was surprised because I thought I did watch it like right before I even started watching the streams and yet I was still so invested in c!Wilbur as this tortured anti-hero.

It took 6 months of... not being in an echo chamber, full of multiple different people of different ages, different stream POVS, and people who joined the fandom at different points in time.

IDK IF THIS WAS EVEN ENTIRELY RELEVANT IT JUST FELT TANGENTIALLY RELEVANT AND THIS WAS SOMETHING I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT FOR A HOT MINUTE AFTER LIKE WATCHING WILBUR'S FIRST VIDEO AGAIN.

TLDR;

SBI CENTRIC ANIMATICS HAD A LASTING AFFECT ON THIS FANDOM AS IT'S HARD TO GO BACK AND ACTUALLY CHECK THE NARRATIVE FOR SOLID FACTS FOR YOUR OWN INTERPRETATION BASED ON THE FACT THAT THIS NARRATIVE SPANS OVER HUNDREDS OF HOURS WORTH OF TWITCH STREAMS.

#asks #anon #dream smp #dsmp #dsmp analysis #dream smp analysis #dsmp meta #dream smp meta #my analysis #long post

80 notes · View notes

hamletteprinceofdenmark · 2 years

Text

As November 16th comes to a close I just want to say how fucking grateful I am to Wilbur for how he portrayed being a suicidal person.

Now bear in mind it’s also 1am in the morning so these thoughts aren’t exactly coherent but I’m going to try to get my thoughts down, in dot point form at least because it was literally note perfect and made me cry.

the long pauses as he watches everybody prepping for the war

the feeling of isolation from the group

^ this was a big one, I Love how Wilbur used the medium to full advantage here. If you were watching from another POV that day you likely wouldn’t have noticed Wilbur being still and quiet because the medium doesn’t lend itself to you noticing that, there’s too much going on all the time, and the blocky nature of the game means a lot of nuance is simply not there, but from Wilbur’s perspective it was palpable. Especially with the face cam. There’s a reason we call it a POV. You are with that person. You see everything from their point of view, inside their head almost, and the long pauses, the micro espressions, what Wilbur chooses to zoom in on. Everyone else is focused on the upcoming battle, Wilbur is focusing on people’s faces and how they glide right over his.

THE SUICIDE AND TNT JOKES

CONSTANTLY FLAGGING EVERYONE WITH HOW UNSTABLE AND UNWELL HE WAS AND NO ONE ACTUALLY TALKING TO HIM ABOUT IT

The way he made a point of giving gifts to people and making THEM feel seen and heard

How he beat himself up after upsetting Niki with Mushroom

the melancholy throughout the whole stream, Wilbur has already decided he’s going to blow up l’manberg no matter what, and kill himself no matter what, so everything is viewed with this kind of preemptive nostalgia and sorrow.

the fondness he hold for everyone, he loves everyone so so much

his little half laugh when Tommy says it was meant to be in his speech

the resignation, he knows what he’s going to do, what he has to do

the hesitation, my heart breaks every time I watch the button room scene, the way he constantly goes back and forth, shaking as he hesitates to push the button (literally shaking the POV, letting us feel him trembling at the thought of actually doing it), the way he rambles and repeats himself because even now, even now, he both has and has not made the decision.

fuck man it made me feel seen

It would have been so easy to make the fact that c!wilbur was suicidal into a joke or to play it up for drama, and the crazy thing is that even though there were jokes (and drama) it was never at the expense of the character. It was never in a way that demeaned or undermined c!wilbur. C!wilbur was never made to look stupid or weak or cowardly for feeling suicidal. You absolutely understood how he had got to that point. At it’s core, Wilbur played that role with a grace, integrity, and honesty that I have rarely seen suicidal people granted in media, and for that I will always, always be grateful.

#tw suicide #Wilbur soot #dream smp #november 16th

34 notes · View notes

wilburs-soot · 3 years

Text

ayo here besties have my take on Derivikat’s Revived bc as much as it’s a banger the c!wilbur analyst in me is just Losing it over the character interpretation

(please note, nothing against the song or the artists, again I think the song slaps and the art is incredible!! there’s just some stuff that doesn’t sit right with me and I wanted to put my ramble out there!! Also, this is all just opinion!! Please feel free to disagree with me, I think the different interpretations of c!wilbur are really fascinating!!)

————

in my opinion, Revived reads as an outside characterization of Wilbur from just moments after he was revived. Which is fine, it just means that it loses a lot of the nuance that his character has in favor of going “oh no he’s back he’s got big plans oh fuck” which is valid, but feels very far removed from how his character *actually* existed during the revival stream. The song just doesn’t feel like it has c! Wilbur’s voice as a character in it.

I really do think the art in revived is very good! However, it leans into the whole “red eyes, evil plans, bad guy” lens on wilbur which I am just Very Much Not A Fan Of because when this portrayal of his character was most popular, he was in the middle of a self destructive mental spiral. (See the “are we the bad guys” stream.) The whole concept of drawing him with glowing red eyes to represent his villainy and (in the case of the pogtopia arc) making him encroach upon Tommy’s personal space to prove a point/“manipulate” him just feels like such a surface level take on the character for me, and while again this is valid, it’s frustrating bc all these big creators keep making content where they paint him like this and due to their popularity he becomes widely villianized in artwork/people’s interpretations of him. In my opinion the revival stream read as him being excited to be alive again and free from his own personal hell, and to have it be an “I’m back, this has been my plan all along, I’m here to fuck shit up and take everything back” just feels Icky to me.

At this point I feel that though his apologies to people weren’t well executed he did genuinely mean them and while again, this song was made before more recent lore streams and has a right to interpret that as him being up to no good or whatever like,,, the man was a Mess that entire stream! He couldn’t even make a point without contradicting himself, of course his apologies are gonna feel weird!

My final point is about limbo and the way the ycgma pallete is used in the song because as much as I love when it’s used it just feels like an weird interpretation of limbo/the album itself to me. the album is so deeply rooted in Wilbur’s mental health and does a great job at expressing the vulnerabilities it needs to, but to take c!wilbur, who clearly is going through a lot of the stuff referenced in the album, and use it so it’s almost like, weaponised?? (Not exactly the word I’m looking for but you know, ycgma feels a lot angrier and like a tool towards a goal in this, at least to me) I dunno it just rubs me the wrong way.

Tldr my take on the revival is essentially “man is stuck in the physical representation of his mental illness and is happy when he’s finally freed bc thirteen and a half years of solitary confinement is Literally Torture holy shit” and the fact that it’s interpreted on a very large scale as “man has used his time dead to his advantage. He’s back, he’s manipulative as ever, he’s evil, and you’d better watch out” just stresses me out because again, it’s such a surface level characterization and he just has so much more depth to him.

Again these are all just my opinions, please feel free to disagree!! I think it’s really interesting how other people view him and other viewpoints are absolutely valid!! That’s the beauty of being able to watch this story from different perspectives, it leaves a lot up to interpretation :)))

#wilbur soot #dream smp #dsmp fandom critical #not really but just to be safe #the song is a banger I just worry about the effect it’s gonna have on peoples interpretation of c!wilbur lmao

24 notes · View notes

enderspawn · 3 years

Note

It's alright if u don't wanna answer this cuz this argument gets people really riled up but do you think c!Techno is a tyrant or nah?

Cuz many c!techno apologists argue that he isn't just cuz he's an anarchist but I've also read a lot of essays that go against it and it'd be really interesting to see ur opinion on this

i think he, in some contexts, can most definitely be called tyrannical, yes. a tyrant? no.

to avoid spamming ppl w discourse we've all def heard before (and bc this ended up MASSIVE (like 2.3k ish), but fairly in depth bc i didnt wanna speak out of bad faith and wanted to be EXPLICTLY clear-- oops), the rest will be under readmore

so heres the thing i want to preface: i used to really LOVE c!techno. i joined beginning of s2, right when exile started, and he was arguably my favorite character. since then though i've fallen out with him a LOT, to the point i almost... actively despite him at times (though mainly in a toxic kind of way which i can acknowledge is flawed).

in short, his actions started to speak louder than his words and i lost investment in his personal character struggles because of the actions he took (doomsday was my breaking point. i get feeling angry and betrayed, as well as seeking revenge against lmanberg, but his actions went too far for me to CARE and it hurt so many more characters as well.)

so when i speak, i come from a place of disliking him but also somewhat understanding the position c!techno apologists come from: i used to be one of them myself.

NOW, do i think he's a tyrant? no. for reference in my analysis, i try to look up the definition of terms to make sure they are utilized properly. while "tyranny" and "tyrannical" can have multiple uses, tyrant itself is a more specific term. to combine the top two definitions, a tyrant is referring to "an extremely oppressive, unjust, or cruel absolute ruler (who governs without restrictions, especially one who seized power illegally.)"

techno's position as an anarchist, imo, DOES indeed make him unable to be a tyrant. tyrants are rulers with very clear power over others from a structural way. anarchists are about the lack of structure or power over others and instead viewing the people around you as equals in power.

in forming the syndicate, they very explicitly worked to not designate a leader and instead make it so that no one would have any power over the others systemically. techno may have taken a integral role, yes, but it doesn't make him suddenly "the leader", its a role that wouldve had to be filled by someone (even if it was democratic to decide who to invite, they'd need someone to hand over the invite itself yknow? like no matter WHAT there needed to be A ROLE)

one could argue that he IS a leader in the shadow hierarchy of the syndicate (which, yes, is a real and professional term used in management courses despite sounding like it comes from a 4kids yugioh dub) in that everyone CONSIDERS and looks to him a leader without him having any actual structural basis behind it, but to argue that allows him to be a tyrant is in bad faith i believe. especially because to the people he would be "ruling", he ISNT oppressive, unjust, or cruel. they are his friends and support network and critical for a lot of his personal development (since feelings of betrayal and trust issues are critical to his character and why he acts the way he does). I wish we were able to SEE this develop more, but oh well.

but like i said: tyrant is fairly specific in definition. TYRANNY, and thus TYRANNICAL are not as limited. I've discussed their definitions here. originally, i made that post because i was angry at a take i had seen that claimed that, like you said, because techno was an anarchist and not part of any government or leadership position, he couldn't be tyrannical. to which i heartily disagree.

for something to be tyrannical, they simply must have an overarching/oppressive power over someone or something. it would not be inaccurate if i were to say that something is "under the tyranny" of a concept, because what it means is that something is under the power of another thing/concept. you can frankly call anything tyranny if it is widespread/overarching and you don't like it. mask mandates? tyranny, its forcing me to act in "rigorous condition". hell, theres even such things as tyranny of the majority in which people agree too much on one thing and it gives them unfair power or tyranny of the minority where people with minority opinions have too much power (thats a very grossly oversimplified definition of both, but it covers the base idea well enough for my point)

the point im making above isnt meant to be taken as "anything can be worked to be defined as tyranny thus it is a meaningless claim", it is that tyranny (and again, thus tyrannical) are very open and nonrestrictive terms.

to make it easier to define, alongside the definitions provided i want to add an explicit clause that is (imo) implied in the original definition: tyranny is... well, bad. that is to say if someone has power over a group but literally everyone is fine with it and agrees to it, its not tyranny. thats just a group of people getting along and one happens to have power over another. a leader does NOT equal a tyrant (as discussed above), so leadership should not be equated with tyranny.

thus as an example: wilbur acting as president (before the election) may have been "unelected" with power over his citizens, but no one was upset with that power. thus, he is not a tyrant and not acting tyrannically (as well as the fact his power was, arguably, NOT rigourous or absolute but thats another topic for another time). SCHLATT however IS a tyrant, as his power was absolute (he did not consult his cabinet) and forced people to comply instead of them complying willingly, thus he was acting tyrannically.

now to finally get to the damn point of this essay: where does c!techno lie? honest answer? it depends slightly on your perspective, but it depends a LOT on the future of the syndicate.

techno is incredibly clear in his goals: no governments, no corruption. in fighting with pogtopia, he is actively working to topple a tyranny-- he isn't tyrannical for doing that.

when he strikes out on nov 16th, it is because he opposes them forming a new government. when they oppose him and disagree, he launches an attack against them. is this tyranny? maybe, but probably not. he IS trying to impose his own physical strength and power (as well as his resources) over the others to stop them from doing what HE doesn't want them to do.

however its more nuanced than that:

1. hes lashing out emotionally as well as politically. he feels betrayed by those he trusted and he believed that they would destroy the government then go (i'm ignoring any debates on if he did or did not know that they planned another government, though it is a source of debate). but typically idk about you but i dont call tyranny for someone fighting with another person.

2. he also may be acting with good intent again, in HIS EYES. if tubbo was part of manburg, whos to say he wont be just as bad? he, in his pov, is likely trying to stop another tyrant before they rise.

3. and finally, and tbh the most damning from any perspective: he gives up. he quickly leaves then RETIRES without intent to try and attack again until he is later provoked. tyranny is defined by it not just being power, but power being USED. if he doesn't use his power to try and impose any will, then he's not tyrannical.

Doomsday I am also not going to touch very in depth on for much of the same reasons. My answer is again a "maybe", depending on the weight you personally place on each issue:

1. he's lashing out as revenge for the butcher army and as revenge against tommy for "betraying" him (though this one we explicitly know he was ignoring the fact tommy did not want to go through with it, however he still did trust and respect tommy regardless so his feelings are understandable anyway)

2. he sees new lmanberg as corrupt and tyrannical (which is undeniable: house arrest for noncompliance, exile without counsel, execution without trial, etc), and thus obligated to destroy it

but also, theres the implicit understanding he's doing this to send a message: do not form a government, or else. its a display of force that also works to warn others unless they want a similar fate. phil even explicitly states that he is doing so to send that message, so one could assume techno is doing the same alongside his personal reasoning listed above.

what i just described is the use of a oppressive and harsh (physical) power in order to gain compliance from people (that compliance being 'not making a government'). does that sound familiar? exactly. it follows the definition(s) of tyranny given previously. technoblade is acting in a way that is, by very definition, tyrannical.

so the debate shifts: is he valid in doing so because he is trying to PREVENT corruption and tyranny. like i said, new lmanberg was undeniably corrupt at points. i held nothing against techno for trying to topple manburg, so does that apply to new lmanberg as well? short answer: i dont know. it depends on your specific opinion of what is acceptable. its like the paradox of tolerance: to have a truly tolerant society, you have to be intolerant of intolerance. to have a truly non-tyrannical society, do you need to have a tyranny enforcing it?

personally (and bc im a lmanberg loyalist /hj) i say it is. regardless of the corruption of new lmanberg, they are also giving a threat to EVERYONE. even those who are innocent, they are presented with the exact same threat and rule set: if you make a government, you will be destroyed.

(which, small divergence here, is part of why debating c!techno is so frustrating. so many times you end up hitting a "well it depends on your political views" situation and there ISNT a correct answer there. im here to analyze characters for fun, not debate political theory)

so: the syndicate then. this is where this debate really "took off" and i think its due to one very specific miscommunication about its goals and plans. the syndicate, upon formation, declares itself to stand against corruption and tyranny. when they are found, the syndicate would work to destroy it. so heres the golden question: what do THEY define as corruption and tyranny? if you were to go off c!techno's previous statements, seemingly "any government" is a valid answer. however, he also states he's fine with people just being in groups together hanging together.

what then DEFINES A GOVERNMENT for them? what lines do they have to sort out what does "deserve to be destroyed" and what does "deserve to exist freely"

this is a hypothetical i like to post when it comes to syndicate discourse:

i have a group of people. lets say 5 or so for example. they all live together and build together. any decisions made that would impact the entire group they make together and they must have a unanimous agreement in order to proceed, but otherwise they are free to be their own people and do their own thing. when you ask them, they tell you they are their own nation and they have a very clearly defined government: they are a direct democracy. does the syndicate have an obligation to attack?

there is absolutely no hierarchy present. there is no corruption present. but, they ARE indeed a government. is that then inherently negative? my answer is fuck no (see the whole "difference between a tyrant and a leader" thing above).

but THATS where the issue of this discourse LIES. in some people's eyes, the answer to that is YES. techno's made it clear "no government" is his personal view, but does that spread to the syndicate as a whole? do they act preemptively in case it DOES become corrupt? is it inherently corrupt because its a government, regardless of how it is ruled? the fact of the matter is because of how little we've seen the syndicate work as a SYNDICATE, we don't know that answer. so we're left to debate and speculate HOW they would act.

if the syndicate were to let that government exist, then they are not tyrannical. they are showing that they are working to stop tyranny and corruption, just like in pogtopia again.

if the syndicate were to destroy/attack that government, then they are tyrannical. simple as that. they are enforcing a rule of their own creation without any nuance or flexibility under the threat of absolute destruction.

miscommunication in debates comes, in my opinion, in the above. of course theres more points of nuance. for example:

would the syndicate allow a government like i had described with early lmanberg, where there is an established hierarchy but everyone in the country consents to said leadership? on one hand, there is no tyranny or corruption present which is what they are trying to work against. on the other hand, theres more a possibility of it occuring. perhaps they'd find a middle road between the two binary options of "leave or destroy" i am presenting, such as checking in occasionally to ensure no corruption occurs.

but if they were to destroy it without, for lack of a better word, "giving it a chance" they would be, in my opinion, tyrannical. they would be going aginst their words of opposing corruption and instead abusing their power to gain compliance.

your/others opinions may differ, again it depends on if you see it as worth it to possibly stop future tyranny or if a hierarchy is INHERENTLY a negative thing.

part of the reason so many blog gave up this debate, beyond not getting very clear answers for the syndicate, is because of the nuance present. there. is. no. right. answer. every single person will view it differently, because there is no universally agreed upon truth of right or wrong here. BUT, i hope this helps shed some light on the discussion and my thoughts on it

#dream smp #mcyt #techno #syndicate analysis #YEAH IM MAINTAGGING WHAT OF IT #also i-- idk if it should be crit tagged? i tried to be as fair and open as possible #lemme know what yall think #ANYWAY ANON IM SO FUCKING SORRY THIS THING ENDED UP 2.3K WORDS LONG #I JUST RLLY WNATED TO BE THOUROUGH AND AS FUCKING CENTRIST /HJ AS POSSIBLE FJDKSLFJ #its very nuanced and theres no right answer but you sure as hell know mine now #answered #anon #im at work rn im gonna get fucking fired for this FJDKSFJKL #/HJ HOPEFULLY IN THAT I AM AT WORK BUT I WONT GET FIRED #og post #(jeb bush voice) please clap

32 notes · View notes

ranvwoop · 3 years

Note

Ran!!!! Lore thought??

hello Cryptid!!! pal!!!! I hope you are doing well!!! I have Quite a few thoughts!!!! I enjoyed it a lot!!! I love... c!Tubbo and c!Ranboo.... both of them. This blog works on a hierarchy of faves, actually, so like, I don't need to be correct but I do need to appreciate my faves :D. All c! from here on out until specified otherwise, also!

To preface! Quackity! Rude! I don't know where exactly my opinion on Quackity was, but its basically like. You can excuse torture, manipulating people to join your country by making them feel they have no other choice, whatever his plans for Techno are, whatever's up with him and Sam, and whatever else has been going on but draw the line at being mean to Tubbo and Ranboo? Basically. Watching Tubbo gather his bearings and shut him down was Cathartic.

(As always, I've got to give cc!Quackity props for the acting!! And that manner of speaking!!! It's very good. Very cool. Whenever he acts I always make a point to remember that cc!Quackity is a law student, and I like law, and I just think about how good he'll be at it :v !! )

I am very excited for this !! It's nice to have conflict. I also really like the fact that it's acknowledged that Quackity does not like Ranboo, because, well. Everyone likes Ranboo, barring Wilbur and people who he hasn't interacted with. He has done nothing wrong in his entire life and everyone knows this (for legal reasons this is a joke). It's cool that Quackity still dislikes him, especially to the extent that he thinks of him as a threat (or trying to convince Tubbo that he does, either one).

I can afford a little bit of nuance to Quackity, he does very obviously have Genuine Issues after everything that happened. Being under Schlatt, I have literally no idea what happened with El Rapids I'm gonna be honest but it sure looked dramatic when Quackity pronounced it dead on his lore stream idk, the Techno conflict. He wants to be left alone. People will not leave him alone. The only people that Las Nevadas as an establishment is hurting right now are people who've already agreed to join, there is no real reason for anyone to be poking about in his business. (Tommy literally opened his stream with "What will annoy Quackity?", Wilbur is here for spite, and Tubbo is investigating it as a threat, but like, there's no real reason other than him being a bit paranoid). They're basically here to bother the guy who just wants to make his little get rich slow scheme nation. He should definitely not blame Tubbo for not checking up on him, though. Yeah, he died, but like. A lot of things happened at that time, if I recall, the Bedrock Bros™ started causing trouble around L'Manburg and then Doomsday happened very soon after. So like. Tubbo had a full plate. Did you go check on how he was doing?? D:??? Not that Quackity had to, but like most failing to reach out, it goes both ways and nobody really has the grounds to blame it on anyone. It absolutely makes sense from a perspective standpoint, though, since he thinks that he's been abandoned by all of his peers, his finaces, and had to manipulate his new pals to hang out with him. However. Don't be mean to Tubbo D:.

... I got really distracted here, it's now been hours later and this is still open on my laptop, whoops.

Tubbo standing his ground!! As he should! He's right. From either perspective, they're only as much of an apparent threat to Las Nevadas as it is to the rest of the server, tbh -- there's no real reason to want them gone yet, but in the hands of two paranoid individuals, everything looks pretty suspicious. Of course. I will be siding with bee duo over all else, because I am a fool, and as watchers, Las Nevadas is probably gonna end up Pretty Bad, cause. We know all of the insider details and such, and we know that the cookie outpost is here to spy on them. But they had no claim to it until today. Also, the Ghandi Civ V line was a power move. Tubbo's whole negotiating, really!! I love Tubbo's character. cc!Tubbo constantly sells himself short and it is slander!

We got some talk about Tubbo trauma, which is very nice. I think the way that Tubbo views Quackity is really interesting, too. I don't remember what role he actually played in Tubbo's execution, but I think it's interesting that he attributes all of the executions to him. And that he worries about Ranboo. I'm once again very glad that we are talking about the fact that Quackity doesn't like Ranboo. Also!! Scars canon! Nice. Nice nice.

I have... a slight... hope...... that Tubbo joins the anarchists. Or at least that they lend a hand. Las Nevadas are claiming his land, after all. I just think it'd be neat. If he's forgiven Technoblade, and Snowchester is basically defunct because all of it's citizens are gone... pspspspspspsps anarchist Tubbo.

Tommy then had a lore stream. I didn't watch most of it. I'm kind of happy that Ranboo did not get caught up what Tommy is doing. I would like good things for Tommy, but I also would like good things for Ranboo, and Tommy asking how that helped Wilbur's plan, and Ranboo saying that he didn't care about Wilbur's plan?? NICE. Ranboo. Please. Do things for yourself and your husband and your friends and don't be pulled into Wilbur's plan because of guilt.

And that's it. I have exhausted most of my thoughts. I just think they're neat. Thank you for reading to the end! Have this lil guy. Look at him.

#asks #☆cryptid☆#i wrote this on dekstop n got very distracted by a little cat extension for xk*t #10/10 would recommend #the kitty can like. run across lines of text if you drag your mouse and it does little animations. :DDDD #also sorry this is long i sort of wanted to get back into actually writing something substantial cause I've forgotten how to do that so you #get an. essay #my applegies tm.#my mother saw me and asked if i was doing my homework.#i had to say no. i am writing about m*necr*ft r*lepl*y.#ALSO HELLO CRYPTID I HOPE THAT U R WELL #i talk a lot sometimes #and sometimes not a lot #okie now im done uhhhhh #that's all.#sorry i used this as writing exersize adn then forgot how to speak halfway through !!!#thank u for asking as always cryptid........ i am glad u enjoy to read or at least ask for me. it is sweet

4 notes · View notes