#I will extrapolate on any of these points if asked | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

bettsfic · 2 years

Text

writing cheats

i know i’ve probably written about these all individually but i’m putting them together in one post. these are writing tricks that are extremely cheap and dirty; when you use them it feels like cheating and honestly by posting them i’m probably exposing all the easy moves in my own work, but more than a writer i am a teacher, so here you go, some writing cheats that have never steered me wrong.

quick character creation

what’s really annoying is when you have two characters sitting at a restaurant or something and the server has to come by. to what degree do you describe the server so that it’s clear they’re just a background character but that they’re not just a faceless form, so that the world has texture without taking up too much space on the page? rule of three, babeyyy: two normal things and a weird one.

she had pale skin and blue eyes but her hair was dyed black like a 2010 emo kid.

he was tall and broad, and he wore a sweatshirt with an embroidered teddy bear on it.

the woman stood there comparing the prices of toilet paper. she had a short angled bob and carried a keychain the length of a trout.

why does it work? it gives the reader something to hang onto, a brief observation that shows the world exists around your narrator. it also works when introducing main characters, but there’s so much action going on that you can’t take time to write a rich long paragraph about them. all you need is a little hook.

quick setting creation

i used to TOIL over descriptive paragraphs. for years i was like, description is my weakness, i must become better at developing imagery. i believed this because a famous writer once projected a paragraph i had written onto a screen and asked my cohort, “count how many images are crafted in this paragraph.” there were none. none! my friends were sitting there like, “we are TRYING” but they couldn’t find any.

i would say that after years of studying imagery development at the sentence level, i am, perhaps, competent at it, but what was more helpful was for me to shrug and tell myself, “i’m just not a writer who does that.”

anyway. my cheat is thus:

there’s not much you can assume about your audience. the audience is not a homogenous whole. but your ideal audience is something you can guess at, and that means you can play around with their existing knowledge and expectations.

if you say your characters are in a tacky shit-on-the-walls restaurant, if your ideal reader is an american who went to restaurants during the maximalist era of franchise design, they will conjure their nearest memory of one of those places. and for those readers who aren’t familiar with it, they’ll use other context clues to conjure that space. the point is, you don’t have to list every single stupid license plate nailed to the wall. you can leave it as one detail of one sentence and let your reader extrapolate from there.

if i say the dentist’s office looked like a gutted 90s taco bell, maybe no ideal audience would have ever seen a place like that, but a lot of people can mentally conjure a dentist’s office and a 90s taco bell and overlay them together to create a weird and fun image.

you can go even simpler than that: a bathroom the size of an airplane lavatory. a tiny studio apartment with a hotplate instead of a stove. a mansion with a winding stairwell. the point is that you want to define the size of the space and its general vibes.

in some ways detailed description can be overrated, because your reader conjures images even in absence of them on the page. and for those readers who can’t mentally conjure images, it doesn’t matter anyway; they take you at your word. the trick is to figure out what details are unexpected, relevant to understanding the story and its characters, and those are the things that you add in.

one other note: after working with hundreds of writers on drafting, for *most* of us it’s difficult to develop images and establish setting in a first draft. it’s nearly always something to be saved for a second or later draft. i think it’s because while we’re writing we tend to put character and action first.

nail the landing

there’s a joke i heard once from a writer i really admire: “you know it’s literary fiction if the story ends with a character looking at a body of water.”

and god it’s so painfully sad and true how easy it is to nail the landing of a given story by ending on a totally irrelevant piece of imagery. the final beat of a story followed by your character looking up at the sky and seeing a flock of birds in the shape of a V flying past. or maybe they’re sitting in their car and they count the rings of a nearby church bell. or maybe they watch an elderly couple walk down the sidewalk hand-in-hand. i don’t know!! when in doubt shove an observation, an image, whatever, something neutral at the end and it’ll sound profound.

(this cheat is the only one that can really bite you in the ass because if the image is too irrelevant you risk tonal incongruity. for use only in the most desperate of times.)

sentence fragments

when writers ask me how to punch up their writing or start developing their own style, my go-to advice is to give up the idea of a complete sentence. fuck noun-verb-object. if you have a series of character actions, knock off the sentence subjects like in script action. if the clause at the end of your sentence is particularly meaningful, don’t separate it with a comma but a period and make it its own thing. if your character is going through something particularly stressful or heinous, that bitch is not thinking in complete thoughts so you don’t have to convey them that way. make punctuation bend to your will!!

rhetorical moves

this one opened a lot of doors for me stylistically. remember that famous writer who called me out on my lack of imagery? i always thought his prose was beautiful, that he’s one of the best living prose writers, etc. once i learned more about rhetoric though, i realized he just employed it a lot.

usually when we talk about beautiful sentences it means a sentence that uses rhetorical devices. the greeks were like, you know what, when we give speeches there are certain ways to phrase things that make the audience go nuts. let’s identify what those things are and give them names so we can use them intentionally and convince people of our opinions.

i love shakespeare, i really do, but one of the big reasons he’s still a household name today and his plays are still performed is because every sentence of every goddamn play utilizes a rhetorical device. the audience is hard-wired to vibrate at the sound and cadence of his writing, like finding the spot on a dog that makes their foot thump. for five hundred years, william shakespeare has been scritching that spot for us.

i have no idea why, cognitively, rhetorical devices are so effective. i’m no rhetorician. all i know is that well-deployed anaphora makes a reader want to throw their panties on stage. my intro to rhetorical devices was the wonderful book the elements of eloquence by mark forsyth, a surprisingly fun read! hopefully that will open some doors for you the way it did for me.

the downside to this is that once you know rhetorical devices, it’s like learning how the sausage is made. on one hand, as a writer, you’ll have a lot stronger grasp of style, but as a reader good prose loses some of its magic.

pacing it out

many writers, myself included, rely on the tried and true “he bit the inside of his cheek” or other some such random action to help pace out dialogue. one time my thesis advisor sat me down and said “you’ve got to take all of those out.”

“all of them?” i said.

“all of them,” she said.

i thought, but that will weaken the text! it didn’t. once i cut what i came to call cheek-biter sentences i never went back. and now when i edit for other people i’m like, look i know where you’re coming from but just cut all these out and see how the scene stands. if it doesn’t feel right you can put some back in. a lot of times when you’re drafting you put those in the way some people say “um.” they’re just sentences you jot while you’re thinking of what the other character says, so from a writing perspective it seems like you’re pacing, but readers don’t read it that way. they just want to get to the next line of dialogue.

but sometimes you really do need to pace out a scene and i think there are other ways to do that that don’t rely on banal physical movements, such as:

interiority: a sentence or paragraph of relevant cognition, bonus points if you weave in background context. good interiority defines the voice of your writing.

observations: i know i just said description is overrated but idk sometimes you just need a character to note the back and forth clacking of one of those desk ball toy things.

character texture: maybe your character notes something about the person they’re talking to. a wilted pocket square. a mole that looks like it needs looked at by a dermatologist. a scar on their forehead. some detail that deepens or complicates our understanding of a character.

narratorial consciousness and access

this one is less a cheat and more a problematic opinion i have that doesn’t win me any popularity in writing circles.

i believe that if you’re writing in first person or close third or any narration which is dedicated to the mind of one character, you are only ever obligated to convey the experience of that character’s consciousness. and nothing else.

by that i mean, if your point of view character is unobservant? then they’re not going to even notice the flight attendant is missing one of their canine teeth. if your pov character is focused and obsessive, they’re going to think lavish, detailed paragraphs about that which they’re obsessed with and have no acknowledgement of the rest of the world. if your pov character has no understanding of time, does your story even need to be linear?

defining the scope of a narrator’s cognition early on can give you parameters in which to work. even if you don’t consciously do this, you still do it. if you write in third person limited present tense without really thinking about it, that’s your scope. i’m just pointing out you can choose to do it differently. you get to define your narrator.

whenever we talk about narration we also talk about information access and the order of information being revealed/conveyed. writing must always be in order; even if you’re writing multiple concurring things, it still has to be rendered on the page in order one after the next, because the human mind can’t read two sentences over top of one another.

if we’re restricted to the mind of a character, that means we’re also restricted by their knowledge and experiences, and this can be used to your benefit. i don’t want to take too much space for this but i do talk more about the relationship between narration and reality here.

in short, you the writer get to choose

what the reader knows,

in what order they know it, and

its relationship to the presumed real events of the story, which develops the (un)reliability of your narrator

okay going to cut this off now before i go on more rants about narrative scope. i hope you found this helpful and go on to put some of these nasty lifehacks in your own writing!!

#writing advice

8K notes · View notes

palms-upturned · 4 months

Note

But you can take direct action AND vote harm reduction as much as possible. In fact, you SHOULD be doing that. Yeah there are too many people whose stance ends at "vote for the least bad" but the problem is the worst of the politicians have dedicated followers who will aggressively vote their guys into the office to the detriment to everyone else. So, yes, get involved and march and everything else but please still vote harm reduction. That's all most of us are asking. Because the worse side of this is still going to be doing genocide, they're just going to be sure to bring some of that genocide home and use it to ensure immigrants and queer people here are killed as well.

I think you need to sit with that last sentence you wrote. The point of my post was that if you cast a vote for people who actively participate in genocide in another country because you think their domestic policy is better for you, then you have to be able to understand and sit with the fact that you are breaking solidarity with colonized people. You are voting for the “leopards who promise to only eat the faces of people in the global south” party. You have to be prepared to accept what people extrapolate about you and your politics from this rather than take it as a slight against your morals that you need to defend yourself from.

Immigrants and queer people are already dying here. The Biden administration has not curbed the sudden rise in homophobic/transphobic legislation we’ve been seeing. Roe v Wade has been repealed, and we very nearly lost the Indian Child Welfare Act, too. We’re seeing a covid surge with numbers rivaling the very start of the pandemic, but none of the protections that we had at the start, which weren’t even good to begin with. And now that people are mobilizing across the country for Palestine, this administration is actively making it more difficult to even express anti zionist sentiments in public. Palestinian communities here are facing increased policing. You can talk about harm reduction all you want, but I struggle to see the value in supporting a party whose only appeal is “at least we’re not the other guys,” who can brazenly go against the majority of the American people over and over and over because they believe that they’ll remain in power no matter what because hey, what’s the alternative, let the republicans win? If there are no stakes for them, then what’s the fucking point? Why would they ever accede any demand that their constituents ever made of them? And if not, then what good is it to put them in positions of power?

Personally, I will never forget any of what I’ve seen as long as I live, and you will never catch me voting for any of these people. I won’t legitimize their strategy. I think it’s a fucking bad one, and I think that these people are never going to do anything but toe the colonial line. I can’t stop you from voting however you want to vote, but I genuinely fail to see how trying to rally people to vote against their better judgment is a better use of your time and energy than trying to rally your party to do something that people would actually vote for. In the meantime, regardless of who’s in what seat, the work laid out before us remains the same. It is always the same. We have to protect each other separate from and in spite of the state.

#asks #anon #genuinely in awe that ppl are still sending me asks like this

375 notes · View notes

dnpbeats · 2 months

Note

so much about why dan loves phil and how phil changed him but what about how phil loves dan??

Okay. When I first read this ask I was like "I got nothing" lol. now obviously not because I think phil doesn't love dan, clearly I believe that he does. but you'll notice that everything I said in my dan loving gremlin phil post was based on things that dan has said. and when it comes to phil, that man is SILENT!! he keeps his mouth shut. so I was like I have nothing to extrapolate from here. but! then I realized that's not true!! bc I think phil is very obvious with his actions!

and honestly just the fact that phil lets us see how much he loves dan through his actions speaks volumes in and of itself. because phil has said so many times that he's a private person, wants to keep any relationship he has private, etc., and I think he's proved that he's serious about that based on the fact that he hasn't said jack shit about dan in the way that dan has said stuff about him.

and yet, phil SHOWS so much how he cares for dan!!! and he says things that allow us to read between the lines! like phil buying the japan tickets and surprising dan with them in 2015. we know that dan is not an impulsive person at all and likes everything to be meticulously planned out. phil knew dan was never gonna bite the bullet so phil was just like "well this is a thing that's happening now" (see also: 2009, phil telling dan to buy tickets to come visit him for the first time and 2023, phil making dan come back to the gaming channel because he knew it would be enjoyable for him again). he just knows dan so well and loves him sm that he doesn't let dan stand in the way of his own happiness. and even though phil is private he allows us see how much he cares for dan, he doesn't try to hide it at all

and then just things like. phil telling the bbc he wanted dan to do the radio show with him. phil calling dan up on stage at the boncas. phil just randomly mentioning dan on his channel(/having dan be there) while giving no context bc at this point he expects everyone to just Know who dan is. phil talking about how proud he is of dan and his book at the end of the hair cutting video bc he knew dan wouldn't let him get away with saying that shit in front of him but he just had to say it.

okay and in terms how dan has changed him/bettered him. I do not think phil was necessarily an unconfident person/struggled in the same way dan did but like obviously everyone is gonna have their own insecurities. but I really truly believe that dan just, lets phil be phil. I was rewatching some of the ditl videos the other day, and in the manchester ditl there's the iconic "phil's in his own little world again" with the fondest laugh ever. but then! london ditl, dan saying yes phil should go climb on the lion and then filming him running over to it (and then being annoyed at the guy who told phil to get off LMAO). japan ditl dan telling phil to go run over towards the bird. do you catch my drift? like phil's a lil quirky but dan doesn't love him in spite of it he loves him because of it!! he encourages phil's phil-isms bc he loves them! and then also just little things like when phil swallowed the glue and dan knew he was anxious so he talked with the paramedic and then texted phil everything that they said and that he was gonna be fine!! I think dan is probably a voice of reassurance for phil a lot. like they just both know each other so well and they know exactly what the other needs, yk?

sorry that I let this sit in my ask box for almost a week anon I just had a lot of thoughts to collect but yeah <3 that's all

#dan and phil #ask #anon #dan howell #phil lester #d&p

252 notes · View notes

suzukiblu · 2 months

Text

WIP excerpt behind the cut; Clark panic-adopts his teenage clones (yes, including the supervillain one).

“Why does Superman have civilian clothes?” Match asks instead. Thirteen–pauses, then just shrugs.

“Ask him,” he says, which means he knows and is just being an asshole. Figures.

“More thorough scans would be helpful,” Jor-El says as they approach a very large . . . well, Match genuinely doesn’t know. It might be a computer. There’s a screen involved, at least. The rows of crystals underneath said screen are definitely not a part of any kind of “computer” he’s ever seen before, but it’s still the likeliest theory he’s got. “The infirmary is not currently optimized for cloned lifeforms, but we should be capable of extrapolation where necessary. And the Fortress’s programming is certainly familiar with Kryptonian-human hybrids, at this point.”

Match doesn’t respond, considering how obvious a statement that was. His genes are functionally identical to Thirteen’s, after all, so of course Superman’s already familiar with his physiology. Well–of course he’d have access to Thirteen’s files, more accurately.

“Um,” Thirteen says, frowning in confusion. “It is?”

Match cannot believe how incredibly stupid his gene donor is. Is Thirteen somehow under the impression that advanced alien technology can't access Cadmus’s files? Hell, the Agenda can get into those with minimal effort. Cadmus’s lab security is not impressive. He's walked right in the front door enough times at this point.

“It is, yes,” Jor-El agrees. “If you could hold still for a moment, please. Both of you, ideally. We may as well scan you as well, Kon-El.”

Match–frowns.

Wait. If the Fortress already has Thirteen's files, then why . . .

A pale blue-white light materializes from the crystals beneath the screen and pans over both him and Thirteen. He doesn't feel any hint of warmth from the light or hear anything, and there's no pain.

In addition to the pain he's already in, he means. Obviously.

The whole process seems very . . . simple, for a DNA scan. Not involved enough.

Not–what he would've expected.

That's all.

He assumes this is just a first step, and the actual analysis will involve something more invasive or–

“Scan complete,” Jor-El announces as the light flicks off. “Genetic profiles now on file for Kon-El and the as yet unnamed new member of the House of El currently classified as ‘Match’. Proper name impending.”

Match has absolutely no idea what to say to any of that.

“I think the AI is malfunctioning,” he says to Thirteen, who scowls at him.

“Rude much?” he says.

“It just called me a ‘member of the House of El’,” Match reminds him dubiously.

“. . . maybe Kal can run a virus scan or something,” Thirteen mutters under his breath with a grimace. Match resists the urge to roll his eyes. It's a gesture he only ever started doing to impersonate Thirteen anyway.

“All Fortress systems are currently running at peak performance,” Jor-El says like a malfunctioning AI would even be an accurate source, then gestures off to the side. “The basic medical supplies are this way. Please follow me.”

“The damage is minimal,” Match says. He's healed from worse without wasting medical supplies. The burns aren't even third-degree. Superman can't possibly want to spend actual resources on him, much less anything that would presumably need to be replaced or recharged later.

“Then treatment will also be minimal,” Jor-El replies matter-of-factly before heading off. “This way.”

He's definitely malfunctioning.

Thirteen follows Jor-El, though, and Match doesn’t know what else to do, so he does too. Either way he doesn’t want Superman to catch up when he’s by himself, so . . .

He doesn’t even know what Superman is doing right now, aside from presumably making whatever call he needed to make, and who knows what that’s about or for. Maybe he’s warning the Justice League about the likelihood of the Agenda causing problems for them, publicity-wise. Or . . . something to that effect, anyway.

They’ll take the opportunity to, he’s sure. The Agenda doesn’t miss opportunities like that.

The infirmary is sparse and open and both laboratory-bright and laboratory-sterile, but still . . . off, somehow. Something about it just seems . . . off.

Match isn’t sure what, exactly.

Maybe it’s just that he can’t smell blood or bleach.

Jor-El instructs him through using the cleaning wipes and disinfectant spray and strange alien bandages from the supplies–Match, like usual, uses his tactile telekinesis to keep himself from flinching when it hurts–and Thirteen tries to help, which is irritating. Match glowers at him until he backs off, which takes twice as long as it should.

Superman probably wouldn’t appreciate him killing Thirteen, after all the fuss. And Superman’s . . . in charge of him now, he thinks. Technically. Probably.

For now, at least.

The Agenda will want him back, so . . .

So for now, yes. Until the Agenda reclaims him and disposes of him as a failed experiment.

Superman would be–harder to reclaim him from, though. Harder than government custody. Maybe even harder than the Justice League in general, because Superman by himself doesn’t necessarily have to answer to the same specific pressures the whole League altogether would.

So if he does . . . whatever Superman wants him to do, exactly–if he does whatever makes Superman want to keep him, for whatever reason Superman decided he wanted to keep him to begin with . . .

He won’t be disposed of as soon, if he does that. Eventually Superman will change his mind and the Agenda will take him back, but–only eventually.

Not yet.

So he just needs to do that.

Match can do that. Superman can't be any harder to please than the Agenda. He . . . thinks he can't, anyway.

Superman tolerates Thirteen, so . . .

#wip: clark panic-adopts his teenage clones

156 notes · View notes

raven-at-the-writing-desk · 10 months

Note

One thing I like about in game yuu despite being a mostly blank slate still manages to have some detail despite being made as an insert. Like how they're good at instruments

I did see that Yuu was can play the bugle (a brass horn?) for White Rabbit Fest, but their skill actually depends on the dialogue option you choose. If you pick the other option, Yuu is just as lackluster at playing as the other characters are. I think they also played the flute either during the Harveston hometown event or in a related character’s Harveston vignettes (I can’t recall which it is).

There was a similar option given during the Harveston hometown event in 4-7 (but it’s more of Epel asking, “do you play instruments” for a yes/no response rather than whether or not Yuu is any good at it):

But!! There definitely are other times when Yuu is described in spite of being designed as a blank slate/self-insert character. Two examples that automatically come to my mind are various characters’ home screen voice lines in which they mention Yuu has a small or slim stature. Crowley also mumbles to himself that Yuu appears "effeminate". The other (and much more obvious) example is when Azul points out in 3-10 of the main story that Yuu doesn’t have any particular talents:

Which??? Sorry, Azul 😂 We have to agree to disagree here. One skill of Yuu’s that we can extrapolate is that they’re a decent photographer. This is because it’s implied that the card illustrations and groovies are pictures taken by Yuu’s ghost camera (regardless of whether or not Yuu is actually mentioned or is present or not during the vignettes). Yuu is also specifically shown taking pictures in some events, such as Port Breeze Fest (ie during Rook’s vignettes).

Yuu is also said to be able to cook for themselves in book 7. This may be because they learned this skill via Master Chef.

Another trait (albeit very generalized) could be that Yuu is the kind of person that facilitates cooperation. Now, what exactly that means can vary greatly from individual interpretation to individual interpretation, but suffice to say that Yuu, in some way or another, helps their peers to collaborate and to get along. Some people also characterize Yuu to be a clever or a strategist, as they helped concoct a battle plan in the prologue among other smaller plans (for example, keeping Leona from sleeping to get his help in book 3, getting “a bad feeling” that Vil will OB soon, etc). Note that this may be why Rook nicknames Yuu “Trickster”. However, it could also be argued that Yuu is sometimes aren’t that bright, perhaps for plot convenience (ie not putting two and two together that Tsunotaro/Hornton is Malleus, not trying to negotiate with Azul’s contract terms in book 3, etc).

It’s mentioned in a few occasions that Yuu is also said to look frail/is not physically fit to contribute to battle (something which the light novel and manga adaptations of Yuu defy), although this could just refer to their lack of magic. Again, related to this, Crowley and others have lines which imply Yuu is feminine looking (small, non-muscular, non-threatening vibes, etc), regardless of what their actual sex or gender may be.

***NOTE:*** A notable difference between TWST JP and TWST EN is that Yuu’s dialogue options in EN are much sassier and more outspoken than those of JP. For example, whereas one of JP’s choices may be, “Oh, I see” (very generic, very plain), EN may exaggerate it to, “Not this again!” (insinuating displeasure or being fed up/actively protesting).

If you guys know of any other traits or abilities that in-game Yuu has, feel free to share them!

#twst #twisted wonderland #Epel Felmier #Azul Ashengrotto #disney twisted wonderland #Yuu #notes from the writing raven #twst manga #twst light novel #twisted wonderland light novel #twisted wonderland manga #Dire Crowley #Rook Hunt #Leona Kingscholar #Malleus Draconia #Vil Schoenheit #twst en #twisted wonderland en

534 notes · View notes

plantsjustwannahavefun · 2 months

Text

"Izzy Canyon dwellers just want to turn him into an innocent victim who did nothing wrong!"

Actually my problem is that, in hindsight, Izzy didn't do enough wrong to justify the common interpretation of his relationship with Ed. In my book, the first time in the series he legitimately crossed over to villainous antagonist territory - someone you actually loved to hate for it even if you understood his reasons - was when he set the British Navy on the Revenge. That way he not only betrayed his integrity as a pirate by consorting with the common enemy of all pirates, but risked Ed's life too - cause, like, come on, that "plan" to send CJ to convince Ed to leave Stede was so far-fetched it barely counts as a plan. I don't buy Izzy ever looking at CJ and going "yep that seems like a smart, responsible, trustworthy man I could rely on for a delicate mind games operation like this". It was an act of sheer desperation on Izzy's part, but he still chose to do it. IMO this was actually worse than what he said to Ed in S1 finale. Although of course that was very nasty, too.

But the thing is, we don't actually have any info on what their relationship used to be like before S1. We were only ever shown, not told - and both times from Izzy's perspective: the first time in S01E04 during his resignation rant, which was very heartfelt and I'm sure a lot of it was true, but it's still one-sided, and the second time during his deathbed speech, which was, again, one-sided and this time biased in another direction - instead of airing his pent-up grievanced Izzy was putting most of the blame on himself.

Other than this, the entirety of Ed and Izzy's pre-S1 relationship gets extrapolated from one single episode, S01E04. The narrative itself seems to want us to see it as a microcosm of their usual long-standing dynamic, at least on the surface. We see Ed being depressed and suicidal, trying to open up to Izzy about it, and Izzy shutting him down and making him act like Blackbeard again. Since it's already clear that Ed and Stede are the main characters, we're primed to see Ed as the victim here and Izzy being an annoying, insensitive nag.

Except the context of those interactions changes everything. The context being that they are literally about to be attacked by the Spanish - something Ed knowingly brought on them with his decisive power as captain - and Ed is deliberately withholding crucial information from his own first mate and the rest of the crew, making them all think they're going to die and he isn't doing anything about it. Izzy wasn't just being a boring buzzkill not being excited for Ed when he showed him that ship model. He was actively panicking and trying to do his job asking Ed for orders so they don't all get slaughtered.

So, yeah, those are some very exceptional circumstances that don't say anything about their typical day to day interactions go when they're not in immediate mortal peril due to lack of communication. Was this the first time Ed ever told him about not wanting to be Blackbeard anymore? Izzy didn't seem very surprised, so probably not, but we don't know, and if Ed had confided in him before, we don't know how Izzy reacted - but I'd like to point out that this time he didn't ridicule Ed in any way, he simply pointed out that they were about to die if Ed didn't do anything. Does Izzy usually indulge Ed in the stuff he finds fun when they're not about to be killed? Again, we don't know, but Izzy's playfulness during that first confrontation with Stede in S01E02, and his whittling and jokes in S2 showed that he wasn't always as grouchy and joyless as he's made out to be. We actually saw him smile when Ed got excited about Buttons, too. Pretty sure if Izzy always shut him down about things like that, Ed would have stopped trying to share it with him long ago.

And, finally, there's one piece of this puzzle that doesn't seem to fit in with the rest at all. The show both told us and implied that Izzy couldn't let Blackbeard go because his own identity was too tied up in it, and because he idolised the glory of violent pirate lifestyle. But if that's the case, then why did he have no problem with Ed wanting to retire? Izzy literally gave him an enthusiastic thumbs up on the whole "kill Stede and steal his identity so he could live the rest of his life as a rich aristocrat" plan. If Izzy only admired Ed as a pirate, and was so hell-bent on keeping the Blackbeard persona alive, why was he ok with Ed retiring? How does this square up with the idea that Izzy had been keeping Ed chained to piracy?

I'd honestly hoped we would get some flashbacks of the two of them in S2, and then S3 before that hope died too, because there's still so much we're missing.

#ofmd #our flag means death #izzy hands

117 notes · View notes

galedekarios · 6 months

Text

i was thinking a bit more about the drow twins scene again in relation as to why gale might go along with it if so 'persuaded' by tav.

i've talked about the scene itself already (more than once), and i have seen other people discuss the topic very well, too.

i think i have come around as to why larian has the option there, and why gale might agree to go along with it, despite not only his initial refusal and not wishing to talk or think about it afterwards if tav tries to talk to him about it, but also rejecting every other to open the relationship up outside of this scene.

i have seen people say quite often that gale is toxic, but i honestly think that it leans more the other way around: gale is willing to accept toxicity from his partner to some extent, if it means he'll also be "loved".

one could already extrapolate that from what little we know from mystra's relationship with him, but also from the things he's willing to accept from a player character, including a tav, who, in this scene, can potentially coerce him with a dc 25 persuasion check into a foursome/fivesome without prior discussion.

i think this scene shows where gale is at this point in time, relationship-wise and love-wise. by staying even though he refuses initially, and i think it was intentional (in hindsight) on larian's part.

he endures imo because at least in this scenario with the drow twins, he was included here. asked to participate. he's not strong enough to break up with his partner, if they still extend at least this much to him.

whereas he does break up if tav cheats on him without including him, or he feels the relationship may be subsumed by someone else (i.e. the player engaging romantically with someone other than him, see his reaction to also romantically engaging with any of the other companions).

i do believe he's enduring tav's toxicity here with the mindset of pleasing them. he'll accept this, hopes that they have sated their curiosity now that they are done with their "rutting" as he puts it - and hopefully afterwards the entire affair then can be "confined to the footnotes" of their romance:

Gale: Ahem. I hope you’re not here to ask about our recent, erm, activities. I’d rather those were consigned to the footnotes of our romance, if it’s all the same with you.

i'm sorry if this is incoherent. i'm still trying to order my thoughts about this, but yeah, i just think this is where i land on it.

that even with how badly tav treats him here by springing this onto him, by not giving him time to think and even actively encouraging him not to think about it, he's still acknowledged as their partner. singular. and it's clear this is 'just' a sex thing.

the instances where he breaks up with tav is when tav sleeps with mizora, where he was not included nor acknowledged as their partner, or consulted prior (even as briefly as with the drow twins), or if tav tries to bring someone else into their romance, were he believes he would be lost in the equation of adding another person to what he shares with his partner now.

so here, in this moment, he just does it bc well, his partner told him not to overthink, right.

and he loves them. and he wants to please them. and he might come to enjoy it, just like they said. and it'll keep them happy.

he hopes it won't come up again.

(i should clarify that this is a personal interpretation and one that i’m not comfortable arguing over.)

#gale dekarios #bg3 #baldur's gate 3 #ch: gale dekarios #vg: baldur's gate 3 #series: baldur's gate #meta: mybg3 #coercion cw #abuse cw #just to be safe

193 notes · View notes

cerastes · 5 months

Note

What's your read on Andreanna's 'love at first sight' line? It could be fun to just take it as face value and just assume it's just her having a crush on Skadi and Spectre (making her utter lack of connection to them on the network very funny), but I feel like there's something else going on there. Is it seaborn stuff? Something to do with her being an abyssal hunter knockoff having some kind of innate admiration for the original?

It’s because she’s a Walmart Abyssal Hunter, yeah.

The line in question:

Andreana feels something completely and utterly puzzling and maybe even thrilling when see sees Specter and Skadi, so she says this. It’s further elaborated on in her Module lore:

In her Module, Andreana explains that she was making a joke with that comment, however, it is true that she felt weird and bothered, Felt A Ways, as some would say, when looking at them or in their immediate presence. Then she posits that this physiological reaction might have to do with That Weird Backstory Of Hers, but also, 1) she doesn’t really care too much about it, and 2) it sounds like a pain in the ass so she doesn’t want to find out.

As we all know (and if not, as you’ll learn now), Abyssal Hunters can sense each other on a level that other people can’t. They perceive each other as they would a wave, a sea current, the smell of the sea, even its temperature, if close enough to each other. In Under Tides, for example, Skadi immediately perks up when Gladiia breaks into Specter’s room to steal her away, because she immediately ‘smelled’ a cold, strong wave of seawater coming from her room. That’s how Gladiia ‘smells’ or ‘feels’. It is stated at various points that Hunters don’t even need words to communicate if they so choose, with Specter in particular feeling like land-dweller language is bothersome to a fault at first, and Skadi addressing that with “no yeah I hated it at first too, still can’t get used to it, but it’s got its virtues”. It also explains a little why Skadi is so stoic and laconic: She literally isn’t used to talking or needing to, but I digress.

It’s easy to extrapolate that this is precisely what Andreana is feeling when she sees the Hunters: She’s “feeling” them but has no earthly clue as to what the hell that is in the first place. Proper Aegir Hunters have an education — Gladiia taught Laurentina not just about the Hunter trade, but also about art in general, with a focus on dancing — that prepares them to be Hunters and have the information needed given to them. Andreana has memory issues and not a damn clue of what the dicken is going on when she “feels” a Hunter, no context, so her first assumption is “Huh. Love at first sight?” because why the hell is she feeling something as intimate as what kind of waves and breeze they are from just looking at them? Then, a while later, since Andreana is a pretty pragmatic, logical, no-nonsense person, she starts putting the legos together and thinking, oh, yeah, might have to do with my Mysterious Circumstances, on second thought. Then she shrugs it off and keeps fiddling with her crossbow.

In Kal’tsit’s own words Andreana 200 Trust Files), if Laurentina or Didi can be considered a proper inkwell, Andreana is a droplet of ink in a glass of water: A facsimile, an attempt at something, an aberration. Of course, this callous indictment isn’t directed at Andreana, it’s aimed at what was done to Andreana.

And since I know I’ll get an ask about it, I’ll take the liberty of plugging Andreana into Drimo’s patented Just A Guy spectrum. Is Andreana Just A Guy (gender neutral)? Not quite. Let’s compare and contrast with our favorite specimen, Shalem. Shalem is terrified of his backstory and runs from it at every turn, until it was impossible for him to refuse it any longer (IS2), Andreana, on the other hand, is aware that she has a backstory. She KNOWS there’s lore, but she doesn’t really want to meet it. The backstory ambushes her, but Andreana says “no thank you :)” and walks past it. It’s a pain in the ass. She’d rather play paintball. She’s not normal, is keenly aware of it, and doesn’t give a zalak’s ass about it. Can’t be bothered! Simply uninterested!

#arknights #andreana

173 notes · View notes

ianthe-is-a-bitch-and-i-love-her · 2 years

Text

I've noticed something very interesting about the structure of The Locked Tomb series recently, in that it is a series that is immeasurably more than the sum of its parts. Not that that's an uncommon thing for serialized media, it's literally the point of the format to tell a deeper story as a whole than is told in any one installment, but I think tlt is a particularly extreme example.

Like, gtn is the only book in the series that works at all as a standalone story. In most series, if you skip a book, you'll be confused about specifics and backstories and what have you, but you'll probably be able to follow along and get the gist of the theming, even if you miss some details and subtleties.

With this series, though, the subsequent books (especially HtN but also NtN) are essentially incomprehensible if you've skipped the previous books. They don't follow a predictable trajectory from the previous books that can be back-extrapolated from their stand alone contents. Like, genuinely try to imagine what you would think the previous books must have been about if you just read Nona. Imagine what you'd think the themes were. It's completely out of wack.

This is because each new book in the series isn't just a continuation of the previous books - it is in dialogue with the previous books. Each new book is a commentary on what came before, a reinterpretation that forces you to rethink or even reread the previous books with a different perspective that draws more layers of meaning to the surface. It makes the series feel like a knot that you're slowly unpicking - each new thread that is revealed to you changes how you perceive the weave of the previous threads.

I fucking love this. It makes the series incredibly rereadable, and it rewards spending a lot of time contemplating and theorizing about what you've read, which is excellent because the books are written in such a way that they invite you to ask questions without giving you answers. It make you feel ecstatic when you achieve a new level of understanding of a story you had thought you already understood.

There's a drawback to this, though, in that it makes the first read-through of a new book in the series the worst read-through. Again, HtN is infamous for this, verging on incomprehensible on a first pass but bristling with rich meaning and evocative prose on a second, but it's a trait that applies to all three books released so far. On a first read, lacking the context of the later series, GtN's story feels straightforward, sometimes juvenile, full of relatively simple but evocative characters, and burdened with what seems to be needlessly obtuse and obscure worldbuilding that only exists to slow down the reader's attempts to solve the murder mystery and to act as a backdrop to be cut through by Gideon's harshly modern and irreverent quips. (Sidenote, but as much as that is a thing that a lot of the fandom really enjoys, I know a few people who found that choice extremely jarring and unpleasant. It is a polarizing structural choice, it just doesn't seem like it because people who don't like it don't often stick with the series long enough to get invested in the deeper themes and plot of the series).

NtN too follows this format, although we don't yet have the added context of it's sequel, so a lot of what it has to say remains maddeningly out of reach. It certainly enriches rereads of the previous books, though; a lot of people have gone into great detail about how Nona's perspective on Kiriona reframes our perception of Gideon as a narrator. And John's accounting of the end of the world and the Resurrection adds so many more layers to all the interactions we witness in HtN.

It's just a very unique way to build a story, to start with something fairly simple and self-contained and then spend the next two books layering more and more meaning on those events. For me, it's not the characters (much as I love them) but the structure of the series that keeps me so fucking obsessed with these books.

#the locked tomb #tlt #gideon the ninth #harrow the ninth #nona the ninth #nona spoilers

2K notes · View notes

vinelark · 9 months

Note

bart thinks kon is maybe stupid for not realizing tim is robin, but kon just respects robin so much that subconsciously he can't allow himself to make that connection until robin tells him himself

yeah! also kon initially met tim (as a civilian) in a situation that made him perceive tim through a certain lens—tim was one of a few rich kids kidnapped for ransom, and at that point, if asked, kon probably wouldn’t be able to imagine robin getting successfully kidnapped by a non-supervillain. like he knows robin is human/not a meta (and understands what this means for robin specifically more and more as time goes on) but the bats still have this carefully cultivated vibe/reputation that masks their vulnerabilities. so when kon interacts with tim after that initial kidnapping, he’s already framed tim as someone normal/vulnerable in a way that he doesn’t see robin. also, he’s extrapolated his idea of tim as a rich kid who does rich kid things with his time (yacht parties, hiring whole actors, living in a penthouse, getting fostered by a gazillionaire) and not vigilante things with his time. like he thinks tim is weird and funny and intriguing and surprisingly kind but he also imagines tim hanging out in expensive boarding school libraries and fancy galas and stuff. and while he’s vein_guy_meme.jpg trying to respect robin’s privacy, when he does idly imagine robin as a civilian he still pictures rob on, like, a roof or in a cave or napping on top of the tower fridge or something. so it’s not like he’s Seeing It and then rationalizing his way out of realizing, but rather that he’s pre-rationalized both tim and robin in a way that already separates them in his mind.

tl;dr kon's a smart guy and could totally put it together with the right prompting, so the watsonian reason he hasn't is all of the above; the doylist reason is because i as the author am having fun and also want the reveal to drop at a certain moment.

meanwhile bart met tim without any of those preconceived notions, and caught on as soon as tim said names (robin's shorthand for "no names in the field") because bart was like, huh, that's a very robin thing to say, and also this guy is having a weird reaction to fear gas so now i'm thinking about gotham, and also we're on a roof, and also his hair looks kinda windblown and spiky, all of which reminds me of ohhhhh shit omg okay that's why robin wasn't answering his messages got it

#kon is thinking too hard and bart is thinking just the right amount. i love them #also bart knows how good robin is at being a cryptid so he assumes there's a reason kon hasn't put it together #whether that reason is extra deliberate on robin's end or just circumstance #but boy will bart be ready when the penny does drop #timkon #bart allen #kon-el #my fic #asks

325 notes · View notes

dionysus-complex · 6 months

Note

you mentioned you specialize in roman violence. can you rec any good works on the subject, especially during the late antique period? how much (or little) time/writing did latin authors spend on the question of the necessity/morality/glory of violence, especially when bound up with empire and borders? did rhetoric around domestic violence evolve?

It's obviously a massive topic, so it's difficult to know where to begin! For looking at violence in Late Antiquity, I highly recommend the work of Maijastina Kahlos as a starting point - most of her scholarship deals with tensions between religious communities in the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity, and I've found it extremely clear and illuminating. For Late Antique slavery, I'd look at Jennifer Trimble's work, especially "The Zoninus Collar and the Archaeology of Roman Slavery" (2016, JSTOR link here). On the intersections of violence and the legal system, I'd recommend Sarah Bond's 2014 article "Altering Infamy: Status, Violence, and Civic Exclusion in Late Antiquity" (JSTOR link here) as well as Julia Hillner's 2015 book Prison, Punishment and Penance in Late Antiquity. Amy Richlin is essential reading on Roman violence in general, and I'd highly highly recommend her piece "Cicero's Head" in Constructions of the Classical Body (ed. James Porter, 1999) if you have access to an academic library and can get a hold of it; it's explicitly framed as a Jewish, post-Holocaust reflection on the violence of the Roman proscriptions and civil wars and has been profoundly influential on my own thinking.

In general, Imperial-era Latin authors spend a lot of time thinking about the necessity/morality/glory of violence, to the point that I'd say violence is the key theme in Imperial Latin literature. It's often bound up with Stoic philosophy (in the 1st-2nd c. CE; Seneca's De Ira is a key text - you might take a look at sections 3.18-19 on torture under Caligula), and given the bias of our sources which skew toward the elite/senatorial-class perspective, it can be harder to track down texts that explicitly make the link between violence and Roman imperium. One famous example is the speech of Calgacus in Tacitus' Agricola 29-32 (link to a translation here), which purports to be the speech of a Celtic general in Britain rousing his troops to battle against the Romans in the 80s CE. Given that speeches in Roman historiography are generally regarded as being compositions by the historian, it's important to ask why exactly Tacitus of all people gives a prominent place to a scathing critique of Roman imperium - there are lots of ideas on this and few definitive answers, but it's a startling passage to say the least.

Imperial Latin epic poetry (e.g. Lucan's Bellum Civile; Statius' Thebaid) is well known for being graphically violent in the extreme (as in brutal torture, dismemberment, and one infamous instance of brain-eating in Thebaid 8), and there's a lot of work on how and why violence becomes highly aestheticized for Imperial Latin poets. There's also the genre of Roman declamation (difficult to explain, but essentially something like mock trial cases that were used for rhetorical education and showmanship), which frequently explores extremely violent scenarios involving torture, kin-killing, etc. Most scholars these days tend to read declamation as a space where (elite, male) Romans worked out and interrogated various cultural anxieties and taboos. Because of this, you get some of the strongest condemnations of violence found anywhere in Latin literature in the declamatory corpus, but it's difficult to extrapolate from that because again it's something like mock trial and rhetorical showmanship that does not necessarily map on to real-life Roman attitudes.

I've barely scratched the surface and there's a lot more I could say but I'll cut myself off here - I might be able to offer more specific recs if you're interested in e.g. violence as spectacle, aesthetics and artistic representations of violence, etc.

#thanks for the ask!

159 notes · View notes

hollowed-theory-hall · 1 month

Note

what's the one harry potter pairing u like that u mentioned in the tags of your hinny post?

Anonymous: Can I ask who that minor character you ship with Harry is? For some absurd reason my mind jumped to Stan Shunpike lol but it's probably not him.... Or is it?

Okay, so this is kind of a funny story. Like, my pipeline through hp pairings was a weird one. Like, I used to read a lot of Harry pairings, still do on occasion (some make more sense than others). None of them were ones I would point at and say: "that should've happened in the books"

One day, I was innocently writing a fic (canon divergence of GoF), and it was just for me, for funnsies, never posted it anywhere and not planning to. And I planned to pair Harry with someone there (honestly, I don't remember who because I didn't write the plan down) but when writing, Harry ended up with a different character. And it was so strange to me because that never happened.

Like, how do you write a ship accidentally?

But I did. I wrote Harry into a ship by accident. So I went back to the books to try and figure out why the hell would my subconscious decide that's the way to go.

I'll also preface it by all this being my subjective opinion and I do read other Harry ships in fics, this one just quickly became my favorite to write (and the only one I write). Also, I don't actually think this is a pairing that should've happened in the books, it's place is in fic and that's where I like it.

So, the character I accidentally shipped with Harry is... *drumroll*

Stan Shunpike!

Not really, it's:

Theodore Nott

Now, you might look at the name and go: "Who the fuck is that?"

And you'll be correct. Theo has 0 speaking lines in the entire book series. His name appears twice. He, himself, as a person, only appeared on page, like, 3 times in the background. The scene that gives the most information about him is other characters talking about him. He isn't even present.

That being said, I'm very good at extrapolating a lot of information from very little evidence. So allow me, to walk you through who is Theodore Nott and why I ship him with Harry.

Basic Information

So, let's start with the most basic overview before I pull out the quotes and go any deeper.

We know Theo is a Slytherin student in Harry's year. So he likely shares a dorm with Draco, Blaise, Crabbe, and Goyle.

Theo's father is both at the graveyard at the end of GoF and in the Department of Mysteries at the end of OotP, so we know he is a Death Eater. We also know Thoe's father was one of the first and closest Death Eaters to Voldemort, who waited for him during his interview with Dumbledore in 1967:

“Then if I were to go to the Hog’s Head tonight, I would not find a group of them — Nott, Rosier, Mulciber, Dolohov — awaiting your return? Devoted friends indeed...”

(HBP, page 444)

We also know the Nott family is "as pure-blooded as the Malfoys" according to JKR in an interview. We also know Theo's great-grandfather (maybe? the family relation isn't clear), Cantankerus Nott, is suspected to be the one who wrote the Pure-Blood Dictionary, the book that coined the term "Sacred 28" and made that list (which the Nott family are on).

The name Nott is potentially to be derived from the name Nótt, which is the personification of the night in Norse Mythology. So it has been theorized the Nott family have a Nordic origin. Possible, but it doesn't really matter for this post.

What does, is that he comes from a dark, Death Eater, blood-purist family similar to the Malfoys. Even so, Theo never took the Dark Mark and never joined Voldemort in the books.

Now, that we have the basic information out of the way, let's look at Theodore as a person.

All the details I could gather from the books

Alright, now we get to the fun part. That is, me going through all the relevant scenes that mention Theodore Nott and actually creating a character psychoanalysis out of basically nothing.

So, the quotes aren't organized in a particular order. I'm just going to explain Theo and then explain why all this makes me ship him with Harry.

“Well, I pity Slughorn’s taste. Maybe he’s going a bit senile. Shame, my father always said he was a good wizard in his day. My father used to be a bit of a favorite of his. Slughorn probably hasn’t heard I’m on the train, or —” “I wouldn’t bank on an invitation,” said Zabini. “He asked me about Nott’s father when I first arrived. They used to be old friends, apparently, but when he heard he’d been caught at the Ministry he didn’t look happy, and Nott didn’t get an invitation, did he? I don’t think Slughorn’s interested in Death Eaters.” Malfoy looked angry, but forced out a singularly humorless laugh.

(HBP, page 150)

This is a part of the conversation between Draco, Pansy, and Blaise, Harry overhears when he is hiding in their compartment at the beginning of HBP. I have a few things to note regarding this scene.

Firstly, throughout this conversation, Pansy, Blaise, and Draco all call each other by their first name. This shows closeness, they are all friendly and familiar enough to use their first names with each other. Theo, though, is referred to as "Nott" by all three in the compartment.

He doesn't actually sit in their compartment which is in itself a sign about how he isn't really friendly with Draco's group. Considering the group is most of his year from his house, Theo is likely very lonely, and it will be apparent from other scenes I bring up later.

Secondly, Theo's father is in Azkaban. We know Draco is bothered about his own father's predicament. He mentions it to Harry and bothers him over it, Theo doesn't though. Theo doesn't seem to be bothered by Harry or his father's incarceration.

The only conclusion I can draw from this is that the relationship between Theo and his father is not a good one.

(I know some fics like to have Lucius be abusive towards Draco, for some reason. But the books really don't back this up. Lucius loves Draco and Draco adores his father)

Theo, though, Theo seems to be the one with a very strained relationship with his father. Strained enough that he isn't bothered the man is in Azkaban. What I'm saying is that Theo's father likely abuses or mistreats him in some capacity.

If anything more was needed to complete Harry’s happiness, it was Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle’s reactions. He saw them with their heads together later that afternoon in the library, together with a weedy-looking boy Hermione whispered was called Theodore Nott. They looked around at Harry as he browsed the shelves for the book he needed on Partial Vanishment, and Goyle cracked his knuckles threateningly and Malfoy whispered something undoubtedly malevolent to Crabbe. Harry knew perfectly well why they were acting like this: He had named all of their fathers as Death Eaters

(OotP, page 583)

This is a scene at the end of OotP after Draco, Crabbe, Goyle and Theo's fathers were caught at the ministry and sent to Azkaban because they are Death Eaters. There are a few important notes about this scene.

The first, Hermione knows Theo, while Harry and Ron don't really. This means she likely knows him from the classes she takes and Harry and Ron don't — Arithmancy and/or Ancient Runes.

The second, he is sitting with other Death Eater children, but I don't think it's by choice. I mentioned in the previous quote how he isn't close to Draco and his crew. He sits with them here mostly because he doesn't have another choice. Theo doesn't seem to really have any friends, so he sits with the closest people he has to friends — kids he has known since he was young because their fathers were in the same circle.

The other note about this is that Crabbe, Goyle, and Draco are all mentioned as being threatening and malicious towards Harry because they don't like that their fathers are in Azkaban. Theo, though, Theo doesn't threaten Harry, he isn't part of their whisperings. As I mentioned above, he's likely happy his father is in Azkaban.

A pair of blank, white, shining eyes were growing larger through the gloom and a moment later the dragonish face, neck, and then skeletal body of a great, black, winged horse emerged from the darkness. It looked around at the class for a few seconds, swishing its long black tail, then bowed its head and began to tear flesh from the dead cow with its pointed fangs. A great wave of relief broke over Harry. Here at last was proof that he had not imagined these creatures, that they were real: Hagrid knew about them too. He looked eagerly at Ron, but Ron was still staring around into the trees and after a few seconds he whispered, “Why doesn’t Hagrid call again?” Most of the rest of the class were wearing expressions as confused and nervously expectant as Ron’s and were still gazing everywhere but at the horse standing feet from them. There were only two other people who seemed to be able to see them: a stringy Slytherin boy standing just behind Goyle was watching the horse eating with an expression of great distaste on his face, and Neville, whose eyes were following the swishing progress of the long black tail.

(OotP, page 445)

“The only people who can see thestrals,” she said, “are people who have seen death.”

(OotP, page 446)

The stringy Slytherin boy mentioned here is Theo. This scene proves that:

He takes Care of Magical Creatures

He saw someone die

Let's explore the second one for a moment. The fact Theo can see Thestrals means he watched someone die and was old enough to comprehend what he was seeing. We also know Theo's mother is dead. So it's likely the person he watched die was his mother.

I also want to draw attention to Theo's distaste towards Thestrals. He could likely see them carrying the carriages every year since 2nd year, it's not his first time seeing them. But it doesn't stop his displeasure with their sight from showing. Which says something about him. It means he likely recalls his mother and her death whenever he looks at the Thestrals. and these are memories Theo rather not experience.

We don't know how his mother died, but I'd hazard a guess it wasn't natural. After all, wizards have long life spans, they are more durable to illness and injury, and don't usually die from accidents unless very extreme or magical. And there was no epidemic of dragonpox (a disease that does tend to kill wizards) in the time since 1980 and the books. So, she was more likely killed at some point between 1985(ish) and 1991.

“No, I don’t think so, sir. I’m Muggle-born, you see.” Harry saw Malfoy lean close to Nott and whisper something; both of them sniggered, but Slughorn showed no dismay; on the contrary, he beamed and looked from Hermione to Harry, who was sitting next to her.

(HBP, pages 185-186)

First, Theo is an O student in potions since he is in the potions NEWT class, and was probably meant to be there even if Snape was the teacher.

Second, again, Theo doesn't really have friends. He sits next to Draco as the only other Slytherin in the class. Also, they share the circumstances of being sons of Death Eaters currently in Azkaban. Although both of them seem to deal with it quite differently.

Third, Theo joins Draco in making fun of Hermione's blood status, but he does not initiate it. Considering the environment he was raised in and is in, it makes sense he would make fun of it. Whether he's a blood-purist or not, he would want to keep his image considering he doesn't have many allies. Hanging out with Draco is survival, not friendship. They aren't even on a first-name basis with each other.

“Amortentia doesn’t really create love, of course. It is impossible to manufacture or imitate love. No, this will simply cause a powerful infatuation or obsession. It is probably the most dangerous and powerful potion in this room — oh yes,” he said, nodding gravely at Malfoy and Nott, both of whom were smirking skeptically. “When you have seen as much of life as I have, you will not underestimate the power of obsessive love. . . .

(HBP, page 186)

The final quote I have about Theo is from the same potions class as above. Both he and Draco are portrayed here as underestimating amortentia and its potential damage. It makes sense for their upbringing in the Wizarding World, which has no real laws or regulations regarding love potions that are seen as harmless fun more often than not.

I'll add Theo likely didn't witness a healthy romantic relationship. Considering his father is a Death Eater who is likely abusive and may or may not have killed his mother. With this as his reference to a marriage, it's clear why he'd look down on love and love potions.

Why I think Theo and Harry have potential

Okay, so now that we know who Theodore Nott is, let's talk about why I ship him with Harry.

I think Harry, in general, would get along best with a clever partner with the ability to be ruthless (Slytherins or Ron fall into this category). Because Harry isn't some golden savior; he casts unforgivables, and is very willing to poison Umbridge or Crocio Snape if he could get away with it. He needs a partner that won't be horrified by these thoughts.

Also, Theo literally never speaks on page. Even when spoken to, his reactions are silent. I think this quiet and no need to talk, the ability to be comfortable in silence, is something that would be comfortable for Harry. Harry in the books finds himself annoyed with Ron and Hermione's constant banter on occasion, so I think it fits well.

Theo would also be comfortable around Harry without a need to play a certain part. Because Harry wouldn't care about that. He would honestly rather Theo forgo the pure-blood Slytherin act.

I feel like Harry and Theo, have a good potential to understand each other. Theo lost his mother and likely experiences abuse from his father. It makes them very likely to trauma bond over their crap life and shared experience. Two out of three only ones who could see the Thestrals in the entire class.

The other thing I feel they could connect over is being lonely. Harry spent all his childhood until Hogwarts basically being on his own. Theo stayed on his own. Draco at least has his parents, he has other students he's closer to, not that he shares everything with them, but he has some support network. Theo has none. And this is something Harry knows well.

Theo, I think, wouldn't expect anything specific from Harry. He doesn't even interact with him, not to mock him, and not to idolize him, he doesn't care at all. And we know how much Harry appreciates being thought of as Harry and not as the Boy-Who-Lived. Theo would allow Harry to be himself without some mold he wants him to fit in.

The fact Theo never becomes a Death Eater, even though he was in Draco's year and his father was a Death Eater before Lucius (and in better standing than Lucius with Voldemort) is so interesting. It's somewhat surprising Theo wasn't marked. It means he didn't want to be. It means that Theo Nott didn't want to torture and kill muggleborns or blood traitors, or anyone really. And he didn't want to swear his allegiance to Voldemort. This is just a fascinating fact to me and something I enjoy considering. What life experience made him come to that conclusion? Was it just his dislike of his father that pushed him away? Could he have been another Sirius Black (Gryffindor in a Slytherin family) under slightly different circumstances? I mean, Voldemort likely wouldn't force him to become a Death Eater, but would his father? I don't know what at all went down there, but I like that potential story.

We also know he wasn't part of Umbridge's Inquisitorial Squad, even though some minor Slytherins were mentioned to be part of it. He just seems to be an actually decent guy (I don't care what Cursed Child says about him, I know he's there but I avoided almost anything to do with Cursed Child so I barely know the plot).

Finally, this is a character Harry doesn't have as much drama to get over with. Yes, sometimes I want to read overcoming drama between characters before it becomes a romance, but sometimes I want something chiller than that. And Theo is a really chill, safe, Slytherin option for Harry.

#harry potter #harry potter thoughts #hollowedtheory #hollowedheadcanon #hp #hp thoughts #harry james potter #asks #anon asks #anonymous #theodore nott #theo nott #nottpott

75 notes · View notes

somejazzinthemorning · 1 year

Text

bru's masterlist

Requests are open. Feel free to send me anything and I can try to come out with something beautiful from it.

Smut is marked with a *.

I don't have a tag list, but you can just ask and I'll start one.

English is not my first language and I've been writing in English for less than a year, so I'm apologizing in advance for any mistakes you can find.

Until now, all my works are about Carlos Sainz. (sorry not sorry)

cernobbio*

Carlos took off the blazer and got on his knees. The Ferrari blazer fell onto the wooden floor, the piercing yellow and red patch being the only detail you could perceive in the dark room, only lightened by the lights from the garden.

— Do you still want to dance?

Chapters: 1/1 [read here] Carlos Sainz x Female Reader; Mature Audiences;

tightrope

— Just hold my hand. If you are afraid, you can hold my hand.

And it was so cold, my hand froze when I pulled it out from under the covers to extend it towards him. Carlos was on the bed across from mine, his hand stretched out toward me. The beds were far enough apart that I could barely reach him with my fingers. We both got as close as possible to the edge of the bed, the whisper of sheets spreading through the room. I grabbed two of his fingers. He smiled at me. And we fell asleep like that, with our fingers intertwined, hovering over the face of my brother, lying on a mattress between the beds. Eventually, after I had fallen asleep, I let go of his hand and hid it under the blankets. When I woke up, I had both hands on the pillow, but his was down on the side of the bed, his fingers still outstretched—not towards me, but pointed at the floor. And there was no longer a storm and I was no longer afraid.

Chapters: 11/? 01. 02. 03. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08*. 09. 10*. 11*. Carlos Sainz x Original Character; Mature Audiences;

playing cupid

You're in this situationship with Carlos Sainz—no fuss, no drama, just sex. But then your dads become friends, and Sainz Sr., with a soft spot for you, decides to introduce you to his son, whom you've been... acquainted with for a while. To make things more interesting, he's on a mission to play Cupid, all while Carlos enjoys the thrill of keeping your little secret, playing along with his dad.

Chapters: 1/1 [read here] Carlos Sainz x Female Reader; Warnings: Mentions of sex; Some curse words.

I'll try to keep this updated and hopefully add more stories to the list.

Disclaimers 1. I'm aware writing RPF (Real Person Fiction) is a controversial and challenging topic. But I enjoy writing it, therefore will continue to do so. Note that when I write RPF, I do it with a lot of respect. My works are my interpretation and extrapolation of the subjects. Any RPF is purely fictional and written in an AU where the subject is single. 2. I am over 18 and I choose to write smut and NSFW content. Before reading any of my stories, please have a look at the "warnings" section at the beginning of each story/chapter.

424 notes · View notes