#(complicated feelings on organized religion and nature of god aside | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

chamerionwrites · 3 years

Note

For the character ask game may I be greedy and give you three? Percy de Rolo, Jester Lavorre, Davits Draven.

PERCY DE ROLO

Why I like him: I’m on record about finding guilt one of the tastiest fictional emotions, and Percy is an all-you-can-eat buffet. So there’s that! But I think what makes him really compelling to me is that he screws up a lot but rarely in the exact same way twice; there are definite patterns he circles back to but you can see him learning from them, in a very generals-are-always-prepared-to-fight-the-last-war kind of way, which keeps him from being a static character and also feels very true to the cyclical and frustrating nature of trauma recovery.

Why I don’t: Percy at his worst is willfully cruel, which is a character trait I find very tough to take.

Favorite episode: 57/Duskmeadow. That whole interaction between him and the Raven Queen is so spookily atmospheric, and Matt and Taliesin are so focused, and it’s such a fabulous example of two characters talking straight past each other, which always makes for illuminating character moments and is particularly fascinating when one of them is a god.

Also lbr, I was always going to be into Percy’s angry faith/religion issues.

Favorite line: Taliesin is REALLY good at one-liners so there’s a lot to choose from here, but the simplicity of “I think I really miss my family” messed me up.

Favorite outfit: The mental image of him cackling maniacally in his onesie pajamas (buttflap down) after being woken out of a sound sleep to shoot bandits in the snow still kills me.

OTP: Like I said I’m not the world’s most dedicated shipper, but the slowburn with Vex was pretty glorious and it also just...felt so organic and true to the characters, they understand and balance each other so well.

BROTP: Keyleth; there’s so much emotional range between silly and supportive and challenging between these two characters, they’re very opposites-attract in some ways but under the surface more alike than they are different, and they draw out so many fascinating character moments in each other.

Honorable mention for his odd couple siblings dynamic with Grog.

Headcanon: Percy makes quite a few asides that lead me to suspect the De Rolo family was ultimately loving but more than a little dysfunctional, and that he might be a bit of an emotional mess even without the Briarwoods, and that this probably makes the grieving process harder because it’s really difficult to confront complicated feelings about your family without feeling like a bad person when what happened to them was so cruel and unfair.

Unpopular opinion: Percy doesn’t have a skewed sense of ethics at all; he has a very keen and coherent sense of right and wrong which he frequently chooses to ignore thanks to a combo of ruthless pragmatism, hubris, and self-destructive I-am-in-blood-stepped-in-so-far self-loathing.

A wish: It’s an impossible wish, but I would love to have been a fly on the wall for his first appearance in the pre-stream homegame; the cast’s reactions to his last name alone must have been priceless.

Please never happen: Much as I love Vox Machina, I think their story wrapped up very satisfyingly and I’m glad Matt is trying to keep links between the two campaigns pretty minimal and organic.

5 words to describe him: A MOUNTAIN OF CONTROL ISSUES (that’s it, that’s the tweet).

My nickname: The stupidest smart boy in Taldorei.

JESTER LAVORRE

Why I like her: She sees quite a bit more than she lets on, in an incredibly gentle and nonjudgmental way. Also powerful people continually underestimate her and then she either (1) forcefully befriends them or (2) kicks their ass, and it’s delightful every time.

Laura’s also just very good at subtle development, and figuring her characters out is rewarding in a puzzle-solving sort of way.

Why I don’t: Jester is the kind of very bubbly and well-intentioned but slightly nosy person who would drive me a tiny bit bonkers IRL, because on occasion she walks all over people’s boundaries with the sort of utter lack of malice that leaves you feeling like the asshole if you get angry about it.

Favorite episode: Predictable answer perhaps but the cupcake + hag episode (93/Misery Loves Company) was just…*chef’s kiss.*

Favorite line: Every single time she uses the Sending spell.

Favorite outfit: That green cloak from the art after they went to Xhorhas.

OTP: File this under “I’m just not much of a shipper and thus open to all possibilities as long as there’s interesting character payoff.”

BROTP: I love her relationships with each member of the Nein, for different reasons, but the combo of caring and pure chaos that is Jester + Veth is a favorite.

Headcanon: She grew up sleeping in a big bed and she sprawls in her sleep, which would be annoying in the dome except that all her friends think she’s adorable.

Unpopular opinion: Tbh I’m not immersed enough in CR2 fandom to know what’s unpopular? But I do think it’s easy to miss how deliberate she can be; Jester is a very spontaneous and playful character overall but that doesn’t mean her actions don’t have calculated intent, which is a very tricky balance to get a read on sometimes.

A wish: Serious answer: I really want the narrative to directly address her (fascinatingly Vex-like, even though they’re such different characters in so many ways) compulsion to hide her sad feelings for the sake of everybody else’s emotional welfare.

Funny answer: I desperately want her to annoy and/or unsettle Trent via Sending, he’s just so easy to hate and she’s such a charming troll.

Please never happen: ...I’m kind of darkly curious to see it because the M9 would be SHATTERED and we all know that I live for character development under extremely angsty duress, but I would also be shattered if Jester died, so.

5 words to describe her: Wise, sheltered, mischievous, lonely, disarming

My nickname: I just call her Jester.

DAVITS DRAVEN

Why I like him: Narratively speaking his existence (and the intra-Alliance ideological conflict that runs through Rogue One) makes the Rebellion more grounded and interesting. I also think it’s fairly clear that his motivations aren’t too far off from what Jyn says at the council meeting - “If you give way to an enemy this evil with this much power, you condemn the galaxy to an eternity of submission” - and when viewed in that light he’s abrasive but pretty sympathetic.

Why I don’t: He’s that guy who pretends to let you win an argument and then goes right on doing what he was planning to do all along behind your back, which...listen I don’t even find his decision about Galen Erso unsympathetic, but what an asshole. (Also, headcanon time but I like to project my distaste for the Republic’s Clone Wars empire-in-all-but-name shenanigans on him.)

Favorite scene: Always and forever the “You find him, you kill him” exchange on the tarmac between him and Cassian - it’s such a stakes-raising moment for the plot overall, and the character dynamic between him and Cassian there is fascinating to me.

Favorite line: Tbh I think my favorite “lines” from Draven are actually wordless; he has a lot of physical personality as a character, and if you have any interest in my detail-obsessed writing notes you should ask me sometime about his body language.

Outfit: He only has the one. What with being part of a desperate underdog resistance odds are reasonable that this might be true (or close to it) even in-universe?

OTP: Draven/His Conscience, dubious consent (sorry but this really is the most honest answer to this question lmao).

BROTP: I like to think he and Mon Mothma know each other pretty well. They feel that way, in the film - lots of wordless sideways meetings of the eyes. In my head Mothma is very insightful about people, and Draven is very observant, and they’ve spent several decades doing this desperate underground resistance thing together, so at times it might be a prickly chagrined kind of closeness but they Get each other without a whole lot of explanation required and when they’re on the same page they make a very effective team.

I think I’m just broadly fascinated by the foxhole camaraderie that has to exist between a lot of the Alliance’s leaders. There’s years’ worth of very intense experiences shared by a very limited number of other people there, and it has to make for some odd but ultimately close relationships.

Headcanon: In much the same way that Cassian reads very clearly to me as a man simmering with profound and powerful anger at pretty much all times (though it’s mostly contained by a combo of reserve, weariness, and a scrupulous desire to be a Good Person), Draven reads very clearly to me as a man who’s terrified. I think that in all probability he doesn’t feel a whole lot of that fear on a day-to-day basis, because it’s walled off behind really good compartmentalization skills and a pragmatic personality. Underneath though? Whew. In the film his defining trait is boresight urgency driven by awareness that he’s working under a ticking clock, and...that’s fear! That kind of tunnel vision is characteristic of someone who’s either very driven or very frightened or both. Meanwhile offscreen canon says that back in Republic days he worked with a lot of the people who now form the backbone of the Empire and that some of his drive stems from knowing and damn well dreading what they’re capable of, which makes a lot of sense. Also it’s in the nature of his job to be up-to-date on all the worst news and excruciatingly well-informed about all the gory details, so y’know. I think Draven probably has a lot of very justified reasons to be plagued by a Sense Of Overpowering Dread, and while he likely doesn’t confront it head-on very often there’s a locked box in a dusty file cabinet in the back corner of his mental attic that’s labeled Here Be Dragons and some of his decision-making in the film is probably a product of that.

Unpopular Opinion: I think he and Cassian semi-frequently clash, but in that unspoken, familial way that’s essentially invisible to anyone who doesn’t speak their insular emotional dialect, and hidden and complicated even further by the fact that (1) they’re a couple of spies for whom secrecy and subtlety are deeply ingrained survival skills and (2) neither of them is prepared to admit - even to himself on most days - that their relationship goes beyond that of subordinate and commanding officer.

Basically I think probably 90% of any given conversation between those two characters is wordless, and the silences sometimes get heated but the words almost never do.

A wish: I’ve said it before but I have a weak spot for the narrative sparks that inevitably fly when you shove unlikely characters into close proximity and extreme circumstances and force them to rely on each other for survival. There are any number of characters that I think would be fun to do this to, but among them are Jyn and Draven; between their own personalities, being on the same side of a war, close relationships with Cassian and the enormous dad-murder elephant in the room they have the makings of a very complicated and uncomfortable character dynamic. Jyn is probably never going to like him (and she’s justified!) but I feel like they could agree wholeheartedly on some very basic principles such “my own survival,” “Cassian’s well-being” and/or “ruining the Empire’s day” and the resulting strained teamwork would be fascinating.

Also, imagining the probable life expectancy of anyone who really got on the wrong side of Jyn “canonically twelve ounces of whoop-ass” Erso and General “canonically will not hesitate” Draven is darkly hilarious to me.

Oh-god-please-never-happen: I’m completely uninterested in any version of this character that isn’t at least a little bit bastardous (or any version that’s one-dimensionally villainous, for that matter).

Five words that describe him: Driven, cynical, stubborn, impatient, calculating

My nickname: Terrible garbage man (affectionate)

#/#//#///#////#/////#ask box #my posts #critical role #cr c1 #cr c2 #star wars #rogue one #davits draven

8 notes · View notes

thismountainhastigers · 6 years

Text

Short Writing Assignment #5

Boldly Going

I never understood the argument that the full history of the universe as science has uncovered it is incompatible with how Christians ought to view God and His works. If anything, understanding the full scope of His creativity and power ought to move a person to worship as much as understanding His love and care. I will concede that the more we understand the universe, the further we move from its center, however, the Christian story is supposed to be about God—not mankind—from start to finish, so why should we fret about being put in our right place with respect to who He is? Why limit his capabilities for the sake of our own pride, especially when the universe could be a much bigger, brighter place if we are willing to see all He is capable of? As a religion, the short-term focus of Christianity is often put on the imperative of loving one’s God and neighbor, but the long-term focus is generally about eternal salvation and the “business of saving souls.” The latter in particular presents a few issues for Christians to face with respect to the possibility of life on other planets, particularly intelligent life. Who (or what) can be “saved”? Are they saved in a manner different from humans? Should we send out missions to the planets around Alpha Centuri, as we first did to the Greeks and Romans and later to the Indians and Koreans? Personally, I believe that there are a few qualifications that need to be met before churches start fundraising mission trips to the far-flung corners of the universe.

The life that we may find in the universe can have a number of implications depending on how developed it is, and the first step on this ladder is that of unicellular life. If we find that life exists at all anywhere else, it would certainly be monumental discovery on top of being a huge opportunity for biologists here on Earth to understand the origins of life (though watching it evolve in real-time may prove to be a bit tiresome). As a whole, I do not see the mere existence of such life forms as any particular threat to the way that Christianity operates today. Even if we move a step further into multicellular organisms, so long as their intelligence does not significantly surpass that of certain animals on Earth (e.g. in terms of tool-making and communicating), such creatures are only another thing to marvel at. Life at these levels is just the result of processes that we already know to occur.

The more intelligent that this hypothetical life becomes, however, the more complicated the situation is for me. I see the next step leading into one of two possibilities: intelligent life and intelligent life that possesses some form of a soul. In this case, we shall define the soul as the source of a person’s reason, individuality, and spirituality, both a part of the body and yet separate at the same time, unknowable by physical means. With respect to the Christian issue of salvation, the eternal nature of a soul is the most important aspect here. Admittedly, I am not sure if the difference between a soulless intelligent being and a souled intelligent being will be readily obvious. Perhaps, as the Turing test is supposed to determine human-like intelligence in machines, we can develop a “Lewis test” to determine the ensoulment of aliens based on his quote from Mere Christianity: “If we find ourselves with a desire that nothing in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that we were made for another world.” The discovery of intelligent life without a soul (assuming we can differentiate between the two) would hold no particular spiritual importance for me; if it is not capable of reaching eternity, then it holds no ultimate or eternal significance. Its existence can still serve to teach us about the nature of God, but overall it still does not turn Christian soteriology on its head. However, should we find beings that do possess souls, there is still one more characteristic they must meet before the issue of salvation comes into play at all.

It is another, equally-important question: are these beings perfect? Perfection, something I doubt we experience on Earth, is slightly more difficult to test for, since we rarely encounter it to know what it looks like. Here, however, I want to make the distinction between perfection and omnipotence. The perfection I would expect to find on another planet is moreso the absence of moral imperfection (“sin” in the Christian tradition), seen in the way members of the species interact with themselves and their planet, than the inability to be any better. It is not the sort of perfection that eliminates the need for improving their species or society as a whole; if life on other planets is subject to the same principles of evolution as life elsewhere, they will not be an unchanging entity. Behavior-wise, I imagine that those that are perfect have little motivation to be better for their own sake; we might notice a larger degree of selflessness among such a species as any desire for improving themselves, their society, or their technology is for the sake of another. The possible existence of a perfect race also requires us to ask how such a species would interact with our own (I doubt that the idea that we as a whole are not perfect is exclusively Christian). For their sake, I would want as little direct contact with them as possible. If such perfection can be lost (as Christian tradition states happened in Eden), I would not want to play a role in instigating the Fall of another species. Regardless of whether or not this Fall is of the spiritual kind or the kind which is more accurately described as physical extinction, I have no doubt that humanity at its worst is capable of that. Encountering an imperfect species levels the playing field in terms of interacting with them. How similar is this discovered species to us? Do they feel any ill-will towards each other? Are they capable of harming another unprovoked? Maybe we can attach a checklist of the seven deadly sins and see how many they meet.

The question of perfection finally brings us to central issue of salvation. As far as I can tell, the only prerequisites for salvation are a soul and imperfection. I also cannot believe that God would allow the existence of a souled, intelligent being and give it no chance to join Him on the otherside. Now that we have established what can be saved, we are left with how they are saved, and just as we cannot limit God’s creative efforts to a single planet, I do not think we can limit salvation to just one method (i.e. Jesus, as we know Him here, complete with incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection). Is it within His power to do so? Certainly. Does it make sense to leave the salvation of an entire planet to a species too busy pointing nuclear weapons at each other to make time to develop an advanced space program? Absolutely not, especially when we have no idea if the life out there originated billions of years before us or will originate billions of years afterwards. In addition, if God is capable of the creation of a wide array of physical forms, why limit Him to making the same kind of soul for all spiritual beings? I was always under the impression that angels were spiritually distinct from humans, so perhaps this can be the case for the other possible life out there. In that case, a “one-size-fits-all” method of salvation may not exist at all. Perhaps all of the saving is accomplished through God, but the mechanism itself is allowed to differ. In the end, I am not so worried about having to translate the Gospel of John into some alien language. I will be far more troubled to learn that God had abandoned an entire planet for eons rather than reveal Himself in a way different from how He did here.

Before I conclude, I would like to bring up just how much I like Star Trek. Cultural importance (and dated special effects) aside, the show has come the closest at portraying my ideal society, one where people (and non-people) of all backgrounds work together for a common goal: to better understand the universe and its occupants. Just because I think we need not worry about taking the gospel to the ends of the universe does not mean we should avoid contact altogether. Should we encounter intelligent life anywhere else (or it encounters us), though it may turn a few of our religions on their heads for a moment as we find our bearings, I hope we can interact with them in a way that skips over any violent confrontation, and we can start learning from each other. I do not know if their answers to the big questions of life are any better than ours, but if they are, why not share the knowledge? Unfortunately, this hopeful future may be too far off, and not only because we have yet to find evidence for life elsewhere. On Earth, we as a species have a poor history of treating those different from us and still have yet to stop trying to kill each other over such differences. (After all, the original Star Trek series only showed Americans and Russians working alongside each other in the 2200s, and at this rate things are going now it appears they were very optimistic.) That said, I do think a successful interplanetary exchange of knowledge and culture can be accomplished if and when we finally sort ourselves out here. For my lifetime, I will settle for peace on Earth before I spend too much time worrying about peace in the galaxy.

Christians tend to speak out against the idea of “putting God in a box,” yet I see so many trying to limit what God has done in the physical world, brushing off the new possibilities because they do not fit the notion of God that they have constructed for themselves. The Christian story is about God from start to finish, we are fortunate to be along for the ride. We say His love is infinite, and His mercy is infinite, so why limit His creativity, and limit it to ourselves? I have found that I can know God through hearing about what others think of Him, particularly those from a different religious tradition. I imagine I could do the same with any exoplanetary life form as well.

“Be comforted, small immortals. You are not the voice that all things utter, nor is there eternal silence in the places where you cannot come.”

-C.S. Lewis, Perelandra

#writing assignment

0 notes