I love it when milkvan accounts have "the superhero and the heart 💜💙" in their bios, like yesss address her by exactly what she doesn't wanna be seen as, and him as how his other love interest standing in the way of milkvan sees him
I can honestly say it's gotten to a point where I feel bad? Like, completely separate from byler obviously, just seeing some of their takes on things, it makes me feel pity almost because their interpretation of what's happening is just so superficial and yet they truly believe it's the most beautiful love story on the planet.
I'm not even the type of byler that hates milkvan tbh. I am a byler that was a milkvan back in the day. Like, I hate to admit this, I hate it so much, but I literally remember rewatching season 2 to prepare for s3's release and I skipped all of s2 practically so I could get to the end to rewatch their reunion! I was that bad!
For those that don't know, s2 was seen as like a big risk from Netflix's perspective, because they were scared that the show would tank since El wasn't with the boys again, specifically Mike, for the entire season. And so I can honestly say, at one point, I contributed to a large sector of fans back then who thought it was the Mike and El show and ended up missing a lot as a result. Though, upon coming across theories post s3 (Mike in front of the closet in Will's room was what opened my eyes officially), I remember rewatching s2 and seeing that shed scene and feeling instantly that it was romantic... And so apparently, all it took was me actually watching it instead of skipping over it to realize....
So that's probably a part of the problem for them still, is that they're watching the milkvan scenes with undivided attention (with rose-tinted goggles), and they're glossing over everything else. Even now, with one season left we still see them downplay Mike and Will's relationship by saying Mike hates Will? And that alone could not make it more obvious that they do not actually watch the show.
Most bylers on the other-hand are capable of watching milkvan scenes, multiple times, like we analyze them to death. And most of us are coming from a good place, genuinely trying to understand these two characters and where they are both coming from. Though, I have yet to see a byler scene be analyzed by milkvans? Like they just don't talk about them beyond downplaying them both romantically and platonically? I'm convinced they've seen every byler scene maybe once bc they were forced to on the first watch but they've avoided their scenes ever since... Not great for their ability to understand the show obviously.
Many of them do in fact view that first meeting in the woods as like them falling in love at first sight. And genuinely, A LOT of people got hooked on Stranger Things in the first place because of Mike and El and them sort of viewing all of their interactions as irrefutably romantic.
And that isn't inherently bad! It's not! But now when you add Will in the mix, you start to see the hypocrisy seep in through the cracks. And it's because by comparison, they view fans merely speculating about Mike's potential feelings for Will as something to be seen as perverted or gross. And so that for me, is when I sort of start to question the groundwork of milkvan.
Because quite frankly, I didn't see any of these people getting angry and defensive about how gross 99% of the audience was for shipping Mike and El in s1-2. As far as I can remember, the show was a hit in large part because it followed this very successful trope of self insert nerdy boy meets girl who is way more 'cool' than him, and people ate that shit up bc we always do. It's what we're used to. It's safe. From what I recall, no one had any problem with Mike trying to kiss El in his basement bathroom after like 3 days of knowing her, during a very traumatic time in their lives and only specifically after Lucas implied Mike was already in love with her and wanted to marry her at this point.
They saw that and said, that's love bitch.
And bylers say this all the time, but it is absolutely true: If the roles were reversed, if El was the best friend of Mike's who went missing and instead Will was a boy they found in the woods while looking for her, fans would have been saying this is obviously a best friends to lovers story between Mike and El!!!.. And that bathroom scene? If that happened between Mike and Will? They would have saw that and said what the fuck kind of sick shit is this.? And maybe it would have been in large part because the circumstances at play, bc it doesn't really matter to me personally when it comes to that situation whether it was a girl and a boy or a boy and a boy, it was an odd choice to make, plain and simple. And that's what I'm trying to say here. That to them, one is true love, and one is disturbing.
Mike's known Will longer. If he is queer (he is), then it's very likely he did have a crush on Will at the time he met El, not necessarily super consciously or anything. But even despite that, I don't think Mike would have felt comfortable with kissing Will in that situation, nor any other boy or girl. They prove this when Mike's makes that comment in s2, chastising Dustin and Lucas for merely being interested in getting to know Max, despite never having spoken a word to her? Like that tells you right there the circumstances and everything at play is what led Mike to try to kiss El in that moment, a moment that was unprecedented and never would have happened in any other scenario.
Even in the case they found Will in the woods instead of El, I don't even think that scene would have happened either? And this is because the whole point of it was for El to ask Mike if she was still pretty despite having a buzz cut (looking like a boy like everyone in the story has been hinting at us that entire season), for Mike to say pretty, really pretty, only for him to look visibly uncomfortable with himself, followed by trying to overcorrect this moment by kissing her.
That scene wouldn't make sense with Mike and Will bc it was happening in the first place because of heteronormativity. And it existing and people thinking it's like peak romance, is in and of itself proving the hypocrisy of an audience that is eventually going to call Will and Mike ending up together, coming out of nowhere and perverted...
Bc you just know if El was Mike's best friend, they never would have had any interest in Will as this boy they found with superpowers. They would have got those scenes of Mike looking everywhere for El and instantly latched onto the boy/girl slow-burn best friends to lovers trope.
The crazy together scene???? If that scene was between Mike and his best friend El, fans would have been rooting for it to end in a kiss... Why do you think the Duffers had that awkward long pause at the end? They were nodding to the fact that this audience is willing to see one thing, but not the other. Even when the thing they're willing to see is overcast by things that should make you a little bit more critical of it in the first place.
Putting Will or any other boy in El's place in that scene in the bathroom or other moments between Mike and El in s1 would have completely removed the romantic lens for most of the audience back then, and it's because... wait for it... HETERONORMATIVITY!
We as a society see a boy and a girl being nice to each other and pressure them to make it official. Hell no a boy and a girl can't just close friends. Either one of them is harboring secret feelings or one of them is gay.
Heteronormativity is literally why most of society latched onto these 2 characters, not necessarily the pieces that made up the whole. And so they have to make up excuses despite the circumstances bc it is so normalized that they don't think twice about it, because they've never had to think twice about it up to this point.
Stories have always catered to them. In fact, the stories we've been exposed to our whole lives has created the expectations we have in the first place.
And so like... I do feel bad but only bc I'm a decent person and don't like to see people hurting genuinely.
No doubt I will feel satisfaction seeing some folks who were hurtful to bylers get a taste of their own medicine, but I genuinely hope that they can eventually learn to accept it and appreciate the story for what the Duffers intend it to be when it's all said and done.
As for the superhero and the heart... again, I feel bad like genuinely, I don't know how to even explain the unnecessary guilt I feel that these strangers who I don't even know are going to be whiplashed tf out of next season...
53 notes
·
View notes
where'd you draw inspiration for T&TA and how long did it take you to comprise a legible script [a fellow, curious- and pretty young writer]
The most immediate inspirations for Time and Time Again were Jaws, Quantum Leap, and Psych. I grew up watching a ton of detective type shows and so there's a lot of background radiation in my brain taken up by those. I tend not to take much stock in inspiration though, and generally am comfortable just powerhousing through things (it's kind of what I went to school for). Inspiration happens when it happens, but if it doesn't, my work still needs to get done!
It took me about 7 months to write the first season, which is 4 complete stories. To be clear, though, I don't script! I outline major character events, and then I make about 100 more detailed outlines until I get to one that hits all the development points I want and feels interesting to me. This takes me weeks of writing sometimes 10+ pages a day, putting together boards with strings, etc. until I feel I've got an outline of events that I'm happy with!
I actually get to writing and finessing dialogue while I'm making thumbnails, and 1 episode can take me anywhere from a day to 2 weeks. The longest ones are when they're arguing, and I'm struggling with the minutiae of the implications of their words, where I want them both to be sympathetic without making their dialogue feel unnatural.
So, one complete arc takes me about 4-6 months from start to finish, I think.
My writing is at its best when I get to plan everything up front, and it's at its worst when I'm forced to deliver week-to-week and I can't see the whole story as it is. But, I've also been writing for a long time and I know myself and my process pretty well! Every writer is different, and some people need a lot more time than others. Let yourself relax, don't try to do things "the right way" because there is no right way. Just make stories! Make the process fun for you, and your skills will grow the more stories you tell. As long as you're having fun, the stories are serving their purpose.
9 notes
·
View notes
Do you think Strabo ever had the suspicion that Coriolanus played a role in Sejanus's death? I read your character studies on the Plinth family (love those works so much) and wondered if Strabo would ever have the feeling that Coriolanus betrayed Sejanus because Strabo knows that Coriolanus is just like him. If Strabo sees similarities between himself and Coriolanus, I'm assuming he can sense that Coriolanus is power hungry and willing to betray anyone to get to the top. On another note, how do you think Strabo mourned/reacted after Sejanus's death? We see that Ma curses the mountains for the rest of her life, but Strabo was never really religious.
so, first: tysm for reading my works!!!! I'm so happy you enjoyed it <33
I DEFINITELY think strabo suspected something, but not right away. he was an asshole, but as I always say, I do think he loved his son and his family in his own twisted way. at first, I think he went through the logic he himself says in the book: the plinths were parents without a son, coriolanus was a boy without his parents. and coriolanus was intelligent, and ambitious, and young and full of potential.
but that's the thing: full of potential. coriolanus was 19 at that time, and I think strabo underestimated him for a while. he would never think such a young boy would do the kind of things he did, let alone to sejanus, someone so loyal to coriolanus.
however, as time passed by, and strabo started to notice more and more how coriolanus seemed even more ruthless than himself, even more power hungry... it all started to come into place.
strabo betrayed his own district, his own home.
why wouldn't coriolanus betray a friend?
now, let's talk about strabo and the plinths in general: one thing that makes me think a lot is that after the events of tbosas, we don't hear about the plinths never again in thg. never. coriolanus became their heir, and I'm assuming they became some sort of parent like figures to him. maybe I'm reaching, but in these conditions, I would expect for coriolanus to mention them at least once. but nothing. nothing at all.
so. what happened?
there's a saying where I'm from (I at least never heard it in english) that goes like "it's snake eating snake". it basically means that when two horrible people get close to each other, it's not really a surprise when they start betraying each other. and that's basically coriolanus and strabo to me after years after sejanus' death, after the first moment of pain went away and the logic started to come back into place.
my personal theory is: strabo at some point knew. he was a smart man and too much alike coriolanus. and we all know how things end for people who cross coriolanus' path.
about how strabo reacted: I think he was devasted, really. and in the same way coriolanus has this feeling all over the book that he's annoyed and tired of having to get sejanus out of trouble, strabo have done this all his life, and it wasn't enough. strabo hated to fail, and regarding sejanus, I think he felt like he failed. and plus, he not only lost his son, he lost his heir. I think he drowned himself in work and I do think he had something to do with why the hell D2 went from their mentality in the 10th games to their mentality in the 74th games. maybe he helped coriolanus with propaganda, or gave him ideas, idk, but it was important to him to make sure that no other boy from that district would end up in the dangerou rebel path sejanus ended.
(of course coriolanus supported his ideas. strabo just didn't know at the time that the reasons were completely different from his.)
10 notes
·
View notes