ofbreathandflame

[ofbreathandflame]

Well, again, the issue is not that Rhys has done bad things, it’s how those actions are framed in the story. Let’s think about this – if Rhysand’s actions UTM were framed as negative then perhaps we would not be having this conversation.

Of course, we can argue that Rhysand (1) has developed negative coping mechanisms / perspective (2) Rhysand’s trauma informs the things that he does (both pre, during, and after UTM), and (3) Rhysand’s position was uniquely isolating because of the nature of the role he was forced to play. These are points that I believe can be argued and offer an interesting view; but for any of that to happen, we have to acknowledge that the behaviors are negative. That’s often the problem with the arguments that begin to arise – no one wants to admit that Rhysand has developed (or just has) negative qualities and behaviors. No one wants to contend with the reality of consequences. “Rhysand has always admitted that he would be willing to do terrible things for his family” – and yet there’s no elaboration on those “terrible things.” No one wants to talk about those proposed negative qualities. The story (and the audience) don’t want to admit that Rhys doesn’t really have a solid moral high ground over Tamlin, or admittedly other villains. Just because Rhysand “admits” he’s prone to basically being abusive doesn’t…make it any less abusive.

My proposed argument about Rhysand’s actions UTM are this: he chose to sexually assault Feyre, he chose to “protect” Feyre in ways that were extremely sexually explicit. I believe these are choices that Rhys chooses to make – and I believe they say something about him. It’s noted, to me, that Amarantha scarcely makes Rhys do anything that he does to Feyre. I also believe that his actions regarding Feyre were done with an air of autonomy; as in, I believe Rhysand takes these measures into his own hands. Ultimately, I believe that while Rhysand has to contend with the horrors, he himself becomes beholden to them at some point and ends up perpetrating the same behaviors.

We cannot argue that Rhysand sexually assaulted Feyre, and then argue that it doesn’t say something about him. It does. In the realm of the story – from a writing standpoint – I think a good author can still make a character like that sympathetic and understandable (see: Nahadoth and Itempas from N.K. Jemisin’s Hundred Thousand Kingdom). If I were analyzing Rhysand’s actions, I would simply make the argument that perhaps Rhysand’s abuse of Feyre mirror’s his own abuse by Amarantha hands, and he potentially sees Feyre (and her hope) as something to be threatened – or even shamed by. If Rhysand’s actions were written in a way that clearly exemplified that his actions are not meant to be praised (and are NOT are reflection of love) then he could be salvaged. I actually believe a lot of the abusive things Rhysand does makes sense given the environment and if the story leaned into this from a storytelling perspective and did away with needing to moralize, then this would all be fine. Framing Rhysand’s abuse of Feyre as something to be praised, admired, and loved for is actually quite insane. If we frame his actions as purely preservational and self-serving, that would make so much sense. Imagine being in Rhysand’s position; I guarantee everyone would do whatever they could to stop such extreme amounts of abuse and sexual violence. And even then, the story could still create a narrative that warns of the danger of sexual violence and consent, it would just be subtextual and more allegorical than concretely written in the text. Starting Feyre and Rhysand off in such a tragic place, having Feyre and Rhysand acknowledged truly what happened, having them discuss ways for both of them to move forward while building up the mating bond in the background. Have Feyre acknowledge this untrusting, sly, slick part of Rhysand and have her not assume her mate does everything out of the kindness of his heart. Build their romance out of a place of mutual atonement – play on the theme of guilt Feyre feels and the whole premise of the court. Let the connection between Feyre and Rhys be that they truly acknowledge each others darkness (and also let Feyre do selfish things – maybe she knew damn well Clare Beddor’s family might suffer a bad fate but its not her family and Feyre would do anything for them; Let Feyre kill those fairies with ease because she cares about her life. Let her contend with reality that she would actually do anything for her family and then have that be a connection between Rhys and Feyre.

Something that has always bothered me about the “we don’t talk enough about Rhysand’s trauma” argument that gets thrown around when we earnestly discuss the validity of his actions is the presumption of innocence in that statement. The unwritten statement is that the trauma somehow explains and simultaneously absolves him of the implications of his actions. I objectively agree with the sentiment – Rhysand’s trauma is not talked about enough and it should be. The argument dancing in the corner is the fact that people believe that Rhysand’s extreme amount of trauma absolves him – even going as far as essentially say that Rhysand’s abuse operates out of fear (or because of fear) which is essentially the exact same ideology the book bashed Tamlin for. In the end, the cycle just comes back around and the abuse gets pushed into the backdrop.

#anti sjm #anti rhysand #anti feysand #anti feyre #anti acosf #anti acomaf #this is more of an analysis of character than anti character rant #I’m just tired of people trying to essentially disregard that rhysand has done bad things #while simultaneously trying to make justification for it

[ofbreathandflame]

The Paradoxical Nature of Feyre

It’s interesting to consider just how much of Feyre’s character must overcompensate for Rhysand’s shortcomings as a character. I’ve always wondered at the impossibility of the morality involved in the characterization of feyre; in which, Feyre exists – as @feyres-divorce-lawyer has already elaborated on this this post – in this violent conundrum in which is operates as both the most qualified, but is oftentimes then characterized as the most inept to help.

To elaborate – Feyre’s character has to subsume an almost reverential when she is discussed in thorough conversations that question to her motivations, tactility, and efficiency. And because Feyre is never actually given qualities (or I should say – those qualities are never at the forefront when discussing why she is placed in these hierarchal / leadership positions) that prove she deserves to be a leader there’s no actual, tangible evidence to prove that Feyre is inherently qualified for any of these roles. When Helion asks Rhysand – “why did you make her High Lady” the story does not lean onto to any tangible reasons as to why we the reader should believe this other than ‘Rhys loved Feyre’

Here enters the actual problem with Feyre’s character: her being High Lady is a statement of Rhys goodness, not a statement on Feyre’s prowess. Because the story leans on such individualistic, arbitrary ideals, there’s nothing being said about Feyre as a character. So much of these conversations centers around Feyre being qualified but there’s nothing in the story that suggests otherwise. Feyre being reckless and brave prove that she is….reckless and brave – both those qualities don’t really make a good leader and they prove…nothing about Feyre’s skills. Realistically, of course Feyre knows close to nothing – of course she’s going to make very bad decisions and mistakes, of course her per view is limited. So much is put into proving that Feyre is the best that there’s often no conversation about how rigid that makes Feyre as a character.

Those are flaws that make Feyre a better character. One of my favorite moments when reading A Storm of Swords was the moment Davos realizes he needs to be able to read because ‘he’s a lord now.’ I love how he reflects on how hard the process is and how the children seem to read so easily and he has to sit down and sound out the words. Davos is such a good character because he represents the kind of struggles someone – lowborn, smuggler, illiterate, might have when integrating themselves into a new hierarchal world. But this also says something about him as a character – he chooses to begin the journey to learn how to read because he’s realized he needs tools in order to combat is inexperience. Even the fact that it’s not Feyre who realizes she needs to learn how to read but Rhys who forces her says so much about her character, negatively.  

So when we have these conversations about Feyre, no one ever actually proves what makes Feyre qualified to lead. Begrudgingly feeding your family because you feel obligated doesn’t prove that you can lead an entire town; it proves perhaps resilience, perhaps resourcefulness but even then id argue Feyre isn’t even that (see: she seems to not learned any other skills other than hunting, complains about her shoes instead of just mending her own or switching with Nesta or Elain; she can’t cook, etcs). Rhysand making Feyre High Lady because he loves her says nothing about her as a character. It doesn’t expound her talents and skills – and ultimately doesn’t make anyone believe the title is tangible. Even the story doesn’t believe that to be true.  Nothing about Feyre’s trials UTM prove that she is capable leader – if anything they prove the opposite (I do not mean this negatively – if anything, I’ve always felt that Nesta’s arc with the Valkyries fit Feyre much more than her own arc did. I could see Feyre being someone who operates under her own set of rules. I’ve always felt that Feyre seems to chafe under rules , so it doesn’t make sense that she would bound herself to such a leadership role as High Lady).

Back to the main point – the whole I’m making is that I believe that Feyre is talked about this way because so much of her character has to be muted to connect with Rhys. I think this conversation is always a consequence of Rhyland’s characterization and the novel's (and stans) rush to defend him. So many things have to be true about Feyre in order for her romance to Rhysand to be believable - and I argue that those changes are to the detriment of the traits Feyre's is initially characterized as having. And because Rhysand never has to undergo an actual character arc the pressure is placed on Feyre's character to align with the more negative traits Rhys possesses. Realistically, given how Feyre is characterized and given the whole “I hate the preening, gawking Spring Court” – I think its weird that she would immediately (1) do the exact thing in basically nothing with Rhys (2) allow herself to be turned into the most traumatic version of herself and (3) delight in random people’s pain. But because the story never asks Feyre to introspect she simply doesn’t talk about it.  And even if the story wants to go there – so much of Feyre’s healing hinges on affirming that she is good and so introducing these bad, carnal, selfish thoughts into the mix seem to undermine that.

#anti sjm #anti rhysand #anti feysand #anti acosf #anti sjm: feyre a #anti sjm: feyre archeron #anfi acomaf #anti acomaf #anti acowar

[ofbreathandflame]

This might not be normal but I’m dying to know your opinion on the ship wars. I don’t know why I’m obsessed with your opinion on the matter but I am very interested in your thoughts on it. 🙂

hi anon!!!

(pls note these are my opinions)

i don't have extreme opinions on the ship themselves. like lucien, elain, gwyn, azriel, and morrigan are all very boring characters to me. i feel like all of these pairings would be like watching paint dry. like let's think about it - elain's pov would literally just have to rework and rehash so many events in the story to make her likable (to the general audience). we've already discussed their vague human life and its clear sjm didn't really event that much lore about their lives before the story. elain has no conflicts with any members save for the whole weird and awkward mate / azriel situation. there's no established villain. azriel has no personality. lucien is in limbo and has no personality. the whole thing about lucien being helion son is ultimately useless and doesn't really change anything (the story is also arguing that i should root for helion despite the fact he just is okay with loa being abused). beron is a caricature villain who made his life harder by just reviving his age old enemy whom he dislikes and has since he was born. so how serious am i supposed to take him as a villain?

koschei is just there and is also another villain with no personality. morrigan also has no personality. gwyn is also just there and I mean I wouldn't say there's a lot of build-up for her either. but at the very least she has some inner conflicts to resolve. rhys is obviously not going to be a real barrier. there's literally no appeal to any of these characters IMO.

if the story would handle an illyrian plotline with emerie and azriel at the wing, i'd probably be interested but unfortunately sjm is the writer so it wouldn't be good. but yeah weirdly enough I would enjoy an emerie x az story (not romantic - but I wouldn't mind; I would love an emerie x female illyrian but alas there are no named illyrian females in this entire series besides her). i think the story unironically sets up an interesting dynamic between the illyrians and the night court but the story genuinely doesn't seem them as victims in any capacity - but I've got to admit its an interesting setup. think about it:

illyrians mothers raise these sons who grow up to hate them. women are isolated in these communities and robbed of their ability to fly; but these women are also semi-indoctrinated to sone extent to exalt this system of brutality and violence. mother's send their sons off to the blood rite to die so that they can serve and protect an utopia (velaris) that they have no access to. their high lord passes law - but is naught to enforce them because he recognizes who integral this oppression is to his political and militaristic aspirations. their high lord leaves their burgeoning communities without leadership for almost half a century to join forces with amarantha but then comes back after his tenure and SLAUGHTERS and tortures hordes of people for doing the same thing despite the fact he removed any court protection from them.

its interesting to me! id read that. it also kind of reminds me of the dynamic between paul atreides / jessica and their use of the fremen in dune (please read if you haven't! very fun and surprisingly easy read!)

#anti sjm #anti acosf #anti sjm: azriel #anti sjm: emerie of illyria #anti sjm: elain archeron #anti sjm: lucien vanserra #anti inner circle #anti rhysand #anti feysand

[ofbreathandflame]

anyways i hope y’all know fmc’s should still be fmc’s even after they become mothers…. like tell me you know that pls

#omg you literally ate this🙏🏾🙏🏾

[ofbreathandflame]

let them knowwwwwwwwwwww

motherhood doesn't take away from a fmc ability to be an actual character. mothers are not paragons of virtuousness and should not have to be.

catelyn (asoiaf) is literally one of my all-time favorite characters because of how multifaceted she is. her emotions, her toil, her flaws, her reasonings (even when bad/or abusive) all make sense. she can be the momma bear of her children, and at the same time, we also understand how she can be abusive and/or unloving (see: jon). even when her actions may see reckless or a 'woman's' folly as the men see it - catelyn's emotions are so real. like even the way feyre's motherhood is described his almost reverential to the point of decharacterization. the idea that she was wrong to imprison nesta in the intervention is always undermined by the fact she was mother - and i hate that. you guys argue that feyre is 'strong' enough to be high lady and reign through her pregnancy, but then also believe that she's somehow too weak to be held accountable for her actions. its madness. and proves they don't see feyre as an nuanced character with flaws and sentience.

anyways i hope y’all know fmc’s should still be fmc’s even after they become mothers…. like tell me you know that pls

[ofbreathandflame]

first- hiiiiiiiiii!!

second - this was literally my face when I saw this conversation when hofas was released. you mean feyre can't be in her own series because *checks notes* she has to recover from her fictional pregnancy??? like whattttttt??? and they were serious too which is the scary part lmaoo

'of course feyre wasn't in hofas - she just had a child'!

she's also a fictional character. as in...she's not real. and this is why caring about these issues is important. feyre does not exist yall. maternity leave (in this context)......does not need to exist. she's a fictional character she doesn't need to 'rest'. ultimately, arguments like these always reveal to me the people who are earnestly just rhys stans who parade feyre around when she co-signs her own abuse through narration, and disregard her when her opinions no longer align with their fantasy footstool. the fact that they claim that feyre is the 'main character' and yet justify her absence is insane. like if you truly believed that feyre was the main character...then why would you essentially make up an argument such as 'she's a mother and needs to rest.'

first and firemost, the end of hosab highlights rhysand as the surprise. the last line of the book is not 'hello bryce, I'm feyre welcome to the night court" and that in itself (to some extent) who the story thinks is the main character. the appeal was rhys...not feyre.

like wdym a fictional mother cant be in her own series because she's recovering off page from her fictional birth. i need us to be serious for a second here. yall are literally arguing that she IS the main character. why would the main character not be in her own series just because she had a baby????? i think this proves the extent to which "feyre" (*undercover rhys*) go to derail conversations about the problems in this series.

[ofbreathandflame]

'of course feyre wasn't in hofas - she just had a child'!

she's also a fictional character. as in...she's not real. and this is why caring about these issues is important. feyre does not exist yall. maternity leave (in this context)......does not need to exist. she's a fictional character she doesn't need to 'rest'. ultimately, arguments like these always reveal to me the people who are earnestly just rhys stans who parade feyre around when she co-signs her own abuse through narration, and disregard her when her opinions no longer align with their fantasy footstool. the fact that they claim that feyre is the 'main character' and yet justify her absence is insane. like if you truly believed that feyre was the main character...then why would you essentially make up an argument such as 'she's a mother and needs to rest.'

first and firemost, the end of hosab highlights rhysand as the surprise. the last line of the book is not 'hello bryce, I'm feyre welcome to the night court" and that in itself (to some extent) who the story thinks is the main character. the appeal was rhys...not feyre.

like wdym a fictional mother cant be in her own series because she's recovering off page from her fictional birth. i need us to be serious for a second here. yall are literally arguing that she IS the main character. why would the main character not be in her own series just because she had a baby????? i think this proves the extent to which "feyre" (*undercover rhys*) go to derail conversations about the problems in this series.

#anti sjm #anti rhysand #anti feyre #anti feysand #anti acosf #[note]: this is an old post yall from like jan so the convo is prob stale #tbf ive just logged in so im catching up with every thing #my juniors are taking their tests so I have five hours of free time since I'm proctoring hehe #anti sjm: pro feyre

[ofbreathandflame]

“We like that Feyre got the choice to rest in ACOSF! That’s different than Tamlin forcing that on Feyre in ACOMAF!”

if y'all really cared about Feyre's choices y’all would hate the baby plotline and call out Rhysand as abusive there but y’all don’t. You don’t care about Feyre's choices, you care about what Rhysand wants Feyre to be and do for him at any given point in time.

#literally #like every argument like this is just Rhys defense.

[ofbreathandflame]

I hate that you still get this of hate😕

thank you lovely❤️💜❤️💜❤️

im actual a bit surprised bc i honestly don’t get as much anymore. deleting my last blog significantly decreased the amount i get. tbf- that blog had over 1400 followers so i get it’s different but I only really get the occasional this and that now. idk what i did lmaoo but hey ig it’s the name of the game.

[ofbreathandflame]

Hey, just wanted to let you know that I think you're awesome and I love your posts! Don't let the haters win!

thank you so much you’re literally the sweetest💜💜💜💜💜💜💜

[ofbreathandflame]

Hey! I wanted to send you a nice ask since you are getting lots of hate.

Hope you are doing well besides everything.

Have some plants

Thank you lovely❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

[ofbreathandflame]

“you think you’re SO smart…”

yep. i sure do - i am smart. so are most of the people on this app. idk know abt y’all but i don’t believe in downplaying my qualifications or my accomplishments. if you disagree with my stance, then you disagree but like it has nothing to do with whether or not im ‘smart.’ bc one - i do think im smart and (2) lack of (access) to education doesn’t make these observations any less important. like what are we saying here y’all. everybody has the capacity to convey (in whatever way works for them) why they don’t like something - sometimes we have not been given the tools to adequately relate those problems. or sometimes we communicate those issues differently.

me writing 20000 words can convey the same message as someone saying ‘Rhys is bad. i write a lot bc i personally struggle with being concise and also this is a personal blog; my intent is to make the content accessible to some degree. im doing this for me, and to validate other who feel similarly.

im writing in all lower case, these posts are literally unedited, the tags are always anti. yes, these are serious conversation, and serious scholarship to some extent. i am putting im effort into my analysis, i do care about the issues. that’s a given or else I would not be running the blog. like DUH it bothers me. idk why i would be nonchalant on issues i clearly take offense too. but the presentation of these conversation is leisure-ish, you don’t have to engage with convo until you’re ready. i think it’s actually good to not engage with these conversations fully if you don’t fully understand or actually get why the issues are issues. the conversation is there if you’re ready for it, if not then all you have to do is mute the #anti sjm tag and you’d literally never see a single thing I post.

#anti sjm

[ofbreathandflame]

why am i getting all of these hate anon guys it’s literally almost black history month this is actually illegal

#you don’t understand #this is the law y’all #not on miss eartha kitt’s internet

[ofbreathandflame]

ill tell you this, i'll take those weird, rabid feysand stans over the ones that purposely preach docility when we speak about the issues. like - there's a maliciousness in the latter that is much more intentional. bc there's an awareness when you acknowledge the issues, and there's something very interesting about the way they decide to frame those discussions. idk know abt yall but i think racism is pretty serious...and i think any scholarship or interrogation dealing with that issue is a bit different than being ostentatious. like i just don't get that argument - especially when the book is the one making the story a moral lesson. (and even if it didn't - sjm's writing is still the problem at the heart). like sometimes i think people are so deadset on proving the point that antis are speaking nonsense - that they end up needing to justify sjm's writing to prove their point. if we're acknowledging that sjm has (at the very least) a sensitivity/racial issue - you can't shoot that conversation down because it 'makes rhys look bad' or you've shelved it as strictly a 'pro-nesta-antifeysand argument' and therefore you're approaching the argument trying to prove the point that 'actually there is no racism bc the fantasy world justifies itself.' we're questioning why the author feels comfortable creating a situation where racism, misogyny or abuse needs to be justified.

if you don't think the issues are serious - then you just don't. you either recognize these issues in their entirety or you don't at all.

#anti sjm #anti feysand

[ofbreathandflame]

Why you care so much about what feyre and her stans are doing🤔

you know, im actually very glad you sent this in anon, though i know it wasn't sent in good faith. when i say feyre 'stans' - i am being 100% sarcastic. my argument is that i don't believe the people who peddle the idea that they hold feyre to be first actually believe that ideal. i also believe they end up purposely derailing actual conversations about abuse, feminism, and racism bc they don't want to actual critique rhys, so they end up selling much more intentional bs to avoid the conversations all together,

as to why that matters - i can explain.

(1) i think a lot of people who work under the idea that they like feyre 'first' believe that a female perspective = feminist. in theory, i believe a lot of rhys stans subconsciously (or consciously) understand that his actions are villainous (to some capacity). like they do understand that there's only so far they can actually support sexual assault. i think a lot of people use feyre to circumvent this issue: if feyre agrees or even likes the abuse, then it cancels out the implication of the it. and this partially because the book flocks to do the same thing - it never introspects about what x character's actions say about them as a character. think about it - even if we work with the idea that rhys doesn't enjoy the abuse he put feyre through, going as far as to reiterate that he feels shame -- we have to question why the story responds to that with plainly stating that feyre actually enjoyed the abuse and/or felt genuine attraction rhys in those moments. because then it (a) removes the idea of moral-greyness; rhysand never has to reflect because the story always believes he secretly justified. (b) there should still be a conversation about what that means. the mating bond operates as both a justification and a rebuke of feysand's actions (c) it puts into question what the story is actually arguing about feyre's trauma from utm. if feyre always secretly wanted rhysand utm...so much to unpack there. we're not genuinely rebuking abuse. and that's fine if you're drawing a scene or simply entertainment - it becomes worrisome when we considered that there is a lesson being put forth.

(2) people who use feyre as the scapegoat to often time sidestep conversations. feyre's narration is only considered when it validates rhysand's abuse - other times, the idea that we should consider canon wholly (analyze the information we're given v. what we're told) becomes nonexistent. so even though feyre has reiterated her boundaries to rhysand (and even though rhys is already aware of those boundaries via his mental snooping), there still this need to 'hear things from rhys side' - even though we know what feyre choice would have been. we know that feyre would have never wanted that information kept from her. its literally been her only consistent trait- don't lie. and as i said in this post: even the act of creating the intervention undermines three books of feyre's narration cementing her boundary.

(3) 'feyre stans' often hijack the conversations; the conversation about racism (and rhys's absue) always stalls because -- AGAIN -- there's only so much analysis they can happen before you realize the problem is both sjm's ideology and her obsession w/ rhys. at some point they always end up defending sjm (and her racism and misogyny). there's a struggle between actual unpacking rhysand's action and what that means for him as a character. they do want to have the serious conversations, just not in a way that detrimental or all-encompassing. selective reading, plain and simple.

i also believe thats why there so much overblown hate for tamlin (that in my opinion, backfired terribly esp over the last three years) is merely insecurity about the problems w/ rhys's charcater. morally, there only so many conversation we can have before the weirdness rears it head. we can't argue tamlin is abusive and then in the same breadth argue for the neccessity of the same form of abuse. we can't argue that rhys is morally-grey and then ignore the greyness area. we also cannot say rhys grows as a character if we argue that he never grows from the person we met utm. we can't say that we 'recognize' he was wrong, but then constantly uplift those very moments as moments of love. we can't say sjm has racial/moral in her story and then remove how that effects more favorable characters.

#anti sjm #anti rhysand #anti feyre #anti feysand #anti acosf #(4) they're also always either in the anti tags or in my anons soo....

[ofbreathandflame]

https://www.tumblr.com/astrababyy/738088417973420032/one-thing-i-really-liked-about-feyre-in-the-first

This post of your makes me wonder if SJM wasn't a onetrick pony and respected her own stories and actually wrote characters and not tropes of girlboss ™️ what would've feyre's character trajectory looked like? I'm interested to know what do you think her arc would've been?

I sometimes feel like the problem isn't even Feysand being a ship it's SJM molding Feyre (& nesta) so they are similar to their bat boy mates. Because like there's S&B with darklina being it's most popular ship. Sure it's not endgame and that's because Leigh didn't completely change Alina's whole personality to fit the darkling. Alina got to keep the characteristics that made her who she is which is what made the chemistry between the two interesting too unlike in SJM's stories where she obliterates her fmc's entire personality to fit their male li and in doing so it ruins any appeal in the "ship" itself. Feyre/Feysand and Nesta/Nessian are both examples of that.

hello, anon! i rarely ever receive asks regarding meta or characterization so thanks so much for this lol <3

as i stated in the post you linked, i do believe that feyre's natural arc would've had some sort of internal conflict regarding both her trauma from under the mountain and her being turned into a faerie. i feel that rhysand's comment about her "human heart" could've been emphasized better in the second book and would've served as an interesting contrast from rhys, her established mate in the story. their morals are vastly different from each other; how does this change their relationship? would feyre accept him for who he is? would she judge him, scorn him, try to help him?

especially in regards to the impending war, i think feyre struggling with her newfound fae instincts, being different from who she used to be, and trying to reconnect with who she used to be while accepting who she is now could've been very profound and paired well with her struggles with the trauma she faced from under the mountain.

the major issue with feyre's characterization is how she was molded to become rhysand's partner, rather than being able to fit with him naturally and seamlessly. the same issue occurs with nesta and cassian's relationship, where her character has to be altered just to fit in with the person cassian is. in feyre's case specifically, it got worse as the books went on. feyre gradually became less and less alike to her old self without a clear reason for why she was changing in that way. as i stated before, her becoming a less violent-averse person due to her faerie nature is understandable and would've been a wake-up call considering her transformation, but feyre becoming less empathetic and understanding of the plight of the lower classes, becoming so much more okay with spending money carelessly, supporting rhysand's frankly corrupt government structure, etc. are all ooc.

feyre, as a character, had a lot of potential and could've had that transition into becoming this warrior queen without losing all her morals and beliefs, becoming a vessel for the pro rhysand agenda. it's truly unfortunate that her character had to devolve in the way it did.

#such good points #sjm critical

[ofbreathandflame]

me queueing that post for no reason at all😭

#idk why it feels like magic when i do it but it does #im always surprised when i check and it posts as if thats not the entire point 💀 #its fun to me