aninfinitenumberofmonkeys - Tumblr blog

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Photo

InfinityWar Artbook arrived today , amazing drawings *

#art #marvel #it looks like a tiny drax is riding on his shoulder #has drax been shrunk or is Loki huge?#either way i love it

892 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

Kid Loki and Gator Loki were an iconic duo, but sometimes one just misses the funky little evil murder magpie

#askjfgh #this is gorgeous #fantastic art #loki series spoilers

352 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

Did Loki Do the Right Thing?

I’m seeing lots of posts stating they’re happy that in the end of the series, Loki did the right thing, and other fans who are upset that Loki sided with TVA. I feel like I’m the only one who had a different interpretation. I want to explain why.

One of the main themes of the show is “control”.

Was that element of control what you wanted to lean into with the series? Or was there something more specific you felt the show could explore that the movies hadn’t a chance to do? It was certainly a big component of it. I love the Danny Boyle Steve Jobs movie. There’s a bit in there that [ Aaron] Sorkin pulled from the Walter Isaacson Steve Jobs biography, just talking about how Steve Jobs was adopted and how people who are adopted are out of control at the most important moment of their lives. And that movie is about how Steve Jobs is so obsessive about end-to-end control over all this technology. I drew a really interesting parallel between Loki and Steve Jobs: The desire to rule. “I know best. I want to rule. I want to be in control as an adult because I was, in fact, so out of control as a young Frost Giant baby.” [X]

While it’s true that Loki felt out of control for most of his life, MW’s interpretation of the reasons is wrong. For one being adopted was not the reason Loki felt out of control. It was being lied to about it, and being treated differently, and being saved to be used as a political pawn. And despite knowing about his race, his parents let Thor and Loki to grew up with racist believes about Jotuns being monsters.

When Loki found out the truth about his race, he realized that as a Jotun he never had a chance to be seen and accepted for who he was and for his abilities. No matter how much he had tried during his life, he was never going to be seen as equal and worthy as Thor in Odin’s eye. His life was doomed from the start to be in the shadows. The purpose for his existence, was decided for him even before he could utter his first words. Odin had planned for him to be in the shadow, and then to be a king of monsters under Thor’s shadow.

So, he tried to prove himself worthy, not for a throne, but to his father. Loki never wanted the throne( @worstloki explained in this thread perfectly why Loki being powerhungry and wanting to rule was a pointless arc in the show). He saw it as the symbol of being worthy and accepted, because that was how Odin made his sons see it. But when he realized even that was pointless and Odin still didn’t accept him, Loki decided to take control of at least his death, and let himself fall.

Then he fell to Thanos' Sanctuary and when he became “ready”, he was given the scepter which was “influencing his mind” and at the same time The Other could violate Loki’s mind, see his thoughts and surroundings and inflicting pain on him. We saw he threatened Loki with promise of “more pain”. Again, under duress and mind influence Loki was not in control to decide his own fate.

MW wrongly interpreted Loki’s lines in the Avengers, which are actually projections of his own situation(1, 2, 3), as complete truths about Loki’s motivations. Considering how he sees Loki’s characterization and motives, let’s analyze what’s been happening in the show and the possible interpretation of Loki's actions in the finale.

Loki explains his reason to rule in ep1:

"I would have made it easy for them. The first and most oppressive lie ever uttered was the song of freedom. For nearly every living thing, choice breeds shame and uncertainty and regret. There’s a fork in every road, yet the wrong path always taken."

And when Mobius asks Loki whether he falls in this category, Loki doesn’t answer. Later Loki compares himself to TVA.

"It's part of the illusion. It's the cruel elaborate trick conjured by the weak to inspire fear. A desperate play for control."

The show wants to imply that Loki wants to rule to have the control he desperately needs and also stop people from making mistakes like the ones he made.

Having this in mind, let’s see how TVA is portrayed in the show. An authoritarian oppressive organization that takes away people’s free will, annihilating entire realities, murdering people, kidnapping and brainwashing them in the name of their propaganda about “sacred” timeline.

Now in ep6, the narrative presents us with this question: What if this is a necessary evil?

Ravonna tries to convinces herself that it was. She is the typical example of how someone who has built their entire life on a lie would react. She had to believe it was for a reason. Because otherwise she has to accept that all she did was for nothing.

Kang believes the same thing. That by ending the multiversal war and continuously annihilating realities, he did a favor to people. Is he right?

The narrative presents us with some key phrases: “necessary lie”, “dogma”, “I keep you safe from greater evil”, “stifling order or cataclysmic chaos” , “you may hate the dictator but something far worse is gonna fill that void if you depose of him”, “doing horrible things for a good reason”.

These are the basic propaganda of every authoritarian/totalitarian/fascistic power ever. This is how they excuse, normalize and legitimize their crimes in oppressing, torturing and murdering people. Inciting fear of a greater evil and a promise of safety against it if you obey their rules. So if you think siding with TVA is the right choice, or if it's a necessary evil, think again(and read some books to not fall for this bs). As @wnnbdarklord said in this thread:

"who gives the TVA or Kang or Loki or who the fuck ever the moral authority to decide to take away free will from people? who gives them the authority to keep doing it once it’s done?

NO ONE! It’s ridiculous! the state of the universe obviously naturally tends towards a multiversal mish mash of timelines! “but the war death ruin” like the sAcREd TImELinE isn’t already filled with that. and even if it weren’t already filled with that, the simple fact remains: no one should get the authority to decide to take away free will from people.

It’s absurd!"

Now, back to Loki’s character arc about control. He is puzzled by Kang giving up control and all that freedom, and asks about it twice. He understands that Kang is basically afraid of himself, of the mistakes he could make. He is doing what Loki says in the first ep was the reason he wanted to rule. Loki can see himself in what Kang has become. But deep down Loki never wanted to rule. Certainly not like this. And he doesn’t like their options either.

So, how Loki’s actions in stopping Sylvie can be interpreted?

My interpretation was that Loki wanted to find a third way. And it would be in character for Loki that when he is presented by options he doesn’t like, he makes a new way and choose that option. My reasoning for it is that the show basically introduced chaos as universe’s way to get free and Lokis the agents of chaos. That’s why there were so many of them in the void. But their limited POV prevented them to find the main villain or takes his place. This Loki though, is past all of that and can see the bigger picture and given the chance he may be able to find another way when Kang says “this is the only way”.

But there are some things that worries me this wasn’t the intent. Like Loki saying “The universe is in balance, everything we know to be true”. In-universe I would think this is the result of Thanos’ brainwashing about order and balance. Out-universe I’m not sure I like what this is implying. Specially if we consider what the director is saying about Kang:

“I was quite excited that we got to show him because he is the one that brings it all [together],” director Kate Herron adds. “[He’s] the theme of our show. No one is completely good or completely bad, and people do fall into that gray area. I thought his reasoning with [Loki and Sylvie] that you can take me out, but I'll be back here anyway...you're going to awaken all these versions of me. And they are much scarier than me. I really believe him when he says that.” [X]

KH says she believes Kangs' reasoning. Although believing sth to be true, doesn’t mean the way to counter it is the right way. So this might not mean KH is siding with Kang’s POV. And there is too much of authoritarian propaganda words in the narrative that it’s so obvious, to later being presented as the truth or the message the show is aiming for.

I interpreted Loki’s panic at the end of the episode, not as him siding with TVA, but at the prospect of countless more evil versions of Kang. Loki has seen Thanos. But even Thanos wasn’t omniscient. How would you fight someone who knows everything and can predict your every move?

I hope my interpretation of the narrative is right and they don’t present TVA as a necessary evil or that Loki wanted to side with it. Because if there isn’t a third way, if Loki and Sylvie only had those two options, removing the dictator is always, always the right choice. There is nothing more valuable than free will and freedom. Safety doesn’t exist where there is no freedom.

#loki series spoilers #yes #this!

246 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

I remember when this was announced and then being bummed when they shortened it. So even though they’re calling it season 2 now it was all part of season one initially. Technically, what we got today is the mid season episode, if that helps.

#oh thank goodness #this makes so much sense #things were set up that never came to fruition #and i wasnt sure how much if at all they would be picked up later #but if it was originally meant to all be done at once #im more hopeful it will stay consistent #and we'll get to see the payoff

3K notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

Marvel, i swear to god-

I made a thing pt.10.

#loki series spoilers

3K notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

Maybe I'm being too generous, but I interpreted that less as Loki siding with the TVA and more him wanting to take the time to search for a third option - like it was presented as a binary choice, "take away everyone's free will or everything gets destroyed in a ginormous cosmic war", but Loki is a trickster and the whole point of tricksters is that they aren't confined by rules and binaries. Especially with how unambiguously evil the TVA is portrayed earlier in the show, it wouldn't make sense narratively to have Loki end up siding with them.

That being said, I agree that it was certainly presented in a way that this interpretation isn't unfounded, and placing Loki on the side of authoritarianism over chaos would be super not great for all the reasons you've stated.

I’ve been seeing people justify Loki siding with the TVA as “there would be too much chaos otherwise WAR DEATH RUIN”

and my entire counterpoint is “please consider why disney wants you to side with the authoritarian organization trying to keep order by denying everyone free will”

but also

who gives a shit? who gives the TVA or Kang or Loki or who the fuck ever the moral authority to decide to take away free will from people? who gives them the authority to keep doing it once it’s done?

NO ONE! It’s ridiculous! the state of the universe obviously naturally tends towards a multiversal mish mash of timelines! “but the war death ruin” like the sAcREd TImELinE isn’t already filled with that. and even if it weren’t already filled with that, the simple fact remains: no one should get the authority to decide to take away free will from people.

It’s absurd!

and I personally find it insulting that disney made Loki side with the fucking TVA in the end.

guess the whole “burn it down to the ground” bit from the trailers was a lie too, eh?

#loki series spoilers #loki series negativity #tagging to be safe #love these thoughts because yes!#the tva was super messed up for all these reasons!#but im still hoping that isnt what the writers were getting at

358 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

Loki Season 1 Finale *SPOILERS!*

I am not going to get too philosophical here but it is my sincere hope that the first season finale is not an indicator of the overall moral of the story.

I did enjoy the series and the finale was explosive but if the whole moral of the story is going to be that a benevolent dictator is better because at least he/she keeps everything in order and people are too dumb to choose/fail/succeed on their own because there always has to be someone or something on top making sure that you are protected against your own self, then that renders the whole concept of free will irrelevant and makes the whole avengers and other self-appointed ‘good guys’ of the MCU as nothing more than tyrants.

I don’t remember the exact quote but I believe that it was from the legendary author, C.S. Lewis who wrote that there is nothing worse than a benevolent dictator. Under the guise of order, protecting, and ‘love’, the people willingly let themselves be ruled by this fellow and his tyrannical machine. Time cannot be constrained. The universe, for better AND for worse, wants to break free because at the end of it all, CHAOS IS EXISTENCE. Yes, it is messy and sometimes we all wish we had a magic wand that prevented us from facing obstacles but as the infamous agent of chaos (Nolan’s Joker said in The Dark Knight), it’s fair. A dictatorship, even a benevolent one that ‘solves’ everything will never be what it claims to be: equal. It will never bring stability. When everything is determined. Everything is meaningless. There is always going to be someone that gets stomped or screwed over (like the Lokis) at the expense of those that IT (fate/Kang/Time keepers/ whatever you want to call it) has deemed worthy of being everyone’s saviors. Time will become stagnant. Everything will become pointless. Nobody and nothing can grow without conflict. Even the TVA is the result of chaos. Chaos has to happen. As painful as it is, as much as we want to avoid it. Without it nothing will ever mature.

#loki series spoilers

7 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

So apparently my response to the show's finale was to immediately write fanfiction

#loki series spoilers #fanfic

3 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Note

For physician training it depends on the medical school. Most I'm familiar with have suture clinics with practice on cadavers / cadaver skin in year 1 and 2, with optional extra practice for those who seek it out, but you probably won't be suturing actual wounds until at least year 3. Even then, you'll be supervised and someone more experienced will take anything more complex that comes in until you've had more experience.

That being said, lots of pre-med students have done suture clinics with practice on things like pig's feet (through clubs and other organizations, usually) so it's entirely believable that a student who isn't even in medical school would know the basics.

Welcome back and I have a question!

For medical professionals, when do they learn how to stitch a wound? Or is it only specifically nurses or specifically doctors? Is it the last year of medical school or fairly early?

Hey!

So this is going to be the domain of the following practitioners (note that this list may not be complete):

* Physicians (MD, DO);

* Physician Assistants (PAs);

* Nurse Practitioners (NPs).

I'm unaware of any areas in which nurses, paramedics, or similar are trained and allowed to suture wounds. While the actual suture work is relatively simple, the decision-making around it is surprisingly complex (I used to have a textbook on it, believe it or not, but I ditched it for a cross-country move.)

In physician training (MD or DO), I believe it's in Year 1 or Year 2, and definitely prior to clinicals, but it may vary a bit based on their program design.

This article might be interesting: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamadermatology/fullarticle/2174932

As for PAs and NPs, I'm not entirely sure, but again, most likely before any clinicals.

Hope this helps!

xoxo, Aunt Scripty

#writing reference

140 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

Here's a fic that might be about what you're looking for?

Was it ever shown on screen when Thor found out that Loki was adopted? I know he knew in Avengers but I still haven't figured out whether he found out during the first Thor or did Frigga and Odin tell him after they thought Loki had died after falling off the bridge.

Is there a fic that explores his reaction?

17 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

Okay, so what follows is an ill-advised internet rant; please consider this a warning if you want to avoid frustration and negativity.

I am so, so very tired of the way people on here talk about redemption arcs (with "redemption arc" taken in the way I usually see it used; a storyline in which a character, usually initially framed as a villain or antagonist, betters themself, often but not always involving switching from a "bad" side in a conflict to the "good" side). Specifically, at the moment, I am frustrated with the idea I've seen expressed again and again on here that it's a process that hinges on suffering; that a "bad" character must be beat down and experience pain, suffering, humiliation etc in order for the character development to be realistic or "deserved".

Because sincerely, that's not how character development works! There is no one thing that's going to help every character grow and improve. This isn't to say there isn't a place for this type of narrative; arrogant or spoiled characters can absolutely learn humility and that their actions have consequences in this sort of arc (think Kuzco from The Emperor's New Groove).

But arrogance is not the only flaw a character might need to overcome. For a character who has already been beaten down or is isolated or insecure, more pain isn't going to lead to development, and showing a character grow from something like being treated compassionately (think Stitch from Lilo and Stitch) isn't "babying" them or a fake redemption arc. Lots of different things can help people grow and change, including bad people, because at its core this sort of redemption arc is just character development and it works like any other sort of character development does.

And the idea that people who have done bad things can only progress from those things by suffering and being beat down is really, really ugly. It feels to me like it comes from the same ethos that gave us overly punitive justice systems and toxic "spare the rod, spoil the child" parenting styles, and while I don't think all the people who espouse "redemption must come through suffering" as a narrative ideal support these things in real life, the idea that you have to suffer to make up for wrongdoing is one with real world manifestations. It very genuinely bothers me to see this held up as an ideal, as a "must do" component of that process otherwise the arc is "badly written".

#hello i have many feelings about this #and about redemption arc narratives in general #and the discourse that surrounds them #this is a bit rambling and im not sure how coherent it is #but i saw another post today talking about how a beatdown makes a good redemption arc and im tired

711 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

okay so I want the Time-Keepers specifically and the TVA in general to be the actual bad guys, with the ultimate conclusion of various Lokis unionizing and taking them all down so we can have our multiverse back and also some free will

and I get that of the named characters we’ve met, Renslayer is the only one who seems to have a better idea of what’s going on than anyone else and who therefore might be one of the people pulling the strings, rather than a brainwashed variant like everyone else

but here’s the thing, I don’t want her to be evil either because, hear me out on this, Gugu Mbatha-Raw is really, really pretty

#all valid points #she is really really pretty tho #loki series spoilers

117 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text

Okay but Sylvie knowing she was adopted, barely remembering her mother and having to teach herself magic really only makes sense if she's a variant who diverged from the main timeline when Loki was very young, right? Most likely by finding out about being adopted while still a little kid.

So now I'm just imagining little tiny Loki being arrested right after figuring everything out, managing to duck the TVA guards on account of being an underestimated tiny child, and probably hiding out in TVA-land in disguise for literal centuries with the knowledge that discovery would mean arrest and summary execution.

Just yikes, no wonder she's so determined to burn the place down.

#loki series spoilers

42 notes · View notes

aninfinitenumberofmonkeys · 3 years

Text