#whether you intend to do it or not it still has very real consequences

[total-drama-brainrot]

Hello! About the fake dating!au, I was wondering how the episode Niagara brawls would play out if Alenoaheather was happening. Would Alejandro and heather still be paired up or would one of them be paired up with Noah?

Well, to be entirely honest, I haven't really thought too much on it yet. Mostly because it's still kind of up-in-the-air as to when Noah's elimination would take place in this AU. I think we've sort of settled on post-merge, so he would be present in the Niagara Falls challenges, but the timeline's still really vague so I personally haven't really invested any time in figuring out the semantics of how each episode would play out.

But since you asked, I might as well toss my hat into the ring! I'll just type out my thoughts as they come, so please excuse this response if it's a little all-over-the-place or formatted weirdly.

Off the bat, it's been fairly well established that the canon final four remains unchanged, so at the very least both Sierra and Cody are still present in this challenge; this is important, since in canon the only reason Heather ends up partnered with Alejandro is because Sierra is the one who rejects him as a husband first. I don't really see a reason to change the canonical play of events here, unless a brainstorming session later on down the line necessitates Noah being paired with either Heather or Alejandro for whatever reason. Mostly just because keeping as many "pre-written" plot points as possible lessens the workload on our shoulders (us, of course, being me and @perpetualexistence, and occasionally @ur-local-brown-multifandomist).

But that does leave the question of who Noah would be paired with.

And again, this would be super dependant on who's left in the competition at this point; since Noah's made it to the merge, we know someone has to have taken his place in the London elimination- just that small change could have potential consequences on all of the subsequent eliminations afterwards, so the merge cast might look almost completely different to World Tour's "official" line-up.

And this is also super dependant on whether or not it's Blaineley who wins the Aftermayhem challenge- I'm not sure if any of the others intend to swap her out for a more interesting/plot relevant contestant (which, as much as I do love Blaineley, she's just find of there with no real relevance to the story) like perhaps Lindsay, Leshawna or maybe even Beth- I assume it'd have to be a girl, since the show itself works to even out it's gender ratios, but it could hypothetically be anyone.

So Noah's partner could be... literally anyone, save for the Final Four (Alejandro, Heather, Sierra and Cody).

...Unless?

Now, don't judge me here, but I do kind of like the idea of Noah ending up with Heather as his partner. Maybe it's the vast potential of how their (entirely self-constructed, and self-indulgent) character dynamic could play out in this scenario, or maybe I just want the opportunity to write Noah trying and failing to pick up Heather, eventually leading to her being the one to carry him across the Falls tightrope like a pathetic, soggy kitten. Or maybe I'm just getting my Noaheather on- who knows?

All I'm saying is, they'd be giving a lot of Connecticut Clark and Malfina vibes and I'm so here for it.

And maybe I just want to see something new; there's so many explorations of how an Alenoah Niagara Brawls challenge would play out (and they're all wonderful, don't get me wrong!) so it's time to give some other pairings the spotlight!

Plus, this particular scenario would not only allow the contestants to see Heather and Noah acting like the "fake" couple they're supposed to be, but Alejandro could also play it as either a double-breach of his trust (since he's also supposed to be "fake" dating Noah, at least, and he has his whole romantic rivalry with Heather) or take advantage of his position and try to charm whoever he's partnered up with and either secure a valuable ally for later on down the road, or beguile his next elimination target into a false sense of security- since a huge part of Alejandro's character is his conniving flirtatiousness, and I don't want to completely negate that.

Now that I'm thinking about it, Alejandro's flirty nature could be a conflict point between himself and his partners. That's a thought for another time, though.

But, again, it's still very up-in-the-air and I don't really think I can give a definitive answer until a proper elimination order has been established- or, at the very least, the elimination order pre-merge. So, uh, sorry for the lack of a definitive answer!

#alenoaheather save me... save me alenoaheather... #going to have to dedicate myself entirely to this au at some point. but. my drafts... #at the very least we'll have to make a mock-up of how the elimination order will go. just so we can built a plotline around it. #just so i know what characters we're working with at any given time. #total drama #td alejandro #td heather #td noah #alenoaheather #fake dating au #ophe rambling #silly ideas #replies

[oneshortdamnfuse]

The Duffer’s early characterization of Billy as a racist bully is a problem, and not because Billy didn’t actually say or do anything racist. It’s because their supposed “inspiration” picked from IT (specifically Henry Bowers) and their push for Billy to have more overtly racist lines is not appropriate for the story they were telling. At all. I go back and forth over whether or not it would have been better for Billy to be this one dimensional villain, like Jason Carver was in season 4. However, given the type of story they were telling I am glad that we were given the opportunity to see a “bully” type character who had a backstory that explained his motivations. It added layers to his and Max’s character. It made the fight against the Mindflayer more dramatic and compelling. That being said, as an abuse survivor whose ACE score is an 8, it was still hard to watch and even harder dealing with the fandom fallout that is still stuck in the mindset that Billy is basically the Duffer’s version of Henry Bowers - something they never truly accomplished.

Stranger Things is not IT, no matter how many nods they try to give to it. IT is inspired by real racist and homophobic violence in a small town. Stranger Things does not touch upon either of those things with any authenticity, and it was never meant to. It doesn’t mean that fans can’t or shouldn’t care about those things. However, there is absolutely no good reason why the Duffers should have been faithful to their original vision of Billy being as overtly racist (using slurs, even) and violent as Henry Bowers because it serves no narrative purpose other than to traumatize characters and vicariously viewers with minimal long term consequence to the plot. This is not IT. They spend more time on this show tormenting abused people than they ever do addressing systemic hate. So fans should not treat it like IT, and they should certainly not treat Billy as another Henry Bowers or act like he’s ever done anything on par with that character’s actions when there is no canon proof of that.

My ongoing problem with the Duffers is that they don’t utilize trauma in a thoughtful way that connects to the overall theme. They are writing a generic good over evil story, which is okay but it’s not what people inflate it to be. Instead trauma is like decoration. You are meant to look at it and maybe it will evoke some feelings but it is just decoration. Stephen King’s IT is not that. Trauma is integral to the plot of the book where an entire town is not made “sick” by supernatural experimentation but rather the systemic hatred and disregard for life that is pervasive in their community. Henry Bowers is symbolic of that hatred in his words and his actions, which is why he becomes a willing pawn of IT unlike Billy who is taken against his will and forced to relive his trauma. For Henry, this union is liberating and exciting. Henry never stops, either. He never backs down. He is unrelentingly racist and homophobic, as opposed to Billy who leaves Max and her friends alone after a single incident. Henry also never feels bad about what he does, unlike Billy who dies apologizing.

Any time fans justify their feelings towards Billy using the Duffer’s words, I can’t take them seriously because their vision re: his characterization was never realized and it’s a good thing it wasn’t. They wouldn’t handle it, and you know how I know? The very scene where he attacks Lucas has minimal narrative consequence despite the way it made fans feel. Like I said, it’s just for decoration. This is not Henry Bowers. This is not IT. They never intended to explore racism in any meaningful way, just like they’re dragging their feet in terms of queer representation four seasons in. It. Is. Just. Decoration. Instead, we got to see fans cheer as they made Billy suffer and die while his trauma was put on full display after doing heinous things against his will. That’s not a villain’s satisfying end. That is a tragedy. It’s extremely sad, and the season 4 finale as well as the overall lack of emotional maturity in this fandom has not only reopened the wound of seeing his trauma mocked but rubbed salt in it with every screenshot of the Duffer’s words that gets reposted.

I cannot reiterate enough that trauma is decoration to the Duffers, which isn’t just evident with Billy but I digress. Yet, some fans hang on to their shallow words like everything they say or suggest is narratively true and fully realized. I can think of no better example of this than when fans say Billy is homophobic because Henry Bowers is homophobic, even though there’s no evidence he is and in fact Billy is called a f****t by his father. Just absolutely no critical thought there. If I don’t stop somewhere I will never shut up about it but to this day it makes me unbelievably angry to see anyone dare make comparisons with IT and Henry Bowers when that’s not what Stranger Things is about no matter how much they borrow aesthetically from Stephen King. Being critical of Billy is fine and encouraged by me, but not when you’re using it to make ridiculous claims or simply justify hating abuse survivors. We’re not all good little survivors who are soft and demure, but we still deserve a chance to heal. You don’t need to be a jerk about people who wanted that for Billy.

#stranger things #billy hargrove #long post cw

[iwritenarrativesandstuff]

One thing I am curious about is how much Chuuya is important to the central story? Like he just appears when he needs to be here and then just gone

You know, at first my answer would've been just this: "Chuuya is not a main character and is not important to the central story but I am convinced he will be going forward."

But then I paused and thought about it... and realized something.

Chuuya hasn't shown up very much in the main manga, that much is true. However, the timing of his appearances is interesting because he always shows up during or slightly before a turning point in the story. Take a look at this:

Chapters 10 + 11, Port Mafia Arc: We are introduced to his character - he's one of the major character's (Dazai's) old partner. At the same time this is happening, Atsushi and Akutagawa are having their first real fight and shortly after, Chuuya tells Dazai that Akutagawa has the information on who placed the bounty, which brings the Guild into play.

Chapter 16, Guild Arc: Chuuya, along with many other mafia characters, is present when Mori is revealed as the boss, another significant event.

Chapters 21 and 22, Guild Arc: Chuuya is part of Mori's plan to pit the Agency and Guild against each other. Shortly after this, Q is released, marking another turning point.

Chapter 29, Guild Arc: Atsushi sees Chuuya ordering the protection of Yokohama from Q's curse. It is highly likely that his decision to form a temporary truce with the Mafia was a result of seeing Chuuya's actions.

Chapter 31, Guild Arc: The well-known Double Black chapter. Not only is this the first instance of the truce, but it is also the template for Dazai's later plan reveal - that he intends Atsushi and Akutagawa to be another Double Black.

Chapter 47, Cannibalism Arc: It's Chuuya who makes the first move and kickstarts the actual conflict. I believe this is the only time his actions and choices directly affect the main plot (which is... interesting actually...). Unfortunately in chapter 49, he is immediately sucked into Poe's book with little fanfare sidjcn

Chapter 62, Hunting Dogs Arc: Chuuya rescues the Agency members from the Hunting Dogs, which is the first semi-decent turn of events for the Agency in that arc.

Chapters 98 and 101, Vampire Infection Outbreak Arc: Chuuya shows up as a vampire (rip man). I don't know yet what the consequences of this will be but there will absolutely be consequences.

Idk, I do find it interesting that Chuuya appears to show up at transitory spots in the plotline, despite not playing an especially active role. I find it difficult to believe that's not significant in some way; after all, I've already commented on how Chuuya influences changes in Dazai. I'm starting to wonder if Chuuya's role from a meta sense is to induce change in some way - that would be a tad ironic, considering Chuuya... hasn't really changed much, and is still very much stuck in the same place he was, but now without a personal drive.

Whether you agree on the above though, I feel really confident that we're building up to something with him in the main story. What's more, I think this actually was always the plan, and not a decision made because Chuuya became really popular. While I don't think Asagiri is the type to really plan future events in any detail, I do think there is some general sense of where the characters are going. I have a few reasons to believe this.

Chuuya was in the manga before he even made his first appearance. If you check out Dazai's profile, Chuuya is mentioned as... one of his dislikes. Lol.

Chuuya was always going to be Dazai's ex-partner. It was the first thing decided about him, to my knowledge anyways. I've also noticed that Dazai, despite how much he appears, doesn't undergo a lot of development in the series proper (most of it's in the light novels, same as Chuuya). I suspect their development in the main series will once again run parallel as soon as Chuuya winds up with a more major role.

Asagiri and Harukawa spent the longest on Chuuya's design. And Asagiri always felt he was going to end up as a popular character, which is part of the reason why it took so long - he needed to look perfect.

Fifteen's afterword implies Chuuya's backstory was always going to be told eventually. Yes, the story was requested, but the response from Asagiri was "it's finally time to write this" not "oh ok if that's what the fans want".

Chuuya and Atsushi haven't even met yet, which is weird. Remember that Atsushi's decision to suggest a truce was likely influenced by his observation of Chuuya's actions. Also I find it strange that the Atsushi-Akutagawa duo are meant to be a new Dazai-Chuuya but one of each of the pair have... never met each other.

Chuuya's story is tied closely to the concept of singularities, ability user experimentation and the government (as well as the war's aftereffects by proxy). These themes run all throughout the world of bsd but have yet to be truly expanded on in the main manga.

Adam and Shirase are in London where the Order of the Clock Tower is. The Order is highly likely to play a major role going forward.

"His destination is still a secret" and "his will not be a peaceful, easy path" from the Stormbringer afterword. So, he's going to suffer more in the future. Yippee?

Anyways. This was a very long answer to your question anon but yeah. Chuuya will be important to the plot going forward and I believe that this was always the intention. It just doesn't make sense to have all this backstory and then not have any kind of payoff for it.

#i'm sorry you cannot ask me a question about chuuya and expect me not to go on an unhinged ramble #i am very very normal about him #bsd #bsd chuuya #thanks for the ask! #bsd meta #i guess #storyrambles #also asagiri really likes writing him so there's that too

[kishimotomasashi]

I love your takes on the Uchiha clan so I wanted to ask you what do you think of the curse of hatred?? Do you think Kishimoto really intended it to be a genetic curse or do you think he provided a different explanation for it in the text?? What do you think of Tobirama’s view in it??

So in the manga canon, there seem to be two versions of what the fans call "curse of hatred": Obito's, since he's the one who actually uses the term (which he said as Madara, meaning he likely got it from him), and Tobirama's, who provides the "scientific" explanation for why the Uchiha are Like That. Each are respectively in chapters 462 and 619 for reference, I don't feel like screenshotting, lol.

There are also different in-universe reasons for why each character says either. Obito's subscribes to Madara's brand of fatalism, in which he believes that shinobi history never straying from interminable violence for most of its duration proves that they are all beyond saving. Tobirama views the Uchiha with suspicion as a result of having been at war with them for most of his life, and is especially anxious regarding what Madara became and the possibility of anyone else going the same route.

I don't know what Kishimoto actually intended because I don't live in his brain, but from what I gather based on the story, what we're supposed to understand as the "curse of hatred" is more Obito's definition than Tobirama's, since his is eventually the one that matters in the series climax (the whole Indra/Ashura reveal); so a destiny initially understood to be inescapable, but that they will eventually escape because of the power of friendship, and all that. Which isn't to say that I think what Tobirama says about the Uchiha doesn't matter: along with his explanation pretty much just putting into words how the we've seen the sharingan work so far, he describes the Uchiha's propensity for going insane with a different sort of determinism, though one whose imagined consequences are barely distinguishable from the way Obito talks about them as fate. Two sides of the same coin.

But funnily enough, he's a bit more hopeful about it than Obito/Madara seem to be: he does believe in the ability of certain Uchiha to overcome this genetic predisposition to being evil of theirs, which he defines as, uh, being more loyal to the village. We've all gone over why this sucks as a narrative probably a billion times by now so I don't need to go into all of that specifically— but, if we decide to accept that premise for a second, it looks to me like the intention with what Tobirama says within the context of the scene he says it in (which is Sasuke asking the past Hokage to define what a shinobi village is, or is supposed to be, and whether Konoha is worth protecting based on that answer) is that it's supposed to fall in line with the "we can achieve peace if we all forget our differences and work together" theme. True, the Uchiha are like this, but they can also overcome this and work for the greater good, and the whole encounter Sasuke has with the Hokage ends on a hopeful note.

Basically it's more or less "everyone else was a lost cause, but you don't have to be" as a hopeful message. Which is Not Very Good, in my personal opinion, when the context is a whole population, children included, being wiped off of the face of the Earth for the actions of a few. So my opinion of the "curse of hatred" the way it's presented in canon is that it just falls into the typical poorly thought out "fate is real" thing that plagues the latter half of the series.

I think I have a stronger opinion against it when it starts being used by fans of the show in discussions. Though I think we're all long past the era in which these arguments were everywhere (or at least I don't hang around in spaces where they're used), I still hold a grudge against every person who used the idea of the "curse of hatred" to defend the UCM, which was often always in order to shield Itachi specifically from criticism for going along with it and it was like... why are we subscribing to the idea of a group of people genetically being predisposed to evil in order to justify why it was necessary that they died right now. Hello.

#Anon #Ask #Uchiha #so yeah I think the curse of hatred thing sucks

[tugadork]

Discussing Hans' Hypothetical Return in Frozen 3

So... been a long while since I've made a post on here. For the few Frozen peeps who follow me, my Fractured fan-fic is currently on an indefinite hiatus (I still very much plan to continue writing it and seeing it through to the end and actually post it at some point, but writer's block continues to pester me and I still need much more storybeats to properly flesh out before I get any serious work done; by now I've only written like half the prologue section).

With that out of the way, and with Frozen 3 being officially greenlit, the question still wonders in the air whether or not everyone's favorite dastardly prince has the opportunity to make a comeback after being left out of Frozen 2 (though, at least we know via that one Santino Fontana's old interview that Hans was intended to be a part of the second movie very early on during development, or at least, the idea itself was discussed).

As of right now, and realistically speaking, I don't think it's very likely for a few reasons: Jen Lee clearly has changed her mind between Frozens 1 and 2 in regards to Hans' character so I don't believe she would begin to consider revisiting his character; him literally being called an unreedemable monster by Elsa in F2 is not a good indication for any chances of a redemption arc with him should he return; in that one group interview with Santino, Josh Gad and the Lopez a few years back, Hans was brought up and Gad even supported the idea of him coming back for a Frozen 3, but Santino seemed very hesitant to the idea so, if he doesn't want to do it assuming they want Hans back, then I don't think he would do it (unless maybe they give the character some depth or give him an overall importance to the plot. I don't know, something that could convince him to come back to the role.)

But I also like to consider what-ifs, and one of those what-ifs is with what to do with Hans' character should he be revisited, because there are quite a few storytelling routes they could go with him, which I will discuss below and you guys can tell me your thoughts if you're particularly interested. These are just basic ideas that came to my head:

1 - Hans is hellbent on revenge against the Arendelle sisters, is the main villain of Frozen 3 and somehow manipulates his family (who is 100% innocent and comprised of good people) into starting a war with Arendelle because of Elsa's unlimited power; still being portrayed as he was during the fireplace scene in F1. [a very generic and boring option for me; many people take issue with how almost unnatural his shift to mustache-twirling villain was, so fleshing his character out a little, villainous or not, I think would help in the long run. Plus, him being the sole main villain would get stale imo]

2 - Like F2 and Frozen Fever, Hans does return somewhat but is made into nothing but a punchline throughout the whole movie, aka the General Hux effect while one or some of his family members play the main villain(s) and ridicule him. [the least interesting and most cringeworthy route to take, and the joke would get old real fast. Not to mention, canonically speaking, Hans' family life hasn't been... great, so I feel like portraying an abusive family relationship like this, even if Hans isn't a good person, would be very uncomfortable and send the wrong message]

3 - Hans' abhorrent actions and consequences, as well as his backstory bit by bit, are fully explored, and he's disowned and exiled by his family following a trial that takes place shortly after his arrival home. Stewing with anger and resentment as he wanders alone, he is eventually approached by the actual main villain (another elemental user would be cool and long overdue for these movies in my eyes) and is ironically manipulated into taking vengeance against those he feels wronged him (Anna and Elsa included) when said villain promises him the rule of the Southern Isles and the happiness he so desires. The villain only intends to use him for their own agenda and someone to take the fall for their actions, choosing to stay in the shadows until the right moment to strike. Hans goes along with the plan, and at first he's thrilled and vindicated, but one tragic moment shatters his concept of morality (this could be any number of things as long as it results in him having a serious wake-up call) and makes him realize how catastrophically wrong his actions are and not being able to cope with it. In the end though, and through moments of actual self-reflection, he helps Frohana to take down the main villain. If he dies, then Anna realizes that people aren't black-and-white like in the storybooks she read as a kid, and decides to forgive him despite what he's done, while Elsa does not. If he survives, either Anna still forgives him or none of the sisters forgive him, but they recognize the change in his character. Hans ultimately gets to make a life for himself, one where he's not shackled by the past. Also, he gets to interact with Olaf in this (seriously guys, immediate comedic potential here, this is literally one of the reasons why I want them to bring Hans back) and Kristoff which he never got to do in the first one. [this, to me, would be much more interesting. Hans' actions would not be taken lightly and the story would later punish him, but through that experience owning up to his mistakes and starting to atone; maybe meeting a few commoners during his exile which he eventually grows to care for or something would gradually kickstart his change. I really love this concept and will probably make a separate post on this that's much more elaborate and better detailed if anyone's interested. It would have to be a different beast than Fractured though, and less of a handful to write for 😅]

4 - Hans is brought back and is still portrayed as a villain, but is given the proper time for his character to be explored and given depth. He also gets an actual villain song. He plots to take vengeance on those who wronged him, but instead of being portrayed as the cunning snake he was in F1, it's more a drive out of desperation and anger. He ends up doing things he would not normally do, horrible things that do weigh on his mind but he pushes on because he sees no other way to claim his happiness; that since barely anyone cared for him when he was younger, that he learned to only care for himself. He's given moments to stop what he's doing and not escalate things further, and despite pausing, he still chooses the worst option. In the end he becomes his own worst enemy, and accidentally dies by his own hand. His defeat is not something that brings either Elsa or Anna joy despite how much he's wronged them and how justified they'd be feel some relief, his family is affected by it, and so the ending of the movie is bittersweet. [let me start off by saying that there is no way in hell Disney would have the cajones to do something this depressing, but man I would kind of love it if they did. One thing I do love about the idea of bringing Hans back and keeping him a villain is turning him into a Shakesperean tragedy, and his quest to claim his happiness by any means unnecessary would be so compelling to watch imo. Sort of similar to Lord Shen from Kung Fu Panda 2 in that regard. You could still have another villain in this, either one with powers - seriously, introduce another elemental user in Frozen 3, Disney, pretty pls - or one/some of his family members that are up to their own nefarious plots]

And that's it! Let me know which plot idea sounds good to you or if a combination of certain elements from all these would be more preferable in your opinion for his hypothetical return. 👍

#frozen #frozen 3 #prince hans #hans westergaard #princess anna #kristoff #frozen olaf #the southern isles #just me rambling about how fascinating I find this character and how great he could be if given the opportunity #hans nation rise up

[aesolerin]

hey. heyehyhey. remember that talk we had about Leper's broken sword and the symbolism of how he broke and all that

well, it gets BETTER/WORSE. and all the more interesting to think about! Wanna know what he says in DD2 when given a whetstone, to sharpen his broken blade?

like, on its surface, it seems simple: he's just projecting and using it as a way to mourn the loss of his looks due to the onset of his disease, right?

Except! (as we talked about): his sword breaking had nothing to do with his looks!(1)

after all, here he is, with his full blade in hand right before the deed that ended with both of them broken: already in his leper gear at this point, with all the symbolic weight that has. (plus just what it could mean in the mundane narrative sense, if we put all our reality warping headcanons aside for just a second, lol) he likely still considered blade still 'handsome', then, as it hasn't shattered yet, no? (and his word choice when talking about it is interesting, too - his blade didn't just break, it shattered. for all that they're synonyms, one word carries a lot more violent and explosive imagery than the other, doesn't it? that this is the word he comes up with when thinking about this moment... it has a lot of interesting implications for how he looks back on it. plus, using it as a way to describe the outcome of his actions here, even if only partially, brings some level of... unintentionality to the consequences, I suppose? i dunno the best way to phrase it, but, like: when it comes to how we use the word in the English language, people knowingly break things all time, whether metaphorically or literally; people break locks to get access to things/places otherwise unavailable to them; "you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet"; ending a romantic relationship with someone is called a breakup, etc. for all that the term implies some level of damage, it's often a controlled use of damage, or something that can be fixed back up later with few repercussions. it's not too dire or drastic for something to end up broken, I guess is what I'm getting at.

For something to have shattered, though? that's almost always implies that the damage wasn't a knowing/intended consequence. At the very least that they did more damage than intended; one would very rarely go out of their way to shatter someone's heart during a break up; if someone shatters a mirror due to punching it, they likely weren't thinking rationally when trying to rid of their reflection; a kid shattering a house's window is gonna get in big trouble if found out, whether that was their goal or not. And that's also part of it - if a person did expect they'd shatter something with their actions, it ascribes to them a level of cruelty and callousness that the word 'break' just doesn't come with as subtextual baggage.

all of which is to say; while the Leper may or may not have expected to come out of his own purge broken, it would have been FAR more self-destructive if he went in expecting it to be shattered by the end. As such, it's very hard for me to think the level of self-damage done was intentional on his part. BUT ANYWAYS. back to the actual topic of this ask xD) What exactly was it that he thought was 'handsome' about his symbolic self before this, as compared to after? Was it the full weight, even as necessary as he thought it was, of killing his own subjects in cold bloo,d and thus no longer being able to truthfully say he'd never knowingly brought harm to those from his kingdom? Was it some level of happiness or enjoyment he got out of the action, thinking such a thing made him monstrous or sadistic?

Was it the calculated cruelty he was able to act with, meaning he at least partially abandoned any beliefs he may have had in kindness and empathy in interacting with others?

However you interpret such a thought process, his interactions with Jester would likely be a huge fucking wake-up call. because, let's be real, the fool would feel less than zero compunctions about calling any and all murder that happens 'sexy', and he'd be joking about it only like. half of the time. if that. xD Though, to be fair, Sarmenti would probably throw around the term 'handsome' less often. Comes a bit too close to sounding sincere, after all, could ruin his reputation as an Unrepentant Silly Asshole if the others picked up on it.

-----

(1)....Though, admittedly, Leper's phrasing in saying he/his blade was "Handsome, once, before it shattered" could just as validly be read as him having lost his handsomeness even before something in him symbolically broke..... But that take is a lot more straightforward in its interpretation, and thus much less fun for me to ruminate on for hours on end. so. ;p

What's your thoughts on all of this, if anything? You agree with any particular interpretation of it, or have an entirely different take? Do you think I'm overanalyzing this too much for DD2, where the reality warping nature of the setting might make the heroes' takes on themselves less reliable than in DD1? (if so, fair!) Just interested to hear any and all of what's going on in your noggin' after reading this!

Leper has so many layers.... so many parts of both of these games live rent free in my head, but this guy and the fucked-up clown are at the very top.

i personally lean towards the more simple 'musing on his “lost” attractiveness' interpretation. it's clear from DD1 and DD2 that Leper has a deep connection to his blade, probably considering it something of a friend or a kindred spirit. it's been with him through so much!

the term 'shattered', though, i do agree is very evocative and there's an intent to it. Leper (and the writers!) didn't simply say 'broken' for a reason. perhaps he feels he shattered himselfa fine and powerful blade in a moment of rage/weakness/self-defense/fear. it's still usable though, even in this shattered state, so Leper will keep on truckin' until his body inevitably gives out.

when the time comes and he's comfortable showing the others his Shrines, though, Jester will call his retaliation a work of art, with only the thinnest veneer of sarcasm. now there's a man who was in control of his fate! there's a man who did not roll over and die when demanded! there's a man who had the guts to do what needed to be done as soon as possible instead of taking the abuse for years and years and years! i'm sure the other heroes would also take Leper's side and assure him that what he did was right on some level, but Jester's agreement hits a bit different.

here's a funny lil interaction between the two of them i formulated with another friend:

Jester, covered in blood: you still love me right?? 🥺

Leper, for the fifth time that day: yes, i do 😊

--

Leper, changing his bandages: truly i am a wretched thing, a walking corpse... 😔

Jester, kissing his forehead: absolutely not, you're hot as fuck and built like a brick shithouse 😤

#ask #itsbeenliketenyearsitsprettywild #long post #darkest dungeon #dd leper #dd jester

[hazele-omega]

random long rant about my Korvax/divergent Korvax headcanons! this is how my brain has decided Korvax work, mostly so that I can write Lucien (and their trauma). mild lore spoilers but no story spoilers - it contains nothing you can't learn before the story (I think). none of this is actually canon afaik, it's just my thoughts on how it all night work. (note: I did not proof read this so please forgive any weird wording or errors)

So a regular convergent Korvax has three 'layers' of memory/function. The bottom layer is their physical shell, where is stored physical sensations or ideas familiar to it. It's a bit like learning and practicing how to do things, or forming habits - it's the holder of those automatic responses when you're used to doing something a lot. The middle layer is the individual mind of the Korvax, or their actual personality core. This governs most of the general conscious functioning and information processing, as well as episodic memories. And finally, the upper layer is the link to the Convergence. Most of the data the Korvax collects is stored in the network, spread out in portions across many other minds. The collective consciousness of the Convergence provides guidance to the individual, creating a kind of 'soft authority' where the Korvax melds to the collective will of the group.

Now let's talk about divergent Korvax. These Korvax lose the upper portion of their memory, causing them to forget or struggle to remember anything that wasn't stored episodically. Convergent Korvax store most things in the upper layer, so this can have consequences for a newly divergent one. The next thing that happens, more slowly and after a while, is the response to a lack of authority. Korvax are built to be together, and when one is alone, they begin to miss the will of the group/being convergent, whether consciously or subconsciously. This causes the subconscious to attempt to create some sort of substitute for the lost authority. This may manifest in a number of ways. The Korvax might pull more from the bottom layer, changing the way these physical sensations impact them, which creates a more hedonistic autonomy as the Korvax becomes about survival and improving themself/ensuring their body does not come to harm. Jointly or alternatively, if the Korvax spends time around organic beings, they may start to take on 'emotions', or copies of them as the subconscious interprets them. This pulls more from the habitual side of the bottom layer, as the Korvax gravitates to/becomes more attached to things that are familiar to them.

Let's elaborate. A Korvax with undeveloped emotions may attempt to imitate others, as stated earlier, in search of some guidance or response. A Korvax does not initially search for pleasure - convergent ones exist in a constant state of neutrality, and it is only once they have lost that that pleasure and pain start to become important to them. Through imitation and observing others' actions and reactions, a divergent Korvax slowly starts to internalise emotions. Fear would be the easiest to understand, and likely one of the first to be experienced. Then would come more complex and conditional emotions, like stress, anger, joy and even love. These emotions, intended to provide a replacement for the subconscious guidance of the Convergence, shift, change and develop, becoming more 'real' in the sense that organic beings would consider them.

So the Korvax becomes 'more human', as we might put it, along with their memory shifting to an episodic format and them requiring sleep, to sort out new information as we do when we sleep and dream. However, an interesting phenomenon can occur in highly developed Korvax, which is where they become emotionally 'bound' to things. This is stranger then it seems - the subconscious, after all, is still searching for authority, and when a Korvax develops an extreme attachment to (usually) a person, like being very close friends or lovers, that person or the idea of the person can begin to fill that authority gap. It is not obvious when this happens, but the Korvax begins to perceive the person as they would have perceived the Convergence, viewing them as holding the same authority. This causes a shift in the way the Korvax's motivations are expressed - the bond originates from emotion, but emotions begin to lessen as the Korvax has less motivational need for them. Depending on the mental strength and experiences of the Korvax, this can create a rather scary shift from affection to obedience - although the Korvax still has access to emotions, they become less and less needed and 'fade out' as the Korvax instead matches their will to that of the person. It takes a very, very long and close relationship for this to happen, and when it does, it can be frightening for the other person. Usually, they did not intend to manipulate or control the Korvax, and it can hurt them and make them feel like a bad person to see the Korvax losing what animated them. You could technically 'snap them out of it' by leaving for a moderate period of time, but it's still scary.

That concludes my random, un-proof-read Korvax speculation! Remember, I am completely normal about them

#no man's sky #korvax #korvax lore #rambles #wow this is long #thinking about Lucien #oc lucien #why

[dankovskaya]

Yeah the idea of Leon being "in love" with like. His idea of who Ada is based on a couple very specific encounters wherein basically all of Ada's interactions with him are highly controlled and strategic and often catered to whatever she believes will most effectively get what she wants out of him is weird and definitely makes him seem like a moron at best and some kind of creep at worst. But he does definitely have residual attachment towards her largely as a consequence of that one night in Raccoon City and I think the most flattering way to interpret it would be that he is fully conscious and aware of the fact that absolutely nothing that Ada has ever shown him of herself is the real Ada but he can't kick the part of him that really really wants to see even a glimpse of what is under that mask.

Vaguely romantically intentioned or otherwise I think Leon just desperately wants to feel like the mutual surface level familiarity or recognition they develop over a series of semi-coincidental high-stress encounters is even remotely balanced bc even with his sarcastic and dry defensive exterior she can still practically read his mind at a glance while he never gets to see so much as a crack in her persona and doesn't even know her real name 😭

And like I don't think he actually EXPECTS to get what he wants especially by the end of re4 reunion but I think there is this like. One sided tension and maybe even grief on his part over the fact that he's probably never going to get to know who she ACTUALLY is even though she was so integral to the most formative event of his entire life mixed with the weird residual emotions he feels for spending half a decade thinking he practically killed her and all of this is in conflict with his also very real resentfulness of the way she has treated him and lied to him and distrust of her profoundly unclear motivations etc. When people say Leon is "obsessed" with Ada I don't think that's really accurate but I DO think he can't let himself think about her too often or he'll drive himself crazy wondering who the hell she is.

And of course another major reason he wants so badly to know something genuine about her is because he is so desperate for her to give him a solid reason to trust her. Which Ada naturally does not give a shit about because whether or not he trusts her fundamentally and no matter how much he might bark about it he's still gonna act like her dog when she's around cause he's still repaying his "debt" 😭 (And it's also interesting I guess to see how that changes over time i.e. by the time of like, re6, which is essentially "Ada gets framed" the game, Leon really doesn't really have any reservations about defending her and he's pretty firm in his resolution to do so. Which again you can interpret as him being a moron with a residual crush on her exterior, or you can interpret as him no longer really giving a shit about Quote Unquote Moral Concerns and playing by personal compulsive raccoon city loyalty rules 😭)

Also, in a similar vein to that, with his own presumably quite lonely and isolated and inherently dehumanizing life as a secret agent guy, he probably views Ada as the only person "in his life" who might be able to relate to him without being (in a sympathetic interpretation of Leon's perspective of his job) tainted by the same institution that has quite literally stolen his life from him. So again, it all ties back to him knowing that he doesn't know her, but wishing that he did. (I think I recall @theonlyadawong making a post interpreting that "night" they left off on referenced in damnation [which is clearly intended to be sexual😭] actually just being one long conversation wherein Leon gets to ask some of the many, many questions he's always had about her and Ada decides how much if it all she's willing to answer them and maybe asks a few in turn, and I'm just obsessed with the idea of that. Instantly incorporated into the worldview.)

All of this is to say I enjoy Aeon from a 99% one sided vaguely-slightly but not inherently romantic longing perspective but if they ever did become something explicitly romantic it would only possibly make sense to me if it was when Ada's whole...everything straight up stops working on Leon. It would have to be at a point where Leon has finally truly put her (and therefore Raccoon City by association) behind him, when he really stops reacting exactly as she expects him to, when he's actually capable of surprising her, and when he can meet her unexpected appearances with genuine indifference (all of which personally I don't think even could happen until he truly gets to make decisions about his own life again😭.) He's still Leon, he'd still help her if she was in trouble, but he's not gonna linger on it. I think only then could Leon possibly genuinely pique her interest as someone on equal standing and therefore open the door to her being even slightly inclined to share a hint of vulnerability with him and maybe actually eventually consider him a friend etc. I think knowing that he truly isn't looking at "Ada" when he looks at her would be absolutely necessary from her perspective. And this is why they kind of rule in re4make because it's absolutely the closest Leon has ever been to rejecting the dynamic that their (very meager and limited and mostly Leon-imagined) relationship was built on.

#TL;DR Aeon can't actually be real until Leon gets the fuck over her but I don't even necessarily want that because #the appeal to me is that Leon Can't completely get over the weird emotions he has surrounding her and suffers for it meanwhile Leon isn't #even a blip on her radar unless he happens to pop up on the chessboard immediately in front of her. Maybe once in a blue moon she sees or #hears something that reminds her of Leon Behavior and finds it amusing but she's definitely not losing #sleep over him the way that he absolutely has over her. #re #leon s kennedy #ada wong #aeon #<= yeah you could say idgaf 😏

[skye-huntress]

The Witch from Mercury Season 2 Reaction

Episode 23: “Unrelenting Tenderness”

Suletta’s at a disadvantage in more ways than one. Just dodging the Gund-bits alone is a feat of piloting expertise, but the main body hasn’t entered the battle yet.

“This doesn’t concern you”? Uh, no. Your actions have already had far reaching consequences, both direct and indirect. Even if, and it’s a big if, Suletta somehow didn’t care about what her family was doing, or the massive loss of life, she still wouldn’t be able to find peace.

Lauda has lost all grip with reality. Miorine brought back the Gundams? They were never even gone in the first place, they just went into hiding. And for every big shot that wants to destroy them and wipe out all the witches, there’s ten opportunistic assholes that want their power for their own gain.

The opening has yet another update. The last one was too minor that I didn’t bother to comment, but this time we’ve got the suits for the final battle.

Lauda is really going all out. He’s fighting to death and doesn’t intend to surrender. We’ll see what Felsi can do.

Seems they caught on to the infiltration team.

Interference from an unknown party that can affect the data storm. Eri seems to know who they are.

Now Prospera is off to murder some teenagers. Guess we’re getting that showdown between her and Kenanji after all.

Why is there yet another secret doomsday weapon in this show?! And it’s basically a discount Deathstar. Also, more scheming politicians and corpos, who’s surprised?!

Take the fucking gun, Bel! Kenanji can’t be the only one armed in a station full of hostiles.

HARU!! Why do you betray me?!

Calling it now, the MVP is officially Felsi. She saw Guel trying to sacrifice himself and was like, nope! That’s right, girl, call both those idiots out!

Splitting up in a station of death does not sound like a good idea. At least Miorine has 5 and Bel covering her.

Of course, she changed the codes! We’re up against a villain that is actually smart.

Notrette used her secret tomato message to Miorine as a secret kill-switch for Quiet Zero. She knew that if anyone misused it, whether it was Delling, Prospera or anyone else, her daughter would stop them.

No. 5 is an excellent shot. It’s one thing to hit your target, but to hit them where you know you won’t kill them accurately, all while in zero G. Who knew I’d end up praising this guy who debuted as such a creep.

And as one doomsday weapon is shut down, another is fired at the very heroes that stopped it.

I didn’t want to know but now we know what it takes to stop Aerial for real. A big fucking lazer. Even then, Eri still manage to block most of the energy and save everyone else.

So here’s where we’re at. The Assembly League had planned to play off destroying the Group as an accident, and since there won’t supposed to be survivors, that idiot was arrogant enough to broadcast his intent. Well, Eri blocked the shot, and all those witnesses to his attempted mass murder are alive. Not only that, even if they could fire off that weapon twice right away, they wouldn’t be able to play it off as an accident. Speaking of which, they’ve also exposed the true nature of their weapon. This massive blunder puts Peil and the League in a very compromising position. Not only that, they probably just killed Suletta’s sister, which makes them the enemy of a lot of people. Sooo, I guess this marks the beginning of the Final Final Battle.

Is that really the title for the next episode? Easy to remember and leaves no room for doubt, but they could have been a little more creative.

#the witch from mercury #g witch #g witch spoilers

[your-reference-here]

As an actual programmer, I’ve been putting way too much thought into how FCG potentially works, and the more I puzzle over it the more I’m starting to recognize haunting parallels between Aeor and real world programmers.

Like...look at the other automatons in Exandria currently. They operate how you would expect something with a standard code base to operate. Lots of “if else” statements, logic loops, etc. based on what they were designed to do. That’s pure technology at work, simple stuff from a programmer’s point of view.

Now let’s assume FCG’s base programming was always to serve as an emotional support and healer. Anyone who has worked in programming knows how HARD it is to make a computer program think with the nuances of a human, let alone read another human’s speech, body language, etc.

On paper, the addition of a soul would enable FCG to better assess whether someone needs help, because now he can empathize with them. Maybe the added personality from that soul was planned too to make him more approachable. These are all benefits to his external designation. However, I’m betting the soul introducing internal emotions was an unforeseen and unavoidable side effect.

If we assume the people designing FCG did their due diligence in testing and were aware of how the added internal emotions impact him, namely that this can add stress to his CPU far faster than anything programmatic, then that means they had to weigh the impacts on FCG’s well-being to his ability to perform his intended function. For FCG to exist as he does now, this would mean that the designers decided the costs to him personally were not as important as the benefits to his function, meaning that they still only saw FCG as a tool and not as a living being despite being the ones who introduced the soul to his body.

But what about FCG’s dangerous fail safes we saw activate in this most recent episode? Wouldn’t the designers have caught that in their testing? This is where those haunting real world parallels come in for me. It’s very easy for codes to become so complex that the humans who originally designed them start to lose understanding of their inner workings. This is especially easy if multiple people are working on it and/or if the code is passed on to new people. I’ve experienced this first hand with every programming job I’ve held to date.

But you don’t have to take my word for it. Coming back to Exandria, we’ve already seen this demonstrated with Laerryn and the Tree of Names. Therefore, I think it’s entirely possible that FCG’s fail-safes could have been missed in testing or, worse, purposely ignored for the sake of the current goal.

tl;dr I think FCG having his own internal feelings was quite possibly an unintended bug from merging a soul with a machine, and that had disastrous hidden consequences due to his creators’ scarily realistic priorities.

#critical role #fresh cut grass #fcg #laerryn coramar seelie #god i love how my programming knowledge is coming in handy here #because FCG is fascinating to think about from that perspective

[gold-pavilion]

hello :) I just found your blog and I think your take on tkrv manga is interesting. May I know your thought about koko & inupi library kiss panel? Does he kissed him as he is or with image of akane in mind? do you think the said panel a queer bait or is there truly something between them? I've been wanting to know (neutral) translator opinion and not from shipper or antis view. Sorry if you have answered similar question, thank you! <3

Hello!! Thanks!! That's alright, it's an interesting topic to discuss and I've barely touched upon it!! To be honest, I'll take this chance to go in-depth, because Inui and Koko's story opens up a whole thing with LGBT rep in manga and the way it's taken by fandom.

Firstly, in order to define whether this is a concrete piece of LGBT content or a case of baiting, we gotta start from establishing what queerbaiting is.

The wikipedia definition is perfect:

"Queerbaiting is a marketing technique for fiction and entertainment in which creators hint at, but then do not actually depict, same-sex romance or other LGBT representation."

There's another concept that I always apply to this, and that's plausible deniability: where is the line between 'hinting' and 'depicting'? Are two people of the same sex, for example, saying they'd die for each other anyday 'hinting' at a romantic bond, 'depicting' a romantic bond or is it meant to be ambiguous? When we just can't be sure of what it is, there's plausible deniability; people who don't wish to see it as LGBT rep will say it's not, people who see it that way will say they do. I, for clarity's sake and to avoid being baited (because I am queer and tired), only consider a canonical depiction one where there is no longer plausible deniability, when no one could argue 'that was platonic, just a friend thing' or nothing is ambiguous anymore.

And when is there no plausible deniability? Normally, when the word 'love' is used or alluded to in a clear romantic context, or an unmistakably romantic gesture (such as a kiss on the lips) appears. Then it's no longer up to interpretation, but a concrete part of that media.

Now, given that Koko and Inui is a romance that took place, ergo, the romantic nature of feelings involved was made undeniably present (the kiss, among other context signs), I don't think we're being baited. It's not bisexual content "hinted, but not given"; it was very much given, fully intended and executed as romantic.

Having said that, I think fandom gets easily confused on what discussion they're having and what discussion they're trying to have. 

Is InuKoko a thing that canonly happened? Yes. It took place beyond plausible deniability and has been displayed numerous times in canon as a plot point of romantic characteristics. Is it LGBT? Yes.

Did it happen for reasons that were unhealthy? Did Koko take a romantic initiative because he was grieving? Or because he was projecting? Or because he was confused? Discussing those points doesn't make InuKoko less canon or less LGBT. It can mean we have a messy bisexual story on our hands, or even an unhealthy bisexual story on our hands if you wanna see it that way, but the fact remains that we have a bisexual story on our hands. Fandom can discuss whether Koko thought about Akane while kissing Inui or not; but the fact of the matter is still that he kissed a boy.

In other words, the discussion of whether it's a 'good' or 'bad' ship is free real estate. Have at it. Maybe Koko was a disaster and an absolute dickhead about it. Maybe Inui was too when he wouldn't talk about his doubts for years. But the discussion of whether InuKoko is a ship that canonly happened in Tokyo Revengers is… not a discussion; the answer is yes.

From the standpoint of someone who cares about LGBT rep and its scarcity in mainstream anime/manga, believe me, I find it frustrating when an LGBT storyline happens "for reasons rooted in heterosexuality" (ergo, Koko developing his homosexual interest in Inui as an aftermath and consequence of his previous heterosexual interest in Akane). And I find it frustrating precisely because it makes people confused about what is still, despite any why/how/etc, an LGBT thing. At the end of the day, the fault of that lies less with the content, but with people shifting the conversation to something it's not and putting validity behind gates of secondary relevance.

At any rate, I've said my piece on that. Back to the start of the question! Back to the library scene. 

Because, while it doesn't change things in terms that what happened has happened and what's canon is canon (and I wanted to make that very clear, as my top priority), I can sure give my own thoughts on the scene itself. For fun lmao.

We don't truly have anything that tells us, clearly and unmistakably, what was going through Koko's head that time. Personally, I think it may be intended to be ambiguous and/or to match his emotional state; that's to say, in process of figuring out what he felt. 

However, nothing in canon has ever pointed to Koko taking Inui as a replacement for Akane, nor confusing him with her in any way (in dialogue, in the recent chapter 252, that has been reestablished too). On the contrary, he's demonstrated to be very aware of Inui as Inui, and to be anguished precisely because of the push and pull of two feelings he has at once. If you ask me, I think there is a reason he said Akane looks like Inui, before likewise implying that Inui looks like Akane too; he has seen them both as themselves.

I don't think any of these things are there for no reason either, as that simply doesn't exist in fiction. Every scene, shot and dialogue is part of a piece of fiction 'cause it is, in one way or another, relevant to be there. I also don't think it's a coincidence that the side of Inui's face that is towards Koko, that is so focused in the scene, is precisely the side with the huge burn mark; the side that isn't Inui-Akane's similarity, but just Inui. I believe there's a reason there for him to have broken down in guilt and grief about Akane after doing that, with someone who was not her.

But that's up to anyone's interpretation.

As a translator, the most I can say is the little parenthesis two paragraphs above: that in the text, in the dialogue, there is no suggestion of replacing or confusion, but a messy case of feelings for two people. Always an Inui and Akane-san, never an Inui as Akane-san. Up until, of course, chapter 252 makes it simply Inui.

The rest is just my impression of the overall material I'm reading, and my take as someone very used to handling fiction. But I'm very happy to be asked about these matters and very honored to be considered someone neutral you'd send this message to!! I hope this has been helpful orrrr at least interesting, 'cause it definitely is to me.

Message again anytime!!

#asks #inukoko #kokonoi hajime #inui seishu #inui akane #thoughts and talk and so #tokyo revengers #tokyo rev #queer themes #let's please not forget that bisexuality exists #but other than that #queer rep vs queer baiting talk

[mypralaya]

Hello you just get disjointed Haven thoughts today. It’s funny how so much of my analysis on Shaw is so structured whereas with Haven it gets more emotional, but I guess that fits? This rant is really like THREE rants, the first one is about how difficult it is the handle a character like Haven without being Problematic and how I do my best to steer through these while staying IC too, then to thoughts about her relationship to the Adversary and its memory, then her child, her real one that never was, and likening her to figures that admittedly don’t really work for her as a non-Christian but that personally do remind me of her because I was raised Catholic THERE’S A LOT HERE

Anyway, I used to think the worst thing about Haven being brought back in the modern era would be the inevitable sexualization and whitewashing and so on, and probably more racist writing. But I’ve now decided the worst thing about it would be that she’d probably be a Girlboss, because that seems to be the shortcut that so many writers now are taking for a Strong Female Character or to right wrongs that have been done to them. And I get this is coming from good desires but it’s so inevitably bad , almost always OOC, and usually does more harm than good to the character’s portrayal. And for Haven, the reason I get why you’d want to do it (not that anyone at Marvel does, I’d put down good money, and thank goodness, but IF SOMEONE DID) is the same reasons I just don’t think it would work for her. And no one suggested it would, I am just arguing against hypothetical situations in my head, because I am like that. Anyway, a big component of the Girlboss is she’s right about everything and knows it and she’s very determined in making sure other characters and the readers know it and she will call out and shoot down every real and imagined slight against her, often violently. But Haven, though WE know she was treated terribly by the narrative and frankly also by the heroes, died with the horrible knowledge that SHE WAS WRONG and that her mistake, whether her fault or not, doomed the world (as far as she knew) She died knowing all the horrible things she did and caused with the belief it was all for a greater end that would justify the means, was actually FOR NOTHING. That her greatest and most deeply held convictions were nothing but a joke by a demon to pass the time, and she had made so many others SUFFER for that. It had to be a hideous experience, one of incredibly crushing pain, but also a HUMBLING one. On a meta level we’re all in Haven’s corner (OR DAMN WELL SHOULD BE) but in-universe she has to face she was as wrong as anyone could be and it had massive consequences. So what sense would it make for her to swagger back into the story calling out all the “good guys” for being shitty to her when it turns out they were retroactively justified and it would have undeniably been BETTER if they’d stopped her? I guess you could justify it in that she’s angry at their treatment nonetheless because it was BEFORE they knew her Evil Plans, or being angry at Xavier because she canonically knows that he sensed another mind inside her, so why didn’t he do anything? But I don’t think that makes sense for her character either. We know she’s not the type to blame others even when they have done her LEGITIMATE WRONG. When she talks to Xavier about the man she loved and who abandoned her pregnant, she has no animosity in her phrasing towards him, just shame and reprimand at HERSELF for being “selfish” in that she abandoned her work and the children in order to have a love affair. She’s not mad at HIM even NOW. And she’s very obviously quick to forgive others; when she flees from Xavier because he kept essentially ASSAULTING her by going into her mind past what she was comfortable with and she KEPT ASKING HIM TO STOP, afterwards she doesn’t think of him with ANY animosity. Quite the reverse, actually. She thinks about how she still does love and respect him. She intends to kill him, because she now knows she has to as he stands in opposition to her, but she’s very sad about it, thinking how she will be sure to slay him with compassion and will weep for him after, and then prays with her “child”. So like, god, if she did come back? She’d probably be so painfully repentant and apologetic, especially to him and X-Factor, and god that is SO UNCOMFY given the racial dynamics here. Which…tracks, because Haven’s whole story is very uncomfy in terms of the intersections of racism, misogyny, and xenophobia. But I also don’t think making her an aggro unrepentant Girlboss would be the answer either. Myself, I DO make her very often unsure and demurring and Taking A Lot of Shit but I also try to be conscious in portraying this as an aspect of trauma, that we have SEEN in canon is HOW she reacts to trauma, and not Just How Brown Women Are since the passive submissive brown woman is SUCH a thing and like, I’m a white Western woman, it’s a dicey thing to handle and I’m not even gonna pretend I get it right all the time—-which is, thank god I’m not actually writing her for Marvel, even if I want to. If I ever was, I’d only take the offer if I could work with a South Asian co-author, I don’t wanna fuck this up in a PUBLISHED WORK. But rest assured I’m not fetishizing this, or holding it up as a Good Thing on her part to be this way, or doing it thoughtlessly, I think about this a lot. And of course her developing from this WOULD BE GREAT AND END GOAL but also real development cannot be rushed. I hate quick fixes in canon, I hate them so much. It’s so cheap and not reflective of reality OR satisfying as an escape. Coming back to stereotypes, there’s also the worry about casting a WOC as a helper and caregiver and like. . .she is, she absolutely is. But I also always have worry about that for obvious reasons. And like. . .so I think Haven is this way because she is a truly good person who canonically has despised the inequality and suffering in the world since childhood and been trying to stop it since she was a kid. As a little she’s said she was tormented by knowing that beyond her privileged world there was so much pain, and tormented by her inability to stop it, and she prayed to God every night to do something. And as an adult—a teen, actually–she went out and did it HER DAMN SELF. And that’s…GREAT. I would never take that away, it’s a key aspect of her character. And alas, as mentioned, she also thinks HAVING ANYTHING FOR HERSELF and taking a break to FALL IN LOVE is SELFISH OF HER and then canon validated that by PUNISHING HER IN THE WORST WAY FOR IT. Again, thorny as hell character here. But I also think, while this is natural for her, it’s also firstly more comforting for her to be the caregiver and in that role because it means the focus is off HER trauma, the acknowledgement is not on HER pain, so she can ignore it too. It gives her control, keeps her in a role that is comforting to HER too. And lbr, she’s societally rewarded by conforming to this role, and would probably face societal consequences if she deviated from it. It’s like how I’m a very naturally feminine person, I think that’s just how I am, but it’s also delusional to think that the fact I’m societally valued and benefitted for this as a cis woman isn’t a factor in this. It’s like that. Like how I’ve also noticed how SUPER FEMME she is and I think she IS JUST LIKE THAT but also she’s a dark-skinned WOC who is six feet tall, so like she probably does have to be Extra Gender Conforming just to get treated like a proper woman. Like Mommy Fortuna putting a false horn on a real unicorn to make people see a unicorn who didn’t believe in them. That’s the angle I try to approach things from, that it’s not simply that she isn’t anything more than a caretaker, but she IS sincerely one BUT also that she locks herself into that box due to societal pressure AND trauma, and all three things can be true at once. Speaking of The Last Unicorn, I couldn’t tell you WHY but I tend to associate it with Haven. In particular, the bit where the Unicorn says “I am no longer like the others. I have been mortal, and part of me is mortal yet” but in reverse. She held a cosmic entity within her body for twenty years and she is fundamentally separate from humanity for that, even though she’s functionally once more a normal human again as she always really was. She cannot go back from that. And in some sick way, she misses the Adversary. I’ve written about this before, but for 20 years she believed this was her divine unborn child talking to her, a constant companion she looked at with love and trust. It’s hard not to miss that lie, even knowing what it was now. I usually think of “Not once did the beast look back before leaving me behind” from Petshop of Horrors and “ I’ve never forgotten him. Dare I say I miss him? I do. I miss him. I still see him in my dreams. They are nightmares mostly, but nightmares tinged with love. Such is the strangeness of the human heart. I still cannot understand how he could abandon me so unceremoniously, without any sort of goodbye, without looking back even once. ❞ from Life of Pi with regards to this, but I also think “.and to this hour the image of Carmilla returns to mind with ambiguous alterations--sometimes the playful, languid, beautiful girl; sometimes the writhing fiend I saw in the ruined church; and often from a reverie I have started, fancying I heard the light step of Carmilla at the drawing room door.” from Carmilla is good too. Her relationship with the Adversary was not romantic but the sentiment is the same, of knowing what a monster this was now, of knowing how you were preyed on, yet unable to stop missing the good times too, even though you KNOW. It reminds me a lot of how many abuse survivors remember their abusers. I think she thinks of it a lot like that. And god it just always kills me how, on top of everything, she lost her child. It was a new meat suit for the Adversary before it was even through her first trimester. I think you can mourn something that never existed, something you only thought existed, something that could have existed but failed to. I think she does. And speaking of the Adversary taking twenty years of her life, ultimately her life itself, and everything she stood for, and then her baby too. . .that’s why I’m always reminded of the Biblical woman clothed with the sun, and the dragon lying in wait to devour her child. Haven wore shining armor, and her child WAS devoured by the great dragon (which obviously represents Satan, which is a word that LITERALLY translates to “Adversary”), and it didn’t even need to wait til birth. And I wouldn’t actually use this metaphor for her if I was writing for canon, because it’s very Christian and Haven is not, but it’s what comes to MY mind as someone raised Catholic and whom this image very much scared when I was little, and I always mentally conflated the woman with Mary whom I also tend to think of in conflation with Haven even if, again, not something I’d write. But like I said, raised Catholic, so that imagery is very much ingrained in my consciousness. And probably why I gravitate so hard towards mother goddess figures. Anyway I’ll stop with the stream of consciousness now and go draw dgjsj

#meta

[utilitycaster]

You know, I hadn't even considered the patron aspect of it, but I think the people framing it as Laudna is sad that Imogen is mad at her are completely wrong here. Like, sure there is an element of that, I'll grant, given that Imogen is the person that stuck around and got to know her, but the running theme of this entire thing is trust and that trust being broken at a key moment.

Imogen feels betrayed because the shard represented comfort and a way out of her current situation. Regardless of it actually is the solution or not, having that taken from her by someone she trusted should have broken her.

Laudna, meanwhile, is experiencing the consequences of the pact she made. I don't think she explicitly and completely trusts Delilah, given previous conversations, but there was certainly a level of that present and Delilah abused it for her own ends. I think experiencing those consequences are why she's sad and that it has very little to actually do with Imogen atm, outside of oh, this is part of the consequences of my own actions.

Looking at it through shipping lens takes away that complexity and idk why you'd want to do that when both characters are fascinating on their own.

Hi anon,

YES THANK YOU that is what I'm getting at. It's fully valid for both of them to be upset! I said as much in my initial response here - that actually, because Laudna's intentions were in fact good but things went wrong due to previous choices she'd made, she's actually extremely sympathetic compared to some of the other scenarios I'd considered for this eventual blow-up - it's just that Imogen is also entirely sympathetic and her deeply hurt response is fully valid.

It's worth noting that Marisha herself, OOC as soon as Matt called for the end, said "I fucked around and found out". Because Laudna did! She got into this pact, somehow! And now it's caused problems for her, and she is completely valid to feel violated and upset - but that should be directed towards Delilah. (And fwiw, on screen, it is, with Laudna screaming at Delilah and only expressing remorse and guilt towards Imogen; it's only in bad meta that people are focusing on Imogen as the cause of Laudna's feelings). And similarly, as you said, Imogen asked that Laudna not do anything to the shard, and then something happened, and whether or not the shard was actually a solution is completely irrelevant and bringing it up is nothing but a distraction intended to invalidate the very real hurt and betrayal Imogen feels.

I think in the end many people really struggle to understand that two people can both have utterly valid and yet sharply conflicting feelings that spill over into being mad at each other (see: bowlgate or the high richter heist early in the Nein's story), and unfortunately, a lot of them further muddy the waters by overlaying shipping, such that whomever they perceive as standing in the way of clear skies for that ship - even one of the people in that ship - is the bad guy (see: the sharp change in responses to Jester later in the Nein's campaign).

The great and interesting part about this conflict is that both people came to it from a place of trust and good intentions, and both had their trust violated, but it was the consequence of Laudna's earlier actions plus a violation of her trust by her patron that ended up ruining things for Imogen, who had never entered into this agreement. The bad guy is Delilah, but really, that doesn't matter; if you lend something to your friend and it gets stolen because they forgot to lock their door, they were still wronged and they shouldn't have been stolen from, but it's fair to say that had you not lent it to them it would probably be fine, and they were responsible for it when it was lost, and to be mad about that. That's what happened here, and it is, as you say, fascinating and complex to explore!

#critical role #critical role spoilers #imogen temult #laudna

[astrababyy]

You know that video has points and all, but SJM herself isn’t sympathetic toward the characters she doesn’t like, and it shows through her writing, making it impossible for readers to “pass the test”. If it really was like that, Tamlin would not be as hated as he is because his character wouldn’t have been destroyed. Nesta wouldn’t be as hated. Again, the video has good points, but I feel like it’s also giving SJM prep that she doesn’t deserve since she doesn’t plan anything or think of anything without a Rhys lens on

i 100% agree, anon. i reblogged the video because of its emphasis on empathy in comparison to the other characters. i don’t personally believe sjm intended for it to be written in the way that booktokker (booktoker?) intended, but i do think the lessons and themes of empathy that the op was focusing on is a really good point overall.

people only want to see suffering when it fits in a neat little box. they never want the ugly sides of it, and they don’t know how to practice empathy towards that version of it that’s not glorified in media. it’s honestly really harmful towards real people. i think that, in itself, is a flaw that spans throughout the entire fandom, regardless of who they like and dislike.

i think i’m guilty of it too — that a lot of people identify with these characters and the lack of empathy acotar fans (and fans in other fandoms) display can be really hurtful. the main flaw in this series is that there’s no real, genuine consequences for having those flaws for a lot of characters. whereas other characters have their flaws blown so out of proportion that we’ve got people in this fandom who like them out of pure spite to the canon narrative.

sjm is capable of writing sympathy for other characters, i think. but she has a very skewed moral code in these books. i can’t say whether that reflects her as a person, but it’s a pretty loud indicator in her stories.

fans of these books definitely give her more credit than i believe she’s due. we see all these theories and ideas and headcanon, and so many people have this huge faith in sjm to make this series phenomenal. it’s kind of sad. i’ve come across stans who genuinely still like her stories but have become disenchanted with her skills as a writer, no longer trusting her to come through with good stories with these characters they’ve fallen in love with.

this post really went off the rails. sorry, anon. anyway, you’re right in that the tiktok i reblogged gave her way more credit than i think she’s due. but that’s not to say she doesn’t make good points on how little empathy this fandom seems capable of displaying, especially towards characters like nesta who isn’t perfect nor is her trauma pretty.

#anti sjm #sjm critical #nesta archeron #pro nesta #acotar fandom #anti acotar fandom #astrababyy #astrababyy asks

[flightfoot]

Do you really think Marinette meant for people to “shun” Lila when she was trying to expose her? I guess shunning would be a natural side effect of it, but I got the impression that she was trying to keep people from getting caught up in Lila’s lies - keep them from either buying emotionally into her stories like Adrien did in Volpina or by becoming her servants (like in Chameleon when Lila used her false illnesses to have her classmates sacrifice for her).

Like there’s no question that Marinette’s initial anger at Lila was in part driven by jealousy, but the jealousy was exacerbated by a very real desire not to see Adrien taken advantage of after she saw Lila steal his book, throw it away and lie to him. Or else she would have never been frustrated enough to snap at her the way she did in that episode. Just incredibly peeved and devastated that Adrien found a cute, Italian girl to hang out with.

As much as Lila grinds her gears, I feel like her emphasis is on her classmates not believing Lila’s lies rather than humiliating Lila- even if that’s a natural side effect that she’s not being cognizant of because she’s so focused on revealing her lies. So Alya wouldn’t have to shun her. Just be a lot more discerning when it comes to her stories.

Of course at the point in Season 5, Marinette is happy to straight up shun Lila (i.e Illusion). But that’s after Lila has threatened her, tried to get her expelled, tried to get her killed as Ladybug and teamed up with Chloe to sabotage her in Risk. She’s had multiple moments where she tried to make peace with Lila after Chameleon and Lila is holding that grudge so her goodwill is gone.

Yeah at this point in time Lila more than deserves to be shunned, she crossed that line once she threatened Marinette in the bathroom, and has only catapulted further past it since.

As for what Marinette originally intended... I mean, I do think she wasn't thinking about it in terms of "they need to shun Lila", but keeping them from getting caught in Lila's lies, though like you said, that would certainly have been the natural consequences of the ways she was trying to go about doing that, especially with the particular way she tried to expose her in the lunchroom. Marinette gets tunnel vision sometimes. Publicly humiliating her the way Marinette did would lead to Lila being shunned as the consequence, and would appear to be the intended consequence from the outside, most likely, with how publicly she did it, and she'd still have some culpability there since it's a reasonably foreseeable consequence, but I do think it's more likely that Marinette's main mindset was on protecting her friends (in her mind, anyway) more than just punishing Lila... probably. She WAS still pretty upset about Lila lying to get the seats rearranged in a way that ended up separating Marinette from Adrien and Alya, so I do think there might have been a bit of vengeance in there, even if that wasn't the story she was telling herself.

As for whether Alya would have to shun her... I think Marinette's feelings on that would depend. If Alya took an approach similar to Adrien's and said like, that she knew Lila was a liar, but that avoiding her wouldn't help her be a better person, so she still would hang out with Lila and maybe, hopefully, nudge her to stop lying, I think Marinette would accept that. Marinette isn't an especially vengeful person, not once she's had time to calm down and think, anyway.

#ask #lila rossi #marinette dupain cheng #ml analysis #miraculous ladybug

[cumulohimbus]

My two-cents on AI-generated art as someone with a college degree in studio art, and as a library technician who frequently deals with matters of copyright:

No one-- not you, not me, not even someone considered a master-- can objectively define what it means for something to be "art". Everyone is going to view different things as art. There is no possible way to concretely say "this is art" and "this isn't art"; this is an argument that has spanned time immemorial. If someone says the AI images they generated are intended to be art, then that should be validated**. If someone says that they don't consider AI-generated media to be art, then that should be validated. If someone states AI-generated media objectively is or is not art, well, they simply do not have the authority to decide that-- no one does!

**Whether or not something is intended to be art, does not negate that there are certain ethics surrounding art-making that are objectively crucial in each individual artist's reputation, and sometimes even beyond. If a piece of AI-generated media is used unethically (ex. made from stolen work and then sold for a profit), then (reasonable) negative consequences for those actions are also valid and necessary. What artists should be concerned about is "what are reasonable consequences for these circumstances?".

As someone who is wildly passionate about open access to things, I still think art theft is usually harmful (some exceptions apply). And, much like art, what constitutes as theft and what constitutes as fair use, is also a very blurry and subjective topic. There is a great example of this that I learned about in college of a photographer (I don't remember their name) who had/had access to the original photographs of another, now-deceased photographer. They took photos of this other photographer's photos, printed them, and put them in a gallery with their original titles but included the word "revisited" or something similar, and claimed them as original. These new photographs were technically the work of this newer photographer, but the content of their photos were entirely the work of someone else. I don't remember what resulted from any controversy that might have followed this situation.

There are plenty of things besides copyright that have an impact on an artist's reputation and sometimes these extend into the art world as a whole. Certain works have historically, and will continue to cause the entire art community to lose support, funding, and sponsorship. Sometimes it's an issue of copyright, other times it's subject matter that's considered obscene or pornographic, other times still it's content that draws the ire of others for being seemingly effortless in creation, or absurd and meaningless in content. Do I think the banana nailed to the gallery wall is "art"? I can't say for sure. I have a lot of questions about it. I don't personally find it an anathema, but I'm sure there were/are plenty of people, both the artistically inclined and the non-artistically inclined, that hate it and think it makes a mockery of "art".

Almost everything I've been seeing lately is someone taking a stance for or vehemently against AI-generated media, and while I find the topic to be one of great significance, I do think it's being approached very divisively, which is unnecessary. Instead of having conversations about whether AI-generated media is "real" or "fake", "bad" or "good", etc., etc., I propose we instead start discussing things like:

"How do we use AI-generated media as an art tool ethically?"

"What things should we require AI-generation software/programmers/creators/users to be fully transparent about?"

"What rules can be put in place to ensure that the needs of those who don't want their work used to teach AI are met?"

"How do we make AI-generated media accessible to those who want to use it while ensuring that creators maintain the rights to their own work, both AI-generated and non-AI-generated?"

"What are reasonable consequences for those who unethically use/profit off of AI-generated media?"

I've seen posts cross my dash of people vilifying AI-generated media, and then a day or two later seen those same people reblogging AI-generated images they seemed to think were neat. Like it or not, AI-generated media is here now, and it's not going to disappear easily, if ever. I don't think it helps anyone to get upset at artists using or liking AI for art-making, and I think it's way too soon to brand all AI-generated media as inherently theft, even some of the things created using programs that pull from non-public domain images, but that's just my opinion. And, I also think that AI-generated media will inevitably, and unfortunately result in making art theft easier, especially while it is still in its beginning stages, when there isn't as much wide spread knowledge about what it does and how it works.

Like every other art medium, there are going to be different ways to use AI, and some of them will go against what is intended/accepted/ethical, like the example I gave of the photographers above. I think individual creators should be held accountable for how they use AI in their art-making instead of people instantly frothing at the mouth if someone happens to say "hey, I think AI-generated images are cool, they give me lots of inspiration" or "hey, I don't really like AI-generated images, it's not for me, and I don't want my work being used to teach AI."

#art #ai generated #ai images #discourse #copyright #ai generated media #dream ai #art theft #discussion