#I like stories and characters where things don't try to be realistically possible | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

blindbeta · 3 months

Note

I've noticed that you are interested in stories with multiple blind characters and often propose adding more blind characters to a story as a solution. I really struggle with this because it's not as simple as that -- stories don't have infinite narrative space. The idea that every story has a large cast is influenced by the prevalence of long serialized media in fandom: webcomics, TV shows, etc. But many writers (myself included) write a lot of novellas and short stories which often only have a few characters -- maybe even only 1 or 2! Even novels don't usually have huge expansive casts -- maybe 5 main characters with some additional side characters.

Considering this, I don't understand how it's realistic for every story (or even, say, 50% of stories) to have multiple blind characters (without it feeling forced). This is compounded by the fact that most blogs that talk about other forms of representation say the same! So if I write a 2-character short story and the protagonist is a blind Latino man, does the second character also have to be a blind Latino man? It just doesn't make sense! This is just a general problem I've noticed in discussions around representation -- there's an assumption that every cast will have 10+ characters and narrative space to develop those characters, even though that's not realistic for most narrative forms.

Do you have any thoughts on this?

Writing Multiple Blind Characters in Short Stories

Hi Anon! Surprise. I write short stories as well. I have experience with this. I have never felt like my blind characters were forced or unrealistic, even with having several of them in the same story. I’ll try to explain what might help you.

First, the idea that multiple blind characters is forced or unrealistic comes from ableism. Think about why you feel there is a limit on disabled characters. If you can create stories, I would hope you are creative enough to consider the possibility that multiple blind characters could exist in the same place and time. Challenging this barrier opens up more possibilities, allowing you to explore different types of blindness, different reactions to it, different upbringings, and multiple ways of living, adapting, and navigating being blind.

Second, blind characters need access to their own community. This is where they learn how to be blind. This where they get support. This is where they might find understanding and belonging. You can find more information about community here in an excellent reblog. Also, here.

As you mentioned, I often suggest adding more blind characters when writers insist upon using stereotyped portrayals. Having multiple characters with different experiences helps to make your story more realistic and nuanced, contrary to what people might implicitly believe. Having more than one blind character is something I highly recommend because it helps with not having all your representation rest on the shoulders of one character.

For example, if you are worried a main character who has cloudy eyes might reinforce the idea that all blind people have cloudy eyes, having another blind character with a different experience may help. If one of your blind characters is naive and innocent, you might have another blind character who is brash, displays a lack of trust in others, and has a lot of shocking stories. Maybe they’re in a rock band together. They met while playing blind football (aka soccer) on a middle school team. They bonded over their pet cats and sour patch kids.

Or something.

Another important thing to remember when writing is that you have control over the story. Too many writers come to me feeling stuck because they feel they cannot change their story while also wanting to incorporate my suggestions. This makes it challenging to address implicit bias or stereotypes, much less guide writers in going in different directions.

Additionally, I feel uncomfortable with the complaints about other blogs in this ask. I feel like this isn’t really about me, nor is it something I can comment on. I will say that it sounds as if a bunch of blogs dedicated to helping people write marginalized characters are mentioning some of the same things. They are probably doing so for a reason.

However, while it helps, writing multiple blind characters won’t improve every story, which I explained in my review of the book Blind. I was not impressed with this book. I did not feel that the four blind characters were very good, nor did having them help with offsetting the portrayal of blindness as a miserable experience.

Conversely, one of my favorite blind characters is Toph Beifong from Avatar: The Last Airbender. Despite being the only blind character in the show, the writers did a good job with her. Would I have liked her to meet more of her community as she travels with the Gang? Absolutely. Even though I like her, she still never had access to her community after being isolated by her parents for so long.

So, no, you don’t need to have multiple blind characters if the suggestion bothers you this much. I even provided good examples of what to do, what not to do, and times where my typical advice was not as helpful for the resulting story.

However, please consider where these feelings stem from. Consider the origins of the idea that having multiple blind characters is unrealistic. Using the example you provided in your question, I wonder, would you say the same if both your characters were white and abled? Is there any way you can challenge the fear of seeming unrealistic? What about being considered unrealistic bothers you so much?

You don’t necessarily need to have characters in the story for them to exist. Even background characters can help. I will try to give some ideas for this:

Does your blind character have family they can talk about or remember? Are any of their family members blind?

Do they have any friends? Just because the friends aren’t in the story doesn’t mean they don’t exist at all.

Does the blind character have any formative memories or flashbacks?

Does the character who isn’t blind know any blind folks?

Your characters should have lives outside of the story. They should have memories and experiences that made them who they are. This is where you can have other blind characters. Perhaps this is how your blind character can have a community.

However, I would still like to see more blind characters interacting with each other. This is what I want as a blind person. If you don’t want to go that direction, that’s fine.

I hope this helps.

#blind #blind characters #writing blind characters #ask #scheduled post #writing more than one blind character #multiple blind characters #ableism #let blind people have friends and community challenge

200 notes · View notes

itsclydebitches · 1 year

Text

I need more time to put my thoughts in order about tonight's episode, but my initial reaction is that I'm surprised by others' disappointment? I mean, I'm actually not that surprised because coming out stories are intensely personal with viewers all looking for/needing vastly different things from their media, but it just feels like a lot of what (I thought) Ted Lasso was trying to do has gotten lost under specific expectations.

Ted goes off on a long, ridiculous, borderline disgusting story at the worst possible moment? Yes, that's the point. For all my fun TedTrent theories, Ted is (currently) serving the role of the well-meaning, but often ignorant straight man. His function is to both provide the insight and warmth that he's known for - "Actually it does matter to us" - while simultaneously showing how this intensely heteronormative culture would react to a player coming out. AKA messily. If we got a perfect scenario where everyone was accepting and said exactly the right thing, that would undermine the problems the show is trying to acknowledge in the first place. The focus on Isaac's complicated anger and Ted's foot-in-mouth syndrome is just as important to this whole scenario as the club's overall acceptance and the fact that Ted immediately realizes that he fucked up: "I regret that." Ted Lasso is a feel-good comedy, so it's all couched in over-the-top humor, but I thought that was an important acknowledgement: your allies - straight or not, out or not - are likely going to react in cringe-worthy, imperfect ways and the important takeaway there is not that they're irredeemable people who don't love you, but that they're trying and you should gently correct them (as Colin does) and allow them to grow (as Ted does). Despite being an absurd fiction, Ted Lasso is working to write about this in a semi-realistic sense. Instead of a Perfect Coming Out Moment that makes all the queer fans (myself included!) squeal at how ~wonderful~ our beloved cast is for being oh so perfect, we get that realistic awkwardness, misplaced anger, and regret.

We cut away from Colin coming out? Yes, because he's already come out to us. I understand why fans would be disappointed in that, but I don't think it's fair to characterize the show as not allowing Colin to come out at all. That was the entirety of "Sunflowers." Rather than trying to fit Colin's big moment into a locker room halftime, the writers crafted a whole episode where he could grapple with that fear of being outed, be reassured, have a heart-to-heart with Trent, sit together on the monument, go out later in celebration... Ted Lasso made space for all that and, understandably to my mind, didn't want to rehash many of those same beats three episodes later, especially not when we need time to work through the intersection of Colin's story with everyone else. (Because despite this being a queer story-line about a queer man, the show is about the team. Colin's conflict was always going to expand into the rest of the cast.) No, we don't get to see Colin come out specifically to the others, but we did see him come out - both narratively by kissing a man and to Trent - and we see the team's reaction immediately after the fact. Making space for Issac didn't feel like it was cheating Colin to me, or focusing too much on the straight characters, because Colin's story has been a season in the making (plus some details earlier on). To say nothing of the fact that his hesitance about coming out is specifically because he fears the team's reaction... so why wouldn't we grapple with Isaac's negative reaction? We already know Colin's worries, we know what he wants, we see him seeking advice from Trent, we see him reaching out to Issac, we see that failing, and after all that his queer story-line is functionally at a stand-still until something else gives. Issac's explosion is what finally tips the scales.

Idk I don't think I'm explaining this very well because it's late and I only just watched, but I'm of the opinion that Ted Lasso did a lot of work in previous episodes so that they'd have space in this episode to do different work, which is smart. From a narrative perspective, Ted doesn't need to be the perfect ally because Colin already has a supportive queer mentor. "La Locker Room Aux Folles" doesn't need to try to balance Colin's emotional coming out with Isaac's internalized homophobia because "Sunflowers" already gave the audience so, so much, allowing the writers to both keep things on screen for our benefit and then later cut away for the sake of time. As said, stories like these are always going to be a hit-or-miss depending on what each individual fan wants and needs, but I think it's worth keeping in mind that Colin's story is not this single episode; it's all of them combined. Has Ted Lasso really not treated his journey respectfully... or did it just not try to check every queer story-line box in a single episode?

#Ted Lasso #Ted Lasso spoilers #Colin Hughes

648 notes · View notes

thegreatwicked · 2 months

Text

Writing Resources Part 2

My first list was so long I decided that I reached the character limit! So we have a part two! I'm going to try and keep them a bit more organized too! Hope these help you all in your writing endeavors and if you happen to use any of them try to give the original source some love!

Also, apologies if I've tagged you more than once and it's annoying! If I reference your material more than twice I will just link your whole Tumblr. I really do want to make sure everyone gets their credit and spotlight!

General Information and Research:

The Fantasy Guide to Royal and Noble Marriages or anything by @inky-duchess Her blog is extensive and is a wealth of information regarding things like royalty/nobility/Period social politics and is a fantastic resource, go check her out! Ink I do appologize I might be tagging you more than once!

@type1diabetesinfandom This blog is an amazing resource if you are interested in writing about characters with any form of diabetes or similar health issues. It was ana amzing find when I was writing my character Belladonna Black from Shadows of Deception who is hypoglycemic. What an amazing source!

How to Cook in a Medieval Setting: by @alpaca-clouds Food is the best way to know a culture and this particular blog post is a trove of information for your fictional foodie set anywhere in this spectrum of time or a great find for a fictional setting! This post obviously gets a chefs kiss!

The Symbolism of Flowers by @novlr Yeah! Leopold knew what he was talkign about, every flower has a meaning and it is entirely possible to send some a bouquette that translates to 'Fuck You' btw it consists of geraniums (stupidity), foxglove (insincerity), meadowsweet (uselessness), yellow carnations (you have disappointed me), and orange lilies (hatred). it would be quite striking! and full of loathing. THE MORE YOU KNOW. This blog is also a fantastic source for writers.

Writing About Body Pain by @slayingfiction I just came across this gem of a blog and if you're one who likes to make your characters sufffer than look no further, also, how ya doing? You ok? Just checking. This blog is also a fantastic writing resource.

How to Accurately Describe Pain in Writing by @hayatheauthor kinda piggybacking off the previous source but nevertheless lets make sure we make these characters suffer realistically? I'm ok too, if you're wondering. This is another great blog that focuses on the aspect of being a writer.

How to Use Canva to Make Mood Boards by @saradika I did not know much about mood baords but I'm telling you they are a gaem changer! They bring a life to your story in a way that is just so stunning and saradika has been so lovely as to make this helpful guide! She's also a very talented writer and is quite the Star Wars Fan! GO check out her stories!

Researching as a Writer by @so-many-ocs Research is a tricky topid to delve into and sometime sit hard to know where to start, this blogger has been so kinda as to make a bit of a roadmap to help you narrow down what you need to research and how. Wonderful blog! Very helpful!

Resources for Writing Deaf, Mute, or Blind Characters by @thecaffeinebookwarrior THIS! This right here is a gem and the only reason I don't write these types fo characters is because I've never known how to do so respectfuly and realistically! Not a problem anymore! Also a wonderful artist!

How to Write and Research a Mental Illness another gem from @hayatheauthor again if you're going to wrote a character with a mental illness lets make sure we get it right!

@namesforwriters It's little but a wonderful source of unique names for your story! Including mythology and music themed names!

Nightmare Disorder vs Night Terrors by @redd956 Some great clarification from a blogger who is diagnosed! So happy I found this as I was wondering about the distinction myself for a little while!

Types of Gemstones by @blueboxbeagle and brought to my attention by @keffirinne

More will be added to this post as I find it and if you find anything that fits the general research on broad topics or specifics please let me know so I can continue this collective writing resource! And make sure to give some of these wonderful writers and bloggers some love!

#writing resources #writing research

76 notes · View notes

hogwartslegacyreactions2 · 1 month

Note

hey!

I love your blog, you are so talented at making the reactions realistic to each character! great job!

can I ask a reaction were they (students and professors) see the MC be bitten by a werewolf?

or they discovered that they are one?

the choice is yours!

A/N: thankies! I try my best! ❤️

HLC REACT TO MC BEING BITTEN BY A WEREWOLF

WARNING: some angst

Wrong place. Wrong time. That's how it happened. What was just thought to be an ordinary mongrel turned out to be a werewolf. MC laid on the ground in a pool of their own blood, grasping their wand arm. MC managed to kill the beast, but not before it got a nasty bite on them.

Even as new to the magical world as they were, they knew this was bad news. There was no cure to the werewolf disease and as soon as the light of the first full moon hit them, they would become a mindless feral beast. This would be their fate for every month for the rest of their life.

They can't tell anyone. They would never be trusted again. Everyone would abandon them. They would be expelled from school. They would never have a normal life.

They try to claim ill when the full moon would come around and disappear into the forest until the moon would wane again. Unfortunately, this pattern doesn't go unnoticed.

~~~

SEBASTIAN SALLOW: Werewolf is the last word he expected to come out of their mouth. That's why they've been avoiding him? They thought that something like them being a werewolf would make him not want to be their friend? Please, that's the most incredible thing anyone has ever told him!

OMINIS GAUNT: What He really cares about is if they're managing themselves responsibly. They could seriously hurt or kill people, they are not themselves when they're forced to transform. He'll take it upon himself to keep track of the moon cycle and constantly remind MC when the next full moon is.

ANNE SALLOW: Now they're both cursed forever. Misery loves company. At least the company is nice.

IMELDA REYES: She doesn't believe MC at first. That's got to be one of the most wild stories she's ever been told. But the monthly disappearances keep happening. She follows them one night on her broom and sees them transform. They never see her in the canopy of the trees. There's a twinge of fear in her eyes the next time they interact.

NATSAI ONAI: She's curious about the form of lycanthropy. Do they turn into a werewolf specifically or is that just a blanket term for lycanthropic creatures in this area of the world? Because where she's from, lycanthropy takes many shapes. She shows genuine interest in learning about MC's condition and helping them manage it. She'll stupefy them if they don't keep up with their moon chart.

GARRETH WEASLEY: That's a pretty heavy thing to admit to, but he can see the silver lining in this. MC is now a source of pretty rare potion ingredients. Don't look at him like that, of course it's the first thing he thinks of. Werewolf teeth and claws are hard to come by without...well, without a lot of unpleasantness.

LEANDER PREWETT: He reflexively jerks away when they admit it. He's heard horror stories of what werewolves do to people, if they bother to leave you alive. MC couldn't possibly be.... He needs time to process. He won't tell other people, but it's hard for him to look at them the same way.

AMIT THAKKAR: Please, he knows the moon cycle for the next 10 years by heart. While he may stand an extra foot or two away from them, he will still gladly be their friend. They're not dangerous as long as they're being smart. Everything will be all right.

EVERETT CLOPTON: He's uncharacteristically quiet for a long time after MC confesses. It's a lot to take in that someone you know is now considerably more dangerous and unpredictable during certain times of the month. He'll need some time to decide if he's willing to stick around.

POPPY SWEETING: Who's a good dog? Kidding. MC has nothing to worry about with her. She's fully accepting of them in their condition, it's not their fault. And for what it's worth, beasts don't really care either. Stick with them and MC won't have to explain wolf tracks constantly in their vicinity.

~~~

ELEAZAR FIG: Because of the amount of time he has spent with MC, he's the first Professor to notice the change in their behavior. It didn't take long for him to realize they would mysteriously disappear during the full moon. Oh, MC, he's so sorry. This wasn't the end of the world, but this was going to make their life difficult. He'll do what he can for them, they still have him after Hogwarts. He won't let them leave school without a plan.

He informs the other professors individually. He wanted them to be in the know so they can continue to manage MC's education without letting the headmaster catch wind of MC's condition.

MATILDA WEASLEY: This news weighs heavy on her. If any parent caught wind of MC's condition, this would be a nightmare for staff to deal with. They were allowing a werewolf within the walls of a school. But this was MC. They were managing it, everyone else that was important knew about it. They were managing it too. They were doing everything in their power to keep accidents from happening. But what if something does happen?

CHIYO KOGAWA: She and Hecat keep close tabs on MC when the full moon draws near. The new transformations wouldn't happen until the moon was at its peak, but they weren't taking any chances.

AESOP SHARP: He met werewolves during his time as an auror. MC is in for a hard life. The vast majority of wizards do not look upon werewolves kindly. In his spare time, what little he had, he researched treatments for lycanthropy. There had been no successful cures or treatments yet invented, but he could take it crack at it.

ABRAHAM RONEN: Next to Professor Fig, he's the professor MC goes to when they need to talk. This condition that they will have to deal with for the rest of their lives has to be weighing heavily on their mind. Mc can tell him how they're feeling. They will get no judgment from him, only comfort.

MIRABEL GARLICK: She's up for MC experimenting with some new plants she has. One in particular called Wolfsbane. There's a superstition that it repels werewolves. Is it true?

MUDIWA ONAI: She does a palm reading for MC and explains in great detail that their condition does not define them as a person. They are MC. They are a person with feelings and emotions and desires and dreams. Not a monster.

BAI HOWIN: She knows someone. She'll give MC a name and tell them to write to that person. They are the liaison to a small werewolf community, perhaps being in touch with others who have dealt with this will help MC cope. Don't worry, no one else needs to know about this.

DINAH HECAT: She's on watch with Kogawa. She knows MC isn't dangerous until the moon is actually out and at its peak, but it's Professor weasley's orders that they keep visual on MC until they are in the safe zone the nights of the full moon.

CUTHBERT BINNS: As long as MC is well behaved in class and keeps up with their studies, he could not care less what is in their blood.

SATYAVATI SHAH: It crosses her mind to inform the headmaster. Even if they're not intentionally dangerous, they are still potentially dangerous. The safety of her students comes first. A direct order from Professor Weasley keeps her from saying anything and she helps MC keep track of the moon cycle.

PHINEAS NIGELLUS BLACK: He never notices what individual students are up to. It's a good thing too, because MC would be immediately expelled if he did. He won't have a dangerous half-breed in his school.

#hogwarts legacy #hogwarts legacy reactions #hogwarts legacy professors #sebastian sallow #ominis gaunt #anne sallow #imelda reyes #natsai onai #garreth weasley #leander prewett #amit thakkar #everett clopton #poppy sweeting #angst

56 notes · View notes

coffeenonsense · 4 months

Text

I usually try to stay in my lane most of the time (mostly bc I am far too old for fandom drama) but what the hell, it's friday, let's put that lit degree to use:

the way people are playing morality politics with fiction is really starting to genuinely irk me and I think some of the responses to ascended astarion are a perfect example of why this type of thinking is actually hugely detrimental to one's ability to meaningfully engage with fiction and also to the future of art.

astarion is one of the most well-written complex characters I've seen in recent years bar none (and I'm clearly not alone given the explosion of his personal fandom lol) and he has a truly compelling, emotionally resonant character arc whether you ascend him or not

If you keep him a spawn, you get a deeply touching, realistic character's journey to healing and personal growth where he learns who he is after the experience of his trauma and depending on the player's choice, explores his relationship to sex, romance and intimacy

If you ascend astarion, you get an equally emotional and well-rounded character arc where he chooses the power that allows him to have the desperate freedom and safety he's wanted, but in the process eschews any hope of real healing or personal development, and again, depending on the player's choices, restarts the cycle of abuse by taking cazador's place.

These options offer vastly different paths for the character and experiences for the player, but while yes, ascended astarion is the evil ending, and yes, ascending astarion is a tragedy, and a fucking incredible one (not only do you have astarion reigniting a circle of abuse but you have the narrative weight of KNOWING he could have actually overcome his trauma...hats off to the bg3 team tbh) but that does not mean ascending astarion MAKES YOU AS THE PLAYER EVIL

Ascend astarion because you love tragic story arcs, ascend him because you want to indulge in a master/slave vampire fantasy, don't ascend him because you want a healing character journey, don't ascend him because you want a sweet romance; all of these choices carry the same moral weight for the player, which is to say, none, because they are an exploration of fiction.

I know I'm saying this to the villain fucker website but it bears repeating; just because someone wants to engage with evil, fucked up characters or content does not mean they support evil acts in their real life, and furthermore, exploring dark, taboo or tragic concepts safely is part of what fiction is for. It enables us to look at those things from a distance, work through difficult feelings and develop greater understanding of what makes our fellow humans tick — and before you get it twisted there's also no moral issue with exploring fucked up media bc you're horny or just, because. You can take it as seriously (or as sexily) as you want.

It's starting to really concern me how many people not only do not get, but are violently opposed to this concept, because equating what someone likes in fiction with their real life moral code and actions is an incredibly dangerous and let's be honest, immature way of thinking that not only stunts your ability to engage with fiction but ironically, hampers your ability to deal with complicated issues and emotions in real life.

I don't know what's driving this trend (though purity culture is certainly playing a role) but it's definitely something that's not just impacting individuals but contributing to the commercialization of art, where we get games and stories and tv shows and books that regurgitate the same safe, mass marketable plotlines and character archetypes over and over and over again so corporations can squeeze out as much profit as possible.

Anyway, remember kids: There's no such thing as thought crime, reaching for morally pure unproblematic media is directly contributing to the death of art, and this is why funding the humanities is important.

#so...yeah #idk man i have thoughts and feelings #and i love astarion so much lol #astarion #ascended astarion #bg3 #baldur's gate 3 #fandom analysis #media analysis #fiction #a personal rant because i need to vent about this and i just recalled i have a blog where i can indeed do so lol #astarion ancunin

139 notes · View notes

embracing-the-ineffable · 3 months

Text

Good Omens, staying skeptical, and the mystery and the lie at the heart of Gravity Falls

-Neil Gaiman, 29 June 2023

I recently came across this post by @apathetic-revenant, which goes into extensive detail about a whole secret meta lie generated by Alex Hirsch, creator and head writer of Gravity Falls, midway through the show.

It went like this: the show was very focused on mysteries, codes, ciphers, etc, and early on a character discovered a mysterious journal with an unknown author, and this drove the plot. There were clues placed in the show so that people could solve the journal author's identity, or more probably so that it would all make sense in hindsight after the big reveal. However, the show ended up with a larger-than-expected fandom who started organizing online in a way the creators hadn't expected or planned for, and they were worried everyone would collectively solve the mystery too easily, too soon, and the suspense and appeal of the story gradually unfolding would be lost.

So they took a fake BTS photo that appeared to reveal the journal's author and "leaked" it online. To give it credibility, the show's creator posted "Fuming right now" and then deleted the post soon after, once they were certain it had been seen and screenshots taken. The Gravity Falls fandom then stopped trying to solve the mystery, as they believed the answer had already been revealed. It was a solution "targeted toward delaying that group problem-solving, without actually affecting the experience of any individual person watching the show."

Ok, Good Omens fandom. Are we Gravity Falls all over again? Are we also experiencing meta lies?

Is it possible that Amazon's marketing department has just released a new promotional video about Aziraphale & Crowley's "timeline of interconnectedness" (discussions here and here ) where they honestly:

got several of those timeline dates wrong, including labeling the entirety of seasons 1 and 2 as belonging to the same year?

mixed all the season 1 and 2 clips together so they're completely interconnected and out of the order they were presented to us so far?

didn't consult with Neil Gaiman for even a moment to be sure they had their facts straight? (Or literally anyone else who's spent years working on it? Or even someone who has just watched it once while paying attention?)

didn't understand the way most series tell a story by moving through time in a realistic linear fashion?

When Neil said today that "time is fine" in response to questions about the timeline of interconnectedness video, was he trying to misdirect the fandom away from the mystery that's clearly hidden throughout both seasons (and especially season 2)?

The Good Place seems suddenly more relevant than I'd imagined:

Neil has told us that his Tumblr posts aren't canon. He's also said:

"Never trust the storyteller. Only trust the story."

"Writers are liars, my dear, surely you know that by now? And yet, things need not have happened to be true. Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot." -Both quotes are from The Sandman [link]

So here's my plea to whichever part of the fandom might read this: Stay Skeptical. It's wonderful to talk to Neil about his characters, the worlds he's created, his writing process, his views on world events, his sense of humor, his kindness, his compassion and empathy, and his good advice & encouragement for the entire range of the human experience. I respect him very much, and I'm thrilled he's here on social media talking to all of us. (Except he doesn't have social media, obviously. He's like Schrödinger's Social Media Neil-cat.)

I'm looking forward to all the surprises I'm certain are in store for us (and Aziraphale and Crowley) in Good Omens season 3. I trust Neil (and Terry!) to deliver our beloved characters to a very satisfying ending. But I don't trust Neil to honestly answer all of our questions on social media - and neither should you.

Especially not when he's already blamed obvious season 2 changes to the Bentley on the "lighting" (as just one example).

With lots of thanks to the members of the @ineffable-detective-agency - including @bbbitchvibbbez, @kimberleyjean, @maufungi, @noneorother, @theastrophysicistnextdoor, and @thebluestgreen for all their excellent fact-checking, ideas, and discussions!

Interested in diving further into all the Good Omens mysteries? I have more posts plus Clues and metas from all over the fandom, here.

59 notes · View notes

highfantasy-soul · 2 months

Text

Ok, here's my breakdown of Jessie Gender's video on NATLA. I decided not to post this as a comment on the video because I just don't feel like it would be productive, but I needed to refute the points she was making as she's a quite respected (at least, I really respect her opinions on things) video essayist and I felt like this video was...wild.

So, I guess it's best to just watch along with her video and read my commentary side-by-side because I don't give much context for my points, this is just a stream-of-consciousness style response.

To be perfectly clear - this is not intended to be a 'hate post' about her, this is just me feeling very strongly that the interpretations of things she had in her video needed to be talked about and another perspective given.

I shift from saying 'you' to 'Jessie' like halfway through (when I decided not to post this as a comment) but I don't feel like going through and changing all those, so yeah, just ignore it.

1) you insulted a martial arts kata as 'a mildly choreographed dance' - it shows a complete lack of understanding of other cultures and a desire to take a quick dig at something you didn't like in a way that insults a cultural practice. I really didn't expect to hear that sort of comment from you so it was pretty jarring when you said it. Ironically, you say that Sokka was wrong to assume the Kyoshi warrior's kata was a 'dance' because that's 'a girl's place' when...you literally made the same insult with not a hint of recognition just a few minutes earlier about a movie you didn't like…

2) I felt that the live-action really deepened a lot of the themes from the OG - take Iroh's storyline for example, fleshing out Suki's character so she's...you know, her own character and not just there to teach Sokka a lesson, and delving into how hard of decisions you have to make during a century long war. Idk, I'm just really curious as to how you felt quite literally the polar opposite of me

3) Sokka's sexism: the animated show handled it one way, but Sokka's treating women as 'less than' wasn't a core part of his character - in all honesty, it doesn't actually make any sense as he was raised by Hakoda (who we never see being sexist), Gran Gran (who left the NWT due to its sexism), and was surrounded mostly by older women. The sexism storyline in the cartoon was to teach a very blatant lesson to kids "don't be sexist, boys!" while the live-action made Sokka's struggles much more realistic and in line with the world building: he struggled with non-traditional masculinity and if he was 'allowed' to be that way while they were at war. For me, it's a much more important message for young men today than the very dated 'women can fight, too!' message that was needed in the early 2000s. It's very odd to me how you claim that Sokka always taking charge isn't ever challenged when...in literally the scene you're showing when you say that, Katara challenges him.

4) I'm sorry, but I cannot possibly see how Suki is her own person more in the animated version than in the live-action. She was literally created solely to teach Sokka a lesson and have no character traits other than 'I'm a strong woman warrior' where 'woman' means 'I like romance' rather than...I'm a whole person with my own wants and desires and fears that have nothing to do with a love interest as is shown in the live-action. You keep comparing the animated and live action as though they were trying to tell the same story about Sokka's journey with his role in the world, but they weren't. Of course Suki's attitude toward him is going to be different, of course he's not going to need to tell her 'you're right, I'm a dumb, terrible man, pretty please could you teach me', because it's a different dynamic they're going for in the live-action.

5) When Sokka pinned her in their lesson in the live-action idk how you got that she was 'demuring herself' to Sokka? Just as in the cartoon, he managed to get the upper hand - which she promptly took back, teaching a lesson along the way. She didn't make herself less so Sokka could feel secure in his masculinity - it's a bit odd you feel that showing respect to someone and helping them learn is 'demuring yourself'. I much prefer them respecting each other than the animated version of them seeing each other as less than and then...her giving him a kiss to prove 'see, I'm a romance-loving girl, too'.

5) To me, Suki beating Sokka in the live-action when the first sparred wasn't her being mean, it was her not understanding how much less experience Sokka had fighting - she genuinely thought he would be able to hold his own against her because he had told her he was the best warrior in his tribe. Her face clearly shows 'I have no idea what I did wrong - I thought that type of sparring is what everyone did for fun, why was he uncomfortable with it?' Not really sure why you made the connection that us seeing Sokka's abs was meant to indicate that his insecurities are unfounded when...literally the whole season shows us that Sokka's struggles aren't "end goal = big strong warrior" but rather "you don't have to be a big strong warrior to help, you are allowed to delve into other aspects of who you are and those are just as important". Just because he has muscles, also doesn't mean he's a competent fighter - those two things aren't the same.

6) It feels like you took certain scenes and made wildly left-field interpretations of them and then claimed that that's what the show was intending you to take from it. It's like saying that the scene that cuts from Sokka saying he bets Momo tastes like chicken and cutting to the scene that shows people cooking meat actually means the showrunners are saying Sokka is going to cook and eat Momo this season and that will then give him the powers of the Avatar. It's very clearly not what the showrunners were saying, but if you interpret it in the least forgiving way and then make a wild leap off that, then yeah, you might get upset with that made-up interpretation. Same with the reasons they didn't put Sokka in the Kyoshi outfit - there is 0 evidence of them nixing that part due to transphobia. I didn't see it as any malicious intent, just a streamline of the plot so Sokka doesn't have to go change before running away on Appa.

7) I feel that the live-action DOES challenge the Fire Bender's colonialist rhetoric in the Kyoshi Island episode, but the animated...doesn't? At all? It's solely about girl power - and as we see with Azula and all the women fire nation soldiers, the fire nation doesn't seem too caught up in sexism. You know what they are caught up in? Which you mention? Bender supremacy. And that's what the live-action directly addresses with Sokka being so surprised that Suki is able to hold her own so well even though she isn't a bender. He's seen just how powerful benders are (they destroyed his home, killed his mom, and beat his ass last episode) and it's in line with the worldbuilding that he feels like he's already several steps behind in being a good enough warrior because he doesn't have bending (a storyline that isn't brought up until an episode in season 3 of the animated show). To me, the live-action Kyoshi storyline refutes the Fire Nation's imperialistic themes much better than the animated show does.

8) The live-action's lesson wasn't that might makes right - Suki never did any strength training exercises with Sokka, she taught him how to control his body and use his opponent's strength against them. Fight smarter, not harder. Know what you're fighting for, not just that you want to fight. Even if you don't have the resources of your opponent, it doesn't mean you're doomed from the start. That last one is particularly poignant when we look at how much stronger the Fire Nation is than the other nations they're subjugating: it's the classic 'oppressed rising up against their oppressors and not winning because they just punched harder, but because they used what they had to fight for a righteous cause and didn't just give up because the other side was more powerful'. That's quite directly what the live-action was saying - the exact lesson you thought it should be saying. You have to do some serious extrapolating from the animated episode to get to those themes while the live-action drew that concept up to the forefront immediately.

9) Aang's journey to accept his Avatar responsibility and the previous Avatar's enforcing this is directly from the animated series. Like, directly. It's not the live-action show saying 'colonialism good'. Showing the Avatar power wasn't the showrunners saying 'see, this OP is good and cool', it was to show the magnitude of it - something the animated show does too. The live-action does talk about how terrifying and damaging that power is - literally the previous episode has Aang almost toss Katara and Sokka off the mountain and they mention it. Just earlier in that episode, Sokka talks about Aang almost killing them and Aangs major hang up about embracing it is that he might hurt someone. Kyoshi argues that not learning to control it will hurt more people and - y'all, individuals are allowed to have their own views of the power that everyone doesn't have to agree with. What happened to 'make strong characters with flaws in their world view?' did you all of a sudden decide that's NOT actually good writing? So having the Avatar who used her powers liberally, and as the video states, used them maybe too much, telling Aang that he needs to use his own powers a lot is…consistent characterization? Which is then challenged by Roku later as he tells Aang that all the Avatars are different and have different views on the power of the Avatar. Why is Kyoshi's opinions suddenly taken as wholly accurate in representing what the show overall is trying to say? She's giving her opinion to Aang - an opinion that has some truth to it, but also some flaws that Aang will need to navigate on his own journey. Kyoshi and Roku's stories are not compressed all into Kyoshi - only the aspect of Roku taking control of Aang and using his body to fuck shit up in the Avatar state is compressed - not the ideological aspects of it

10) Sokka supporting Katara's fight against Pakku is a culmination of his arc to let go of obsessively protecting her and actually letting her decide her course of action herself - because his arc was different in the show than in the animated series. Trying to say that the reason he told her to kick Pakku's ass didn't fit because he was never sexist wasn't the reason - it WAS a culmination of his arc, you just refused to see it by clinging to the old one.

11) The whole argument as to 'why show genocide' I already made a post about, but to condemn the depiction based on the way you interpret the showrunner's quote is disingenuous. Again, it's taking something and making up a narrative around it so you can feel justified in hating it. It's important to show a culture before they are killed because they deserve to be seen as people, not just martyrs. They had lives. They lived and were happy and had a rich culture. They were not just 'fated to die and be told of in history books'. Genocide is disgusting and hard to watch - it's calculated and brutal. Showing that drives home just how awful the actions of the fire nation are in practice rather than just theory. Yes, the airbenders fighting was 'cool' to see - in the way that all action is 'cool' to see. But no, the genocide wasn't played as 'look at neat fighting!' in the live-action. It was shown as brutal and terrible, horrifying and surprising, and the airbenders didn't deserve what happened to them. It also gives you a direct view of what the fire nation is capable of when they come to the south pole and the northern water tribe: you've SEEN the devastation first hand and you DON'T want to see it again. The threat isn't theoretical, it's very real.

11.5) To take a CHILD'S quote about the sequence being 'so cool' is absolutely WILD to me. GORDON IS A CHILD! No, he's not going to have the most sophisticated and politically nuanced sound bite to say about the action sequence in an interview. HE'S A CHILD! Holy mother of god. To use that to bolster your point that 'that's the way it was intended to be viewed and how everyone is going to view it!' is just…..holy shit. You're taking media interpretation from A CHILD??????? Do you think, if we interviewed a child about the OG show, they'd talk about the fucking colonialism??? How Azula was abused too and didn't deserve her fate?? Or do you think they'd say "The fight between the Fire Lord and Aang at the end was so cool!" Honestly thought Jessie Gender wouldn't try to bolster her interpretation with a quote from A CHILD, but I guess here we are…

12) It's wild that she makes the point that conservatives are incapable of reading deeper than just the surface-level visuals of a story while…she's doing literally the same thing just in the opposite way. The live-action depicted the genocide, therefore they MUST just want to 'cool' visual of firebenders fighting airbenders! There can't be any other things at play here! No story being told whatsoever because all it is is spectacle! That's all I see! Ironically, she's falling into the same trap of not looking deeper at why one might depict the horrors of genocide and the battle against people with no army.

13) Aang actually treats the genocide as more immediate in the live-action than he does the animated show. Most animated episodes, you can forget that it even happened, while in the animated show, it pops up a lot in some unexpected ways like when he's uncomfortable waterbending because Gyatzo had always been his teacher, when he yells at Bumi for making light of the genocide, his desire to get to the north to keep it from happening again, when Zhao proclaims that he can wipe out an entire race of benders and Aang says he knows exactly what that's like, when he constantly stays to help people because 'I couldn’t help my own people, but I can help them'. Not only through Aang, but also through every child in the series - like with the animated show, the live-action shows how kids are shaped by the generational trauma of the war plus the immediate effects of it: Teo ready to fight, Jet making compromises to fight back, Sokka shouldering too much responsibility so young, Katara's trauma around her mother's death and her waterbending, Bumi losing his faith, Zuko and Azula being shaped by their father to be the perfect weapons to continue the war.

14) Interpreting Zuko's comment of 'sometimes the weak can become strong' right after his father mutilated him for showing compassion is not meant to be taken as a thesis that 'Zuko just needs to get better at fighting, this is what the story is saying, I am very smart'. It's showing HIS CURRENT view of the world - the idea that his father has taught him that he needs to be strong and Zuko has bought that and wants desperately to earn his father's love. Zuko's story through the series is showing that 'strength' isn't what his father defines it as (or what Jessie defines it as in her video) but rather it's strength of character - compassion is not weakness, it's strength, and no, that doesn't mean if you have compassion you punch harder.

15) The live-action show makes the Fire Nation MUCH more nuanced than the animated show - we see how Ozai and Azula aren't just maniacal villains, but we see the pain and torment their upbringings deal out to them, and in turn, deal to others. It shows the cycle much more clearly and showing fire nation citizens who disagree fleshes out the culture even more.

16) Jet was much more nuanced in the live-action as he's RIGHT about the mechanist being a spy and the king being lax in his duties. He's created a community of people to try to heal from the harm the fire nation has caused them and he gives actual good advice to Katara, helping her emotionally heal and remember the good aspects of her mother.

17) The argument that 'the live action is trying to ignore the past' is a massively simplified narrative. The live-action is showing Aang stuck in the past, unable to take large steps into the future. Pain, trauma and loss can anchor us in the past - it's HEALTHY to keep moving forward rather than only thinking about the pain in the past (ie Jet's advice to Katara). Aang was continually trying to avoid the genocide happening again while simultaneously trying to get past Avatars to do the big hard work for him. His lesson is not to 'forget the past just live in the now' but rather, don't let fear of what has happened in the past stop you from making a difference in the future. Yes, war is loss and suffering, but if you get paralyzed by not being able to prevent that, the fire nation will just keep marching across the world. It's about not letting the past immobilize you to the point where you stop fighting back against oppression - or getting together with a community to help you fight for fear they'll die just like those in the past did.

17.5) Letting go of the past is a buddhist philosophy that is a lot more complicated than Jessie is making it out to be here. Just as in the animated series, characters can come to realizations about lessons they need to learn while still taking seasons to fully learn the lesson - just because Aang said he's ready to let go of the past doesn't mean he's now ignoring it and all will be smooth sailing. It means he's ready to start taking steps to do that and approach life in a healthier way. It's wild that Jessie took the direct quote "I need to let go of the past to focus on my future" and then states that the show is saying "the character's aren't seeing future possibilities and hope, they're focused on the now" when, quite literally, the quote she just referenced….is talking about building a better future.

18) Then, she references later seasons (Aang in the fire nation school) a lot to indicate that the live-action is ignoring those concepts from the OG when….we're talking about season 1 here - not season 3. Why is the world not allowed to organically grow? Why would you make the argument that 'season 1 didn’t explicitly deal with these concepts that aren't brought up until season 3, so therefore they are ignoring them'?

19) Jessie uses a lot of clips from a Daily Wire (conservative talkshow) guy as if that has anything at all to do with the live-action ATLA. She's trying to draw a line between that ideology and the ideology of the show and I feel like she had to bastardize the NATLA show in order to do that so horribly, her interpretation of the story and themes is completely unrecognizable to what is actually shown on screen.

I usually agree with her takes on media, but this video was not it. Every interpretation she had, I interpreted the scenes/lessons in the exact opposite way and, I believe, I interpreted it closer to what the showrunners intended.

Oh no, i just had a thought: this is The Last Jedi all over again! I saw so many negative interpretations of that movie that I just sat and scratched my head over like "How in the WORLD did you get to that conclusion??" when I thought my own interpretation was just...the obvious way to view the movie. I had no idea my views on it would be so controversial. Here we are again. Time is a flat circle. Life is a meaningless cycle of disappointment and confusion, neverending.

#natla #natla positivity #netflix avatar #netflix atla #this isn't intended as hate to Jessie Gender - only a response to her publicly posted video

48 notes · View notes

pikahlua · 7 months

Note

I hope I'm not pestering you at this point, but when exactly do you think he changed his idea of what being the number 1 meant to the extent that he no longer cared about the actually title? Because I got the impression that he'd accepted his weakness when compared to Midoriya under the condition that he would surpass him in the future, based on what he said during the War when trying to keep up with Deku. I kind of thought his visceral reaction to failing to truly damage Shigaraki, and him embracing the damage his awakening was doing to himself to kind of imitate Deku and the power he achieved with his self-sacrificial mindset, kinda supported that. How off am I?

Sorry if I'm making you repeat things you've said.

Oh, you're not off at all. Forgive me, I did not originally understand your meaning in the first question:

Do you think there's going to be a moment where Bakugou comes to terms with the fact that he might never be the number 1 the way he wanted? I can see the story is going on a "save to win" route, but I've been curious about how him realizing his most powerful attacked only grazed Shigaraki will play out.

I thought by not being "the number 1 the way he wanted," you meant his original idea of it from the beginning of the series--the "win no matter what" mentality without a thought for saving anybody. I see now you meant something different.

It sounds like you were asking if Katsuki will ever face the possibility that he may never surpass Izuku or be able to reach Izuku's level when it comes to firepower, that Katsuki may be in Endeavor's situation (not with Endeavor's mindset though) where he constantly sees how wide the gap between them is and must reconcile with that, that Katsuki may have to settle on a "number one" where he surpasses Izuku not with his own strength but only with help from others (i.e. teamwork).

To which I must say, uh, western fans, we gotta talk.

Anon, you may not be guilty of harboring the idea I'm about to challenge, but I see this one particular sentiment all over the place in the English-speaking fandom, and I really need to make something clear to everyone:

Horikoshi has never stated there is an upper limit on any character's power growth potential--NOT EVEN IZUKU'S.

Don't get confused by the "100% One For All" thing. That's a measure of how much of One For All Izuku is USING. It's meant to compare with how much power All Might could use at 100%--but Izuku's real 100% will be different. One For All didn't just get more powerful by being passed on. Each user before Izuku, including notably Shinomori, cultivated and improved the power. Izuku will do so too. His current 100% is not his end-all-be-all 100% over the course of his life. Izuku can train and work hard and grow and make One For All stronger, too.

And Izuku isn't the only one who can do this. Anyone, Katuski included, can improve their quirk. They don't have some set 100% limit they can't increase with enough effort.

To which you might say: okay, but realistically, there is SOME upper limit to that, right?

But actually...no. This is manga/anime, not real life. And shounen manga is particularly notorious for its focus on effort and improvement through hard work. This is a time-honored tradition of the genre dating all the way back to Son Goku of Dragonball (and probably even further back too). The upper limits of Goku's power growth become so absolutely ludicrous as his series carries on and needs him to grow stronger--SO HE JUST GETS STRONGER. That's like the EPITOME of what he is: someone who wants to get stronger so he works to get stronger and, lo and behold, he gets stronger!

And lest we forget, Horikoshi has named Goku as one of his ideals of a "hero," as one of the characters from whom All Might (and by extension Katsuki) takes inspiration.

You know how each generation of quirks has greater potential than the last? This is a direct parallel of One For All's evolution. It showcases that ALL quirks have the ability to evolve into something powerful just like One For All did; it's just a matter of what the quirk user does with it. And each generation can cultivate their quirk and pass it along to get even stronger too. If you want to be a real stickler about how maybe only CERTAIN generations of quirks could surpass One For All, sure, fine, whatever (actually not fine but I'll deal with this later*). We don't know which generation of quirk users Katsuki falls into, and there's a real chance he doesn't know either. But he was born in the same generation as Izuku, so there's no reason his quirk can't be of a ninth generation too. So, he has every reason to believe he could become just as strong as Izuku. He always believed he could surpass All Might, after all.

*Okay let's deal with this little nugget now. Does the ordinal generation of Katsuki's quirk really matter? Not really. Izuku's power was cultivated by many as a theme, but he acknowledges his is a strength made from others'. That doesn't make One For All inherently the best quirk ever, just that it was able to become so strong BECAUSE of others. If the others had done nothing with it, it wouldn't have become so powerful. MHA acknowledges there are other important and good ways of improving one's power: through hard work and effort. It's not that one form of cultivation is absolutely better than the other, just that they both have their uses--and that BOTH TOGETHER would be the best route to improve one's power. This ties into how Japan traditionally views talent and intelligence as products of hard work and improvement in contrast to how the west traditionally views these things as inherent and set at birth. If you're unaware, the Japanese word for "quirk," kosei, translates to "individuality/personality." Individuality/personality is also one of those traits a person has that can be seen as inherent or cultivated--but really it's a product of BOTH. The question of nature versus nurture, as always, is answered with "well actually, both nature and nurture play a part."

(If you want to go off on a tangent with this, go read whatever is the latest version of @siflshonen's Katsuki Bakugou powerpoint presentation on their blog at the time you are reading this.)

Now, I told you all that to tell you this:

Katsuki should never have to face the idea that he will never be able to be number 1 because it's simply not true.

Katsuki has every potential to surpass Izuku. If Izuku were to be satisfied with his quirk's growth and call it quits, Katsuki's quirk's growth would eventually outshine his GUARANTEED. It's because Katsuki is that kind of character, and this is demonstrated in spades throughout the entire manga. Gosh, remember when Izuku said he was only using 8% of OFA in Deku vs Kacchan, Part 2? Remember how the fandom assumed he would dwarf everyone else in comparison as he progressed further down the line?

And remember how Katsuki "grit his teeth to keep from falling behind"?

Everyone's always going on about how Izuku's power will someday eclipse everyone else's, but he's had that monstrous OFA power with him all along since he got it. He just has to improve his BODY to match OFA's power. Has no one really put any thought to how absolutely BATSHIT it is that Katsuki kept up with him? After Katsuki's growth had stalled for so long?

Remember, Izuku's raw power surpassed Katsuki's in DvK2. So by the time of the Paranormal Liberation War, Katsuki developed his quirk to match OFA at 30% in the same amount of time it took Izuku just to develop his body to handle that much OFA. If we're gonna get into the western versions of power-scaling where we care about natural limits...

THE HEIGHTS OF KATSUKI'S "NATURAL" LIMITS ARE EMPIRICALLY ASTRONOMICALLY INSANE.

So, I come back to something you said:

I kind of thought his visceral reaction to failing to truly damage Shigaraki, and him embracing the damage his awakening was doing to himself to kind of imitate Deku and the power he achieved with his self-sacrificial mindset, kinda supported that.

...and to something I said:

But if you mean he'll reconcile with how his firepower compares to TomurAFO's, I'd say, uh, keep an eye out, because already he's had a quirk upgrade since he tried his Howitzer Cluster on TomurAFO. It's very likely that is no longer the upper limit of his capabilities. And that's just assuming he hasn't achieved any other power ups yet/won't get another one soon.

Katsuki's Howitzer Impact Cluster vs TomurAFO was a single snapshot in time. Katsuki has already had a quirk upgrade since then, and as you so aptly pointed out, he's had a sort of philosophical/meta upgrade too as he emulated Izuku. I doubt these will be the last improvements he experiences in his life. He was always held back from surpassing Izuku by the story because he was missing such a huge part of being a hero: saving people. But that's been resolved now. He and Izuku will be rivals who challenge each other to be better for the rest of their lives, and I doubt either one of them will ever truly pull away from the other in terms of raw potential (at least not for long). Katsuki may have instances of self-doubt, of course. He even may at some point acknowledge Izuku as his superior. But I don't think that's a reason for him to ever lose hope or give up. I think there's plenty of reason for anyone to believe it's possible for him to surpass Izuku someday. After all, All Might was considered the best hero of his age not because of his strength but because of his spirit.

And Katsuki's sure got a shitton of spirit.

#anon ask #ask pika #my hero academia manga spoilers #final showdown spoilers #katsuki bakugou #meta #pika's objectively correct power-scaling opinions

85 notes · View notes

clonehub · 17 days

Text

finished tales of the empire. ill say the fight between Morgan and that assassin is the best that ive seen in star wars animation. i dont care for morgan though and I dont feel like i really learned who she was in this. i know she was in the mandalorian and ahsoka, but that's it.

i much preferred barriss's tales. setting aside her having bombed the temple, and the subsequent characterization needed to justify/fall in line with that, I found her story the most compelling. I wish they could have developed her relationship with Lynn a bit more, especially since I liked where it seemed to be going/doing at the end.

i dont like that they seem to have gotten rid of Barriss' muslim coding. She has her hair out/stops covering and eventually cuts her hair short. It's possible they did that in order to retroactively try and remove the racism and islamophobia surrounding her bombing the temple, but that's a generous read.

animation wise, it's gorgeous. blood, sweat, tears, shiny bits and bobs, the most realistic fish in some water ive seen in animation in ages, amazing fight choreography, stunning environments, everything. I found the body language and general movements in Bariss's arc more natural-looking than the ones in Morgan's. This actually highlights a problem I have with the direction sw animation is going in. The environments are basically realistic, but the character models still have a weightless feel to them, or still have little quirks here and there (does a character's upper body/shoulders need to lean forward when they walk?). In addition, Morgan's face was quite...textureless? Compared to other characters standing right beside her, and then characters like Lynn, etc, she was so smooth. Bland, almost.

I've said it for years now, but I wish they'd have found a way to boost or maintain the brush strokes that were so prevalent in early tcw animation. If they'd moved in that direction as the animation improved, I think we'd still be at this gorgeous spot now.

The voice acting was very good as well, especially for Thrawn. But most of all, what I enjoyed beyond anything else was the score. The Kiners absolutely knocked it out of the park with this one, and every single song (especially in Barriss's arc) was RIGHT up my alley and hit on all the things that I love to hear in music. It was so complex and mournful, so heavy and beautiful. I loved it.

Overall, I don't think I have a star rating for TotE because the first character I didn't know anything about, and I might have more annoyances than pluses with Barriss's story and where it ended up. But in general I enjoyed it, you know? I don't think it was bad.

#ch posts #star wars #tales of the empire #tote spoilers #theyre minor though #sw tote

32 notes · View notes

cosmiclion · 8 months

Text

If you thought I couldn't outdo myself more with the fluff for this AU then you haven't seen my true power yet 😈

I don't know if I got OCiel's bangs right but, realistically speaking, human hair never stays in the same place, that's how physics works so whatever lmao.

Anyway, trying to write a Black Butler AU with some fluff where Sebastian and Ciel have a parent-child like relationship WHILE keeping them in-character (Sebas more than Ciel tbh) and still basing it on canon material but making changes and making said changes make sense requires a bit of work ngl.

I mean, I know it's just a project I'm doing for fun and technically there's nothing stopping me from going nuts and making them completely OOC and disregarding canon at all, but I feel then it'd become a separate story with new, original characters who simply happen to be inspired by Kuro (which is also okay, and who knows, maybe in the future I'll repurpose the whole thing to create my own Kuro-inspired original story, even if I don't think I'll ever fully lose interest in Kuro, this cursed series has me in a chokehold lmao). Full ramble under the cut.

Sebastian is the hardest one to write, though I think I'm finally more or less figuring it out. I didn’t want to write him as suddenly learning to love the way humans do thanks to the power of cute children or something, as it just didn't feel natural (or I couldn't personally make it feel natural, I know other people have managed to write that concept very well). What I have so far is that when he does act nurturing he’s simply imitating the behavior of human parents he has observed, but he doesn’t love the kid the same way humans do because he literally doesn’t have that ability. BUT that doesn’t mean he feels nothing at all and that it doesn’t mean anything to Ciel, after all this weird creature is the one who saved his life and raised him with care and patience. The closest comparison I can think of is the relationship between people and “unusual” pets like reptiles, amphibians, insects, etc. We know they can’t love us the way other people (or even other mammals) would but that doesn’t make our bond any less significant! Some bits of canon material also come in handy here, for example I based the fact that familiar Sebas finds Ciel adorable as a kitten on the canon fact that he likes squishing his cheeks because they remind him of a cat's paws 😂 Just know he's an awkward demon who doesn't know how to human but is doing his best 🥺

I think in Ciel’s case I have more freedom since he is, after all, human, and a human’s personality is strongly shaped by their environment and life experiences. Like, what exactly counts as making a character OOC? Sure, I can agree that in a fanwork set in the exact same universe with the exact same events as in canon there’s some things a character would never say or do, but I think AUs were created as a way to explore what-if scenarios. What if this character had been raised by different people? What if they had grown up in a different place? What if this or that event hadn’t happened or had gone differently? Tbh I think it’s just fun to explore endless possibilities, it’s maybe a form of character analysis in some way. And if we think about it, canonverse Ciel was originally sweet, shy and affectionate, and if he’s the complete opposite now it’s only because he went through an utterly horrific and traumatic event that forced him to grow up before his time and toughen himself up because it left him with little to no support system, on top of having to be hyper vigilant because the only thing that "saved" him from that is a literal demon who wants his soul and is haunting him.

So I just wanted to create this alternative timeline where maybe things aren’t as terrible, or they start out as terrible but then some good things come from the most unexpected sources. Ciel is five years younger and thus has more time to process everything and try to heal as he grows up. Sebas isn’t entirely a bastard and willingly does nice things for the child, even if he still doesn’t understand human needs, and while he stills views him as a potential meal (at least at the beginning) he's actually respectful. There’s another demon who understands humans all too well and is happy to lend a hand. His friends and the relatives he has left are more involved in his life. So Ciel more or less has a support system now, albeit a weird dysfunctional one, and doesn’t entirely lose his sweetness (also like... he's 5/6 at the beginning of the story, we really can't expect a preschooler to be an edgy emo who craves violence and revenge ☠️). I imagine he grows up to be just as calculating and cunning as canonverse Ciel, maybe even just as ruthless in his job because it’s a requirement, and is still pretty much a little shit, but this Ciel is not as cold and undemonstrative. He’s still very much an introvert who prefers to be left alone, but he smiles (as in genuinely smile) more often and it’s a little easier for him to express emotions and feelings (more through actions than words, but still meaningful). Hell he may allow himself to be playful and silly sometimes if he’s in the moment.

And if it wasn’t clear from the picture, little Ciel ADORES Sebastian. Sure he's (understandably) a bit skittish around him at first, but once they bond he comes to fully view him as a parental figure. Yes, he's hurt, sad and traumatized, but he's still a resilient little kid, and with enough kindness Sebas can coax his old self to come out of his shell, and until the kid becomes more independent they're like a mama duck and her lil duckling. Their constant banter and bickering when he's older is more a teens being teens thing than anything.

109 notes · View notes

uroboros-if · 8 months

Note

seeing your rant about how difficult it is to be somewhat rude without ruining your relationships in ifs WAS SO RELATABLE! It doesn’t feel real to be always good or nice to characters to be liked

I’m not saying you should be able beat them up and still romance without consequences but romance/relationships aren’t always perfect and peaceful!!! Disagreements/arguments should be something that can happen without it being at the cost of the relationship itself ugh because that’s normal come on >:| as an angst enjoyer, its so hard to have fun without the character being like “you dont agree with me? perish then”

so I’m even more excited for the game now that I saw your take on it because LETS GO!!!!!! <3

You succinctly explained what I struggled to! 😭

I will confess it's half self-indulgent, because I really enjoy relationships where the two must confront their conflicting ideals! I understand most seek other like-minded people, but what of characters who like to be challenged? Characters who can't help but be attached to someone they shouldn't be?

Even setting that aside, you are completely correct! As long as that topic isn't sensitive to someone and neither party is inflexible, people won't automatically like you less.

So not only does such an approval system lose out on angst potential, sometimes it's also unrealistic. There is truth in it as our opinions of others do adjust based on their actions, and those things add up! However, it's a problem when it's applied to even arbitrary choices, or it unnecessarily severely impacts your approval.

Under the read more is my "theory" on why some ROs in IFs are defined by a dynamic trope (rivals to lovers, childhood friends to lovers, etc)!! 💕

It is difficult, if not impossible for a numerical approval system to qualitatively judge your relationship dynamics; it can only judge based on the weight of each choice. It can't, for example, see you've transitioned from being rude, to softening up to the character after realizing they're not so bad. The game only sees the sum of all your negative and positive points.

Without a way to label your actions by anything but a number, a system that purely relies on numerics is incapable of interpreting the dynamics of your relationship, and therefore customizing future interactions with the RO.

Of course, I think most IFs don't purely rely on numbers. Some do a hybrid in which important decisions are tracked qualitatively and lesser ones are tracked numerically. However, even then, some romance is limited by a baseline approval you must achieve in a certain timeframe, and that leads to pressure to meet that mystery number.

Furthermore, these qualitative "important decisions" often have more to do with the plot than how it defines your relationship specifically -- things like "did you kill their father?" rather than "What were their first impressions of the MC?"

So I believe that without a way to interpret the MC's actions meaningfully, there's only one way to play a romance route. There's only one dynamic with that character, one way the relationship can really be. You can be different genders, have your relationship contextualized differently as the story changes from your actions, but rarely does it dramatically differ solely on personality. Rarely does it examine how your relationship varies from the different ways you interact with that character.

I think it's fine that some characters are like that! In fact, it's realistic that some dynamics don't suit certain characters. For example, it's not possible to have rivals to lovers with Salvatore, because they have no reason to see you as a rival, even if you hate them or try to compete with them.

However, taking Sal as an example, your relationship can vary widely by your attitude towards them. It can be a case of friends who lost touch and regret having lost touch; it can be one-sided, as Sal may view MC as a friend, but the MC is bitterly jealous of them. Perhaps MC doesn't think much of them at all.

That's the kind of meaningful interpretation of relationships I aim for--different dynamics rather than boxing in Sal as the typical childhood friends to lovers. There is no one way to play their romance; it should change as the MC is different.

I see how it's not for everyone, and I acknowledge that it is a Herculean task that may, in time, reveal the full extent of its complexity. But I strive for it because such a complicated relationship is central to the conflict of Uroboros. There is nothing more important an undertaking than character relationships in the IF.

Extremely long theory and rambling, but I am so happy someone shares my thoughts, at least as far as disagreements with the ROs!! ❤️❤️ Thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to share even more of my opinion, Anon! I'm thrilled you are so excited for the story!

#uroboros-if #uroboros #asks #anon #i adore these asks 🥺💕#meta #interactive fiction

84 notes · View notes

bomberqueen17 · 4 months

Note

On the way home from work I was thinking about Rochr and Iorveth in your fic and remembered a question I had for you: there is this scene in which Roche gives an overtired and insomniac Iorveth a blowjob in a secluded room, there are knives involved, I think Breniriel is guarding the door? Anyway, Iorveth finally falls asleep and it is implied that Iorveth has been adapting poorly to feeling save and thus somehow feelt safe enough with Roche to fall asleep but not his friends /family?? I don't think they were even talking at this point in your fic, what did I miss?

Have a nice evening /day!

Well, so like, that's the premise of the fic. I'm not saying this to be an ass, this is a genuine response, because it is sort of an honor to have someone thinking about your work beyond even the time it takes to read it, but: That is the premise of the fic.

And either it works for you, or it doesn't. That's just... how fiction works. Do i think that in real life two traumatized people would actually hit it off just like that? Do I think it would work? Do I think it would be healthy? Do I think it would lead to long-term happiness for either or both of them?

I won't answer that, I will just leave that to sit for a moment. My answer is immaterial anyway, because the author's intent is only marginally relevant in some circumstances.

This is fantasy, critically, more broadly than fiction (is it a broader category? I think so). Like... one of them is an elf, and has a shapeshifting dragon as his leige and protector. Some other fantasy elements are even less realistic, but the idea is that they're plausible, for the purposes of fiction.

So this is kind of how fiction works, and fantasy in general. Do you accept the premise of this story? Do you find it plausible, for the purposes of this fictional exercise, that, to bring it specifically back to this story, two characters who have long been enemies, would find something in common like this? Two people who have been on opposite sides but were in the same conflict, who went through many of the same things, who, crucially, commanded others during this awful cataclysm of violence, who had to warp their own moral centers not only to survive but also to potentially damn others by their tragic, inevitable actions. Who have in the past bitterly fought, physically injured one another, murdered one another's comrades, and worse... but in this new peacetime, find, strangely, unexpectedly, compellingly (precedentedly, in reality!) that their former foe is the only one who truly understands what they've been through. And they can trust this former foe the way they can't trust others, because this foe gets it, because this foe knows what's at stake, fully understands what happened, has the same sense of both the fragility of society and the preciousness of its little contracts. Iorveth knows Roche would stab him in the face, not the back, and that is a kind of trust. The whole underpinning of this ship is that in the video game there's a scene where one can best the other, and in each decision tree the loser says unhinged shit about how if they have to die they're perversely glad that at least it was the other who is doing it. Because that other understands what it's worth, and is a worthy foe.

That's it, that's the ship manifesto, LOL.

So-- that's the exercise of the story, trying to draw the reader along to find this as plausible-- I did not say realistic! Plausible-- as possible. The art lies in underpinning it with realistic detail here and there-- including that after many wars in real life history, the veterans of the conflict have found more in common with their opposing veterans than with the civilians of the side they fought for-- and so on and so forth. To make it vivid, to make it relatable, to make the fantasy compelling.

And if the premise doesn't work, then the story doesn't work. That's fine, not all art is for everyone. But that's how it is. Either you accept the premise, and it works, or you don't, and you go find something else that works better for you. This is no judgement on anybody, you or me or anyone, that's just how fantasy works. A reader brings as much to it as the author, and takes as much away, and while there's an element of skill on the part of the author, a large part of it is just going to be the reader's response. Things will or won't work for you and there's nothing wrong with that, it's just another of the ways fantasy works.

(I don't know if you've missed anything, I haven't reread that scene in quite some time because I'm still working on sequels and that takes up a lot of my energy and time; same reason I rarely respond to comments, I just don't have time to both do that and make new works. I do think the blowjob with knives is a separate scene from the passing out with knives but I don't recall exactly either. It's kind of a long story. If you think you missed something, try rereading it? But if that doesn't compel you, then it's really no skin off my nose if you don't! It's fine! I'm not offended, I just don't know how else to answer that question. I don't remember the scene that well. I wrote it like a year ago or more. But I'm well aware the premise of it doesn't work for everyone, which is why there are so many people writing so many different stories.)

LOL I have more to say on this topic because I got a faintly ridiculous comment on a story recently on kind of a loosely related concept, but this is getting long and I should address it separately. Suffice to say, you got a long reply here because I have been spending some time thinking about fiction, what it is and isn't, and how it works.

#on fiction #my writing #asks answered #fantasy being the broader category of imagination #fiction being specifically published narratives #idk how else to explain it #public answer because this is something i'm considering a lot #not to spotlight this person who i genuinely think didn't mean to be a jerk #but it is hard not to see this as kind of a mean thing to ask #like truly i cannot read the story for you it either stands alone or it doesn't #and the other comment i started to essay about is way meaner LOL

29 notes · View notes

gendrie · 9 months

Note

Realistically, what note do you think or hope the books will end in regard to Arya and Gendry? I don’t expect fanfic wish fulfillment but Grrm seems to have a soft spot for them so maybe a vague romantic suggestion that leaves their future open to interpretation? Which I realize is not much different to where we’re already at lol but I just can’t imagine how their relationship would develop.

when i consider what arya/gendry will look like in the end, or just the future in general, i think about whats already in the text. the elements of romance and even sexuality within their interactions are more than a lil suggestive. ie: the two of them rolling around together is not subtle lol. the phrase "between his legs" is used twice in that paragraph. grrm wrote an exclusive to a/g love song and had the singer wink as he sang it. he introduced not one, but 2 characters mostly just to fan the flames here. gendry explicitly threatens to have sex with a girl to try to make arya jealous and he visibly dislikes a perceived rival for her attention. ect! this isn't some obscure aspect of the story. its a legitimate side plot.

so i wouldn't even describe their existing canon interactions as "vague" therefore i don't assume their future ones, endgame included, would be left entirely up to interpretation either. are they going to get married on page? and consummate the union? no. but i do expect their future interactions to continue to be obviously romantic in nature. esp now that arya is older (and gendry seems to be younger)

with all that in mind here are my realistic thoughts:

when arya returns from braavos she will rekindle her friendship with gendry and realize she's attracted to him. gendry, having endured the loss of arya, will be willing to commit to her regardless of the issues that forced them apart previously. its all going to be pg-13 and tame by asoiaf standards but they will be crushing and it's not going to be a secret. not to the readers nor anyone who happens to witness the two of them together.

as i see it theres two potential outcomes: the class difference is still insurmountable and they remain apart or they end up together in some capacity. this will probably be a controversial claim, but a/g have less barriers to being together long term than any other ship imo. consistently, throughout their relationship, gendry being "too bloody lowborn" for arya is THE issue. its the source of all the conflict between them and its the thing keeping them apart. other than that? they clearly like and admire each other. arya trusts gendry, values his perspective, and confides in him things she tells no other character. she wanted him to come home with her, to be a part of her pack.

and i want to emphasis that arya values gendry's counsel specifically because thats one aspect of their dynamic that feels very relevant within the context of their potential as a grown up couple. they make a good team and work well together. they've already endured the bleakest possible scenarios by working together. gendry is presented as a really fitting partner for arya which i think is intentional tbh.

but ultimately, can the class difference be overcome? i think it can. and not only that but i think arya and gendry ending up together can be reflective of the changes we're going to see across the board with westeros' political system. they're not going to abolish the monarchy, but there will be major changes with how the kingdom is run.

the end i envision for them is fairly understated despite all my arguing that their relationship isnt all that subtle. arya asking gendry to come home with her to winterfell (again) would be enough, but thats not vague to me either. the meaning will be clear.

all that being said HEAs are not going to plentiful in asoiaf. grrm likes "we'll always have paris" type romances where two people meet and change each other, but go their separate ways. it could be that is what happens with arya and gendry. im realistic, if not bordering on pessimistic, so i want to embrace that possibility! but everything on paper is telling me they're supposed to end up together. not least of all bc in order for this romantic build up to actually come to full fruition they have to be grown which won't be until post series.

i try to keep my expectations low too but is it wish fulfillment to expect substantial pay off? idk.......grrm has been teasing love, sex and even marriage with arya and gendry for like the entire series actually. since that "arya has the hands of a blacksmith" comment in the first paragraph of her first chapter. he better do something!!!

#ask #gendrya #this got long lol #hopefully its coherent i got a lotta thoughts #i felt like i couldnt address the end without getting into a few other points

66 notes · View notes

heteromerous-rhyming · 2 months

Text

while i'm feeling stabby let's talk about action scenes in the percy jackson show (bc i refuse to let this go i refuse i do)

bc the actions scenes otherwise were not unfortunately memorable for me i'm going to be talking about the first and last ones and why they don't work both on a cinematic level but also on a character level. did i want to address the disappointingness of the st louis arch fight? yes. but literally cannot remember it beyond the fact that it was disappointing. which says a lot imo.

so. let's start with the mrs. dodds fight shall we?

i'm going to say it. taking away the sequence where percy assumes that he's wrongfully in trouble kills a bunch of subtle character work in the series.

in the books percy has a short monologue at the beginning where he starts off with "am i a troubled kid?" and so the lead up to mrs. dodds attacking him does several things. we, the reader understand that percy didn't (consciously) do anything, so we feel the unfairness when he's pulled aside - this scene asks us, the readers, to sympathize with the kid, not the authority figure. it sets up a fundamental theme in the books, that authority figures, and more specifically adults, can be challenged, can be wrong, can be terribly unfair to children. and this is important considering the protagonist of this story is dyslexic and has ADHD???

and they take it out. and it's really really galling.

there's so many other things that i could say about the character work in this scene. so many, like the fact that mrs. dodds' monologue about the gods is misinterpreted at first to be about the school - setting up the connection between the school administration unfairness and the gods unfair attitudes towards their children. like the moment when percy thinks that it might have been his ADHD acting up when mrs. dodds got up the stairs quicker than humanly possible. there's also less foreshadowing for mr. brunner being chiron, like the pen turning into a sword isn't even properly shown hello the pen suddenly having magical properties could be completely divorced from mr. brunner gifting it to percy.

there's just. a lot. of character work I'M LITERALLY SCREAMING IT'S NOT EVEN A HARD SCENE JUST PLEASE WHY IS THE SHOW ALLERGIC TO TENSION LIKE PLEASE

but they don't add in the conversations, they don't add in the moment of self-doubt, they don't add in mr. brunner. mrs. dodds just approaches menacingly. in broad daylight. like sir. the mist can cover a lot but it showed ares as a kidnapper. it doesn't make that much sense that it completely erased people's perception of mrs. dodds. like please.

(also idk if this is disney, but i think that it was incredibly frustrating that they really just removed percy's being treated as a delinquent and as a troubled kid. the show begins with the monologue but the monologue is kickstarted by percy being at "Yancy Academy, a private school for troubled kids in upstate New York." HELLO??? you could have had the exact same monologue but you change it for subpar themes????)

ok so it doesn't work on a character level.

does it work cinematically?

HELL NO.

this scene has already been torn to shreds and back (BUT NOT ENOUGH) so i'll be short. EVEN THE SPY KIDS HAS IMPACT SEQUENCES. ONES THAT LOOK REALISTIC MIND YOU. there's no impact. percy isn't pushed down by mrs. dodds, he just. trips? ig? silently? without any noise? ahahaha the lack of noise??? someone else has already mentioned the lack of noise but yeah once you hear (or don't hear) it, you can't un-hear it.

ahahahaha

ok but surely the show improved as they went on, as the filmed more etc etc. sure. but like. also no. (and also though i'm sure they did film these episodes in order lets also keep in mind that filming is not always linear)

ARES FIGHT SCENE WOOOOO LET'S GO

ok i did lose the video (i looked for it i swear, i took 30 min trying to look for it, which really isn't that long but yeah) but a lovely tumblr user here (i think i know who it was but i don't want to be embarrassingly wrong) edited the ares's fight with his internal monologue and an awful recorder rendition of that one song from the titanic and it really does encapsulate my thoughts. but yeah if you aren't familiar with the video.

when i was watching the final episode i swear i was trying to turn all critical brain functions off but it was really hard for me not to notice the increasing amount of time that ares just lets percy get up. i just watched dune (second part) so i was spoiled for good fight sequences but something i did notice was that in dune, when there is a pause in a fight it is FOR CHARACTER REASONS. the characters are DELIBERATELY NOT ENDING THE FIGHT. and that was not the impression i got from ares. it really wasn't.

and that took away from his authority/menace as a god ngl.

so yeah was the fight better than the dodds fight. 100%. like 500%.

does that make it a good fight sequence.... ehhhhhhhhhhhh....

(why did the scenes with luke have more tension than the ares fight hello)

and character wise. assassination. all the assassination. THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THE CULMINATION OF PERCY'S CHARACTER ARC AHHHHHHHH. sorry. but like this was the point at which percy decides he's done running. and stands up to ares with all the taunts and quick thinking that we know him for. unfortunately the show thought itself better and erased that theme ahaha.

so this really is just a fight for the helm. no big reveals, no reading the actions and emotions of a god, no strategy, no trying to get to the water and ares stopping him. like

WOULD IT BE SO HARD TO JUST FOLLOW THE NICE LOVELY SCRIPT THE BOOKS GAVE YOU FOR EXAMPLE: shot of percy looking at the water, shot of ares looking at percy looking at the water, maybe a pan to the water here, percy moves towards, ares blocks. YOU CAN IN FACT SHOW BATTLEFIELD STRATEGY IN A MOVIE. BC BATTLE STRATEGY RESULTS IN STRATEGIC FIGHTING. WHICH IS WHAT THE VISUAL MEDIUM IS SUPPOSED TO BE GOOD AT. RIGHT? RIGHT???

ahahaha sorry just feeling stabby i don't really know why. anywho off to the senate meeting. i'm running a bit late but i did rsvp with a knife sooooo

#pjo show crit #percy jackon and the olympians #ahahaha i'm back from my extremely long hiatus #this post is dedicated to all the lovely people i see on my dash #who post lovely amazing introspective analysis of pjo

22 notes · View notes

nocturnalazure · 2 months

Text

Warning: long essay ahead.

Following @echoweaver's recent comments, I thought I'd make a public reply on various things I have in mind.

One of the main themes of my story is duty. I find characters that are bound by a code of honor fascinating, and even more so in a criminal environment in which you would least expect such high regard for values. The way my mobsters behave is dictated by their oath to that code and it is absolute. Once you've made that choice, there is no turning back. And yes, that oath takes precedence over everything else. It has to. I wanted all of this to have more impact in the story, and I *think* that's what I'm doing, although obviously in a heavy-handed way.

(As a side note and a disclaimer: I'm not even going to go into the absurd debate of whether or not I'm "romanticizing criminals". That is not the point.)

Take a character like Erik. His whole identity is defined by the mob, in the same way his father found purpose in working for the Golzines. To him, his being a mobster is essential, it means belonging somewhere and being needed. It is even more important to him because of what Laurie means to him (more on that later).

Now take Romeo. He's a reluctant boss and he'd shake off his mafia ties if he could. He's clearly not committed in the same way. It was never a dream for him but a very burdensome inheritance. However, because Laurie showed him it was possible to change things from the inside, he has chosen to accept his legacy, come back and take over from his hateful father. Things are relatively easier for Romeo: he leads a small organization, running almost autonomously. While Laurie is in charge a huge conglomerate with enormous influence, the downfall of which would have consequences that are difficult to measure. We will get more on Laurie's perspective soon.

A romantic relationship with any of those men will always come second to those duties. It may be very romantic to imagine that they can just drop everything out of love, but to me, it doesn't sound very realistic. They live in a such a world that requires them to be available at all times, regardless of what they want to do or who they are with.

So in this regard, I don't think Erik was dishonest with Gloria. His communication style has always been awkward but sincere. Erik didn't promise Gloria anything. He told her before anything happened between them that there were parts of his life he couldn't talk about. He was upfront from the very beginning, and she made a choice, coming back to kiss him. But she thought she could change him, and that's where her mistake lies. You can't change someone like Erik, because of his oath but also because being dedicated is part of his character.

On the other hand, Jamie doesn't try to change Romeo. Romeo has never offered more explanations than Erik did, and Jamie has just accepted it. Romeo did ask Jamie to come with him to Monte Vista, which is a commitment, but he would have gone anyway, with or without Jamie.

Gloria's outburst on the other hand was out of character for her, very much so. She is not particularly shy, but she is reserved and always composed. But in that particular moment, she is freaking out because she's afraid of losing Erik. In the end, she's the one who leaves him with no option. And she ends up losing him over it. Yes, she would truly deserve being with someone who sees her as a priority. But that's not what Erik can offer. Because of his duty, but also because of his lingering feelings for Laurie.

I personally see Laurie and Erik's chemistry and their potential as romantic partners. I'm trying to show how they feel about each other in pretty much every scene in which they interact (and even when they do not interact). The relationship that they had at the very beginning was uncomplicated, but they can't come back to that because too much has happened since then. Granted, their current relationship is slightly unhealthy: Laurie needs to sort out his own issues and be more open, and Erik needs to back off a little bit. But without characters that have the possibility to grow, there wouldn't be a story, would there?

I'd rather not have had to explain it in so many words, but since it may not be clear: this breakup with Gloria is a decisive moment for Erik. He chose more than duty, and he's aware of it.

We will soon focus on Laurie's side of things. Anh will definitely bring something different to the table.

#text post #random #character development

37 notes · View notes