#Of course‚ feel free to disagree with my interpretation of the text

[kyouka-supremacy]

Atsushi for the ask game.

ATSUSHI HERE WE GO THANK YOU FOR HEARING MY PRAYERS

Favorite thing about them: HIS SELFISHNESS. It's so so delicious to explore. Can you imagine a protagonist that saves others not out of simple good will, but because of egoistic self-preservation motives? It just feels counterintuitive for me lmao, and I found it quite messed up when I first watched the anime, but now it's so compelling to explore. His whole “everything I do is in order to gain the right to live” is crazy fashinating. Because lol, that's entirely nonsensical to me! There's no such thing as “gaining the right to live”; all humans, every person in the world is inherently deserving of life. All. No exception. So there's no level of “weak” or “worthless” that would make you lose that right. The fact that's it's a vision so distant and absurd from mine, idk, it just makes it very compelling to explore? “What if there was a little fucked up guy who believed the right to live had to be earned” just sounds like a very interesting premise.

Least favorite thing about them: When I first watched the anime, I think I found him low-key annoying? I just... Don't do very well with self-deprecating people and people who complain a lot in general, I usually suffer in silence and tend to (wrongly) assume others should do the same (this probably makes me sound pretty mean, I swear I try to be understanding irl). However, it doesn't bother me as much anymore, I simply think it's more of a distinctive trait of the character that makes him multilayered and unique. As of now, I can't think of anything I don't like about him if not the fact that I wish he'd rely on Dazai and others in general a little less. I know that has to do with his lack of self-worth, so maybe it makes sense,, but as of now he feels kind of stuck. I just wish we'd see him grow more on that front.

Favorite line:

There may be better ones, but I really like the delivery of this one.

brOTP: KYOUKA AND ATSUSHI they make me go insane. Already talked about this in the Kyouka post but just to reiterate: in my headcanon Kyouka really is the only person Atsushi feels genuine, selfless affection towards. It's very sweet. They're siblings. Kyouka's happiness is really important for Atsushi. They really do have that feeling of people who got out of an abusive environment learning what normality is supposed to be like together. I also really like how they compensate for what the other lacks, be it decisiveness and coolhead for Atsushi and empathy and positivity for Kyouka. Although plenty shipping them romantically, I really like platonic sskk and atsulucy as well.

OTP: I really like sskk eheh. I think they're neat. There's a thousand and one reasons why I find them pretty great. They're objectively the only reason why I got invested in bsd as well as the only thing that has me keep up with the franchise to this day. Right now, I feel like the one thing I really appreciate about them is how you can be the worst person in the universe and still somehow be loveable to someone. I think it's sweet. I also find it very fun and enterataining to explore their various soulmatism antics. They're both very complex and multilayered characters with something deeply wrong with how their minds work that makes them very fun to analyze both by their own and in the complexity of their relationship. Their collective story arc and canon relationship progression is extremely engaging and nice to follow, too. I love dazatsu and atsulucy as well!! Both were ships I wasn't particularly invested when I read the manga for the first time, but really grew in me in the last six months or so. I really dig akuatsulucy as well!!

nOTP: Nothing?

Random headcanon: He really likes reading. There's some real meta-analysis to be made here I actually had written this is probably not the right place to talk about, but in a work that's all about literature, he's the character who reads.

Unpopular opinion: He's the hardest character to write / characterize. That's why people should probably go easier on other fans when they mischaracterize him. He's just very multifaceted and genuinely hard to get. I keep seeing people being like “Stop babyfying Atsushi he's an independent adult!!” then turn around to say “he can't be shipped with Dazai because there's too much unbalance of power :// [somewhat implying Atsushi can't make free decisions for himself]”, or “Stop making of Atsushi a soft baby who never did wrong in his life!!!” then turn around to say “Atsushi is the happy puppy of the agency who gets treats and pats from everyone ^^ ” like. At least to me, a lot of people's arguments sound self-contradictory all the time; but that doesn't mean people should stop having fun and characterize the characters as they like! Just, let's stop being mean to each other and try to be a little more accepting towards others' takes, shall we? And yes that also includes letting people find Atsushi annoying if they find him annoying (although like, I've NEVER found anyone call Atsushi annoying ever, so really, what remote fandom spaces is everyone visiting? Why are you looking for clothes (good takes) at the soup store (Tik/tok I assume?) ).

Song i associate with them: Common World Domination by Pinocchio-P, HIBANA by DECO*27, Ghost Rule by DECO*27, so on and so forth.

Favorite picture of them:

Favourite panel from the manga:

Favourite illustration: Look, there's too many beautiful illustrations, I can't chose. Here's a very good one though.

Favourite illustration in the anime art style:

But also:

Favourite Mayoi card:

Send me a character?

#Btw I think the author does truly believe that people have to earn their own right to live and that #“people can't live unless someone tells them ‘it's okay to go on’ ” #Which is all sorts of fucked up for me and just goes to the encyclopedia titled Reasons Why I Strongly Disagree With Bsd Morals #But taking the character Atsushi on its own out of the context of which worldvies bsd does or doesn't enable. #I think it's very compelling to explore a character who thinks like that!! #Of course‚ feel free to disagree with my interpretation of the text #atsushi nakajima #bsd #mine #people asks me stuff #I feel like with this more than others I have more to say that just didn't come to me... #I have so many headcanons and opinions about Atsushi how can I only pick one!!!

[bnhaobservation]

I think people didn’t understand the context of the scene is that Endevor views his own fathers action, he views his action of saving the girl but getting killed as a failure He treats his fathers failure as his own but about him he was looking down on him for it the example would be in how he Calls his corpses of Lump of meat. There was no empathy or understanding towards the father's actions, just his reaction. This scene is focused on how Enji feels than his own father's feelings. 

Hum...

...I'm not sure what triggered this ask (maybe this reply to another ask?) but the charming part of a manga being a narrative and visual story is that, unless the text or the author say something explicit, the rest is up to interpretation.

So, unless I'm backed up by Horikoshi's statements or by something factual in the manga, I can't tell others how a scene MUST be read, just list various possible readings or merely my own.

For example you say Enji calls his father's corpse a lump of meat because he looks down on him.

It's an interpretation. Another possible interpretation is that it's merely a factual description of his father's remains along with the girl's remains (he calls them both lump of meats) as the area is devasted as if a great explosion has taken place, Enji's father's body could have been mangled beyond recognition and Enji seems to be in shock.

People in shock can distance themselves in this way by refusing to accept what remains of their beloved is what once was their beloved in a 'that's not my father, that's a lump of meat'... or just by being coldly factual because they find relief in it.

Am I trying to say THIS IS THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION? How should I know? This is just a possible interpretation and I'm not Horikoshi.

It stands on equal ground with all the possible interpretations.

We don't know how was Enji's relationship with his father, if he loved the guy or hated the guy, we don't even know if his father was a Hero or just a common person, if he was a well known coward who had a sudden moment of heroism but lacked the ability to save people or a braggart who liked to claim he could defeat any villain with ease.

Everything is possible.

If we analize the scene from a visual perspective, Enji's eyes are wide open and with no pupils inside, which is generally the visual used to represent shock. The rain on his face can be viewed as symbolically representing tears, and therefore sadness.

So if we extrapolate from the visual Enji felt shock and sadness at his father's death but, again, this is not written in stone, this is an analysis done by comparing Enji's image to similar ones and extrapolating from it the recurring visual tropes and their meaning.

Again, it's interpretation, nothing is factual, people are free to disagree.

Narratively though, the scene is shown in relation to a discussion about weakness, or, more specifically, about Enji's innate weakness (生来の弱さ seirai no yowasa), not about failure.

Enji's themes were always tied with "strenght" (強い 'tsuyoi') and its opposite, "weakness" (弱い 'yowai'), the one tied to a theme of failure, or more specifically of "failed work/creation" (失敗作 'Shippaisaku') is Touya, who's haunted by that word to the point it triggers him even when he hears it in the orphanage.

Of course you can interpret this as weakness= failure because, again, we're free to interpret things and the connection 'if you're weak you'll fail' can be done. It's not in the text since the whole thing continues with young Enji telling old Enji he has to continue cursing his true enemy, his own weakness, as this is the only thing that had kept him alive and, in the following chapter he insists he'll keep raging against himself (anger is another of Enji's themes)... but also that he must win.

Failure/fear of failure isn't really considered, not even when he lists the big four that lead to expose the weakness that was always within him...

Said all this, I don't mean to say your interpretation is wrong. I'm not Horikoshi, I don't know which interpretation is right.

The fact that multiple interpretations of a manga scene can exist is what for me, makes things interesting so I'm actually grateful you shared your view with me.

I like to read of different possible readings for scenes, even when they don't match with mine and don't make me change my opinion. For me they're still interesting because they express the different ways in which things can be read.

So again, thank you for sharing your vision for your ask and for allowing me to talk again about the Todorokis as I love to do it.

Let's wait together and see if Horikoshi will give us more bits of Enji's past (or more info about the Todorokis in general, or more scenes with them at least... I'll really take anything at this point...)!

#Todoroki Enji #Ask

[mdzs-owns-my-ass-i-guess]

I keep thinking about the fact that Jiang Cheng chose not to tell Wei Ying the truth about how he lost his core in the first place - by making himself bait for the Wen soldiers to distract them from catching Wei Ying after Lotus Pier was attacked.

And I think there are several reasons for this that I've been mulling over, so I decided to make a post about it.

Disclaimers: I am in no way saying that my opinion is canon fact or that it's the only "right" or "proper" or "correct" interpretation of that scene and/or JC and WWX's characters! Feel free to disagree with me, but respectfully. I do not entertain discourse, however I enjoy debate!

Now onto the post:

One of the reasons why I think JC didn't tell WWX about his own sacrifice is the fact that, though unknowingly, WWX had already repaid his favor by supplying him a new golden core years ago.

JC may not have known the details on how that happened, but it did regardless - so bringing this up at that point in the story, after the whole Guanyin Temple debacle and the golden core reveal, would have been pointless.

Even if WWX would have known that it was JC wanting to protect him (and not the other way around) that arguably led to... well, everything in WWX's first life and his demise, I don't see WWX agonizing too much over it - even if he didn't know it at the time, he repaid his debt immediately and in kind. It would have been shocking and upsetting, of course, but, at least the way I see it, it was a closed matter.

Moreover, I think the reason why JC has kept being bitter and vengeful and angry all these years is the fact that he expected WWX to be grateful for JC's sacrifice... even if WWX had no way of knowing about it.

Hear me out: we know the reason why JC is so angry at WWX is the fact that he believes WWX broke his promise to be JC's subordinate (his words, not mine, but I don't have the chapter on hand right now).

Now, what JC had expected was, presumably, obedience - but WWX didn't provide that, because he chose to stand up for and defend the Wen remnants, which JC disagreed with vehemently (to the point that WWX had to defect from the Jiang sect and stage a fight with JC to "officialize" it).

So not only did WWX not "listen to" JC as a subordinate would, but he insisted to oppose him (and he was right for that, by the way!). In light of that, JC perhaps interpreted it as his own (already repaid) sacrifice as "wasted"... so that misdirected anger fell on WWX, his cultivation path, the Wens and whoever else followed that path or had the surname Wen (these last two are explicitly mentioned in the book, though as supposedly a rumor, however they appear plausible within text, at least to me).

Add to that JZX and JYL dying in circumstances that involved WWX (i am deliberately avoiding the wording "because of WWX", but that's a different post altogether), not to mention JC's proclivity to keeping grudges and needing to blame specific people for everything (personally, I've never seen JC as someone to look at the broad picture and as needing to direct his anger at specific people, without considering the systemic issues)... of course he never moved on, like WWX did.

Because he probably believed he was owed obedience for a sacrifice WWX didn't ask him to make at all (ironic how this is the very same logic JC throws at WWX when the core reveal happens...) and he never got that or an apology for not providing it (which WWX needn't have given anyway, it was morally right of him to protect the Wen remnants!).

All that anger and resentment festered within JC for 13 years, and it burst when he realized he wasn't actually owed anything at all, the debt he believed WWX owned him long repaid with great interest!

#mdzs #mo dao zu shi #original thots #man i hope this isnt too controversial #again this is just how i see things!!

[atomic-rena]

What were your first thoughts to seeing king Julien?

well the first time i met him was in mada 1 and 2, i wasn't a huge animal person (still am not) so even if i liked the movies just fine they never really stuck with me at such a young age.

then in the wonderful year of 2008 tpom started to air on nick. now i still am not an animal person but i really loved tpom! i remember finding king julien funny, a core memory of him that always stuck with me was when he get's his crown stolen by the big rat guy and skipper retrieves it but gets badly beat up only for kj to notice a spot of dirt on it and throw it away in exchange for one of his many replacement crowns. i think generally i just saw him as an asshole tho, he is the cause of most problems in tpom. so yeah, funny guy but not my favorite, (mort was my favorite because he was cute).

but then last year i watched the really long video about mort. you guys know the one, "crimes of mort" or whatever its like 4 hours long. anyways, my jaw was on the floor the entire time. how could the cute little guy from the silly penguin be this eldritch entity?? what the fuck?!?! so i watched ahkj. i had a vague understanding of the mada timeline up until this point, but i figured since ahkj is the prequel to the movies (+ tpom) i should just watch it all in order. i dont really do much, so i have the time...

i was on a road tip with my family the next day, perfect! i can start ahkj! i was captivated by this world i had rediscovered, not only for mort but for king julien too. he was no longer just an asshole that causes problems, he was a more complex and tragic character. one that is somewhat delusional but tries his best to be good (most times). it was a much kinder take on him and my brain just really clicked with him. i watched a few more episodes and decided i should tell my sister.

we get to our destination and we had some down time to kill in a spare bedroom, i had my laptop with me. i ask her if she wants to watch ahkj with me. "it's actually kinda funny!" i modestly promise her, trying to convince her to jump off the deep end with me. she's tired and bored but ultimately still curious enough to say yes. we are fucking hooked to this godforsaken show.

the next couple of months are spent watching nothing but this fucking show with her. i not only start to like king julien more and more, but also maurice and clover. and mort, fucking mort. this little guy found his way into my heart again, this time of course for reasons other than just 'being cute'.

but back to the question: part of the reason kj had such a big appeal to me upon revisiting him was his queerness. i missed it as a kid but this lemur is queer, so obviously queer. but unlike other shows it's not something that others him, it's just him and it felt really natural?? i dont know if i can articulate how i feel fully in text, but regardless of it being very queerbaity, because they never outright say it, i dont think the show had too explicitly say it. now that's a very personal interpretation feel free to disagree but yeah that's kinda how i feel.

another thing is that is a big draw to this character for me is that he's not a fucking teenager. shows about teens are fine (i love the owl house!!) but as an adult that is no longer in high school i dont wanna watch shows about kids in high school. it just feels like every goddamn thing is set in high school (especially anime which i also love but, ughhh different topic). ahkj and just the mada franchise has the advantage of having non human characters, so it's still a funny kid cartoon thats aloud to be silly and lighthearted, but with adult characters with more adult responsibilities. i think ahkj just hit me at the right time in my life, i was able to relate to some of the more general ideas of the show, ya know??

so tldr; as a kid i didnt care for him in tpom but as an adult revisiting him in ahkj he was weirdly relatable. mort is still my favorite despite everything.

#also he's the only completely animal character i've ever found like hot?? #i didnt consider myself a furry before i watched ahkj #but now i believe i meet the minimum requirement #so yeah king julien is hot #something about him #anyways #ask #anon #rena.text #king julien #tpom #ahkj

[voiceless-terror]

my magnus finale and season five thoughts under the cut!

I’ll preface this by saying there were a lot of things I loved about this finale, and none of this is intended to start a debate or fight! It’s simply my feelings about what happened, and everyone’s entitled to their own (and entitled to love/hate what happened!). I totally respect how much others adored this and the wonderful art that’s coming of it. These are, again, just my own thoughts.

I really loved the first half of this. After Jon’s compliance in the last episode (that I found a bit troubling), I was really glad to see that he made the decision to confront Jonah himself and stuck by the idea of not dooming the other worlds. For one, I think it would have been narratively unsatisfying to have Martin be the one to kill Jonah- because let’s face it, while all the assistants have good reason to, this was really Jon’s confrontation to have. And I loved it! The conversation, Jonah begging not to die, and Jon saying - for Sasha, for Tim, hell, even for Gertrude. He never forgets Jonah’s victims or his own friends, and that’s such a core part of his character. 

And I loved the statement. I was hoping we’d get one last one, and this one knocked it out of the park for me. Pupil!Jon is top hot Jon moments, and no I will not be taking questions on this. The soundscaping in this entire episode was brilliant.

I’ll start off by saying I understand narratively why the second half happened. It does make sense to me - that Jon’s final wishes end up being undercut by his love for Martin, and the last moments for me are desperately romantic and sad and lovely and I’m glad that they happened- it leaves so much room for us as an audience to decide what we think happened, and how to go from there. It’s a real gift to creators and though I for one will probably not be able to touch the finale for awhile, writing-wise, I am already itching to write some of my other projects!

But it happened so quickly for me. The pacing and change of heart is so about-face, mostly because of the situation- everything’s crumbling, we don’t really have time for much, if any dialogue. But Jon’s abrupt switch in plans when he was so committed to not dooming the multi-verse, the quick conversation of ‘oh we didn’t trust you so we already started going ahead with it,’ the whole thing was a bit rushed for me, and I think the pacing of this last arc has left a lot to be desired, personally. Again, I’m not saying it doesn’t make sense in its own way, I just don’t think the pacing of this season was the best that it could’ve been. 

What also has been bothering me this season is Jon and Martin’s relationship (again, this is a personal take, it’s not something I expect everyone to agree with, at all). Martin’s not a character who was an initial fave for me at all, but I grew to love and appreciate him so that by the end of season four, I was really invested in Jon and Martin’s relationship and arc! It felt real and organic to me, and it was something to fight for. This stays mostly true for the first part of the season.

But then it gets a bit murky for me. We get the constant schtick of Martin going ‘a statement? Again?’ and this almost constant uncomfortable tension between him and Jon that never sat right with me. He wants Jon to not push any decisions on him, he doesn’t want to hear any statements, he wants his boundaries respected, but he doesn’t really do the same in regards to Jon. While I know the stress of the apocalypse is definitely a factor, it didn’t seem very ‘Martin’ to me, or at least the Martin that’s grown and changed since the first season. There’s a difference between going from being a wallflower to being assertive, and maybe because he’s never had a chance to really be confident and self assured, he doesn’t know how to do it in a way that isn’t a little hurtful. And while these can be normal and realistic parts of a relationship that are in some cases addressed, it’s realistic for me in a way that I don’t feel comfortable with. The way Martin is the one who pushes the ‘kill bill’ arc, especially in the Simon episode where he pretty much commands Jon to kill Simon, and his non-apology at the end of that episode (and the eventual fight where he accuses Jon of being the one to ‘enjoy it too much’). The time at Upton house that for me, is just uncomfortable knowing that Jon is actively dying and by the end, Martin doesn’t seem to realize it until he’s told (and then, when Jon says ‘was I wrong to hold off?’ Martin says no, that he enjoyed the time, and I just don’t think that Martin would ever condone that sort of self-sacrificial shit from Jon, as we see later on in the season!!). And then the fight, where Martin says some pretty awful and untrue things, and runs off with Annabelle- these are all things that could be forgiven, and are! But the apologies from Martin have all been lackluster with a tinge of ‘well I was right, wasn’t I?’ and the narrative doesn’t dispute that, and in fact seems to want us to side with some of his more (in my opinion) impulsive and not very great decisions. Jon very rarely fights back against him, and the times he has, its almost framed as if what he says/his transgressions are worse. I think if Jon acted in the way Martin did for some of this season, fandom would riot. But it's Martin, so he seems to get a free pass to act this way and have it be framed in a much better light. This is again, my own opinion about the text, I’m not saying anyone that disagrees with me is wrong. It’s just how it came off to me, and as someone who has been in relationships with similar sort of issues (on a very non apocalyptic scale, of course) it didn’t sit right with me.

So in the end, Jon goes off to confront Jonah on his own, which some are calling stupid or impulsive. But it’s not to me- this is Jon’s moral compass, and he’s sticking by it. For him to go along with the plan would be wildly out of character, and I’m glad he did this. The way it ended was ultimately satisfying to me, and leaves room for a lot of interpretation. But the way it got there wasn’t really what I wanted. And I say this as someone who really does enjoy jonmartin, and will continue to do so! I hope in a thousand fix it fics they get to talk and go to therapy and work on these issues on their own. But the way Jon and Martin’s relationship was presented over this season wasn’t comfortable for me, the trust issues and lack of communication was never resolved and I’m sort of disappointed with that overall. 

I’m glad we got the ending we did, and I’m going to continue to love these guys for a good while yet. This is, again, not intended to start a debate, I don’t want to fight or engage with anyone like that because I really do respect everyone’s opinions on this season and final arc, and these are just my own thoughts. You are well within your rights to disagree with me on these things! But I just thought I’d share my own feelings about this last season. I’ve loved these characters for a really long time, and I’ve been listening since the end of 2017 so I have a lot of thoughts to sit with right now. But I’ll still definitely be writing and in this fandom for the long haul...especially if I want to reconcile the things I didn’t particularly vibe with xD

Hnnn back to my regularly scheduled posting, sorry for the long rambling thoughts.

#rye rambles #im not going to tag this obvi #but it was cathartic to write #sort of tma negative? but not an indictment of anything #because there was a lot to enjoy #but some things that really made me fjgfdkgl #feel free to ignore #this is long #i also tried to phrase this in the most non combative way possible and that may be annoying but i just dont need hate in my inbox tbh #this is all i will be posting about this cause i dont want this blog to be takes

[dykevillanelle]

Okay so, maybe this will be a big question, but after season 3 especially villanelle background episode and the fact she doesn't want to kill anymore, I feel like it formed a question "Is she really a psycopath or the circumstances make her like this?" and I would love to read your opinion about it.

[your disclaimer that i don’t claim to be an expert on psychopathy/ASPD though i have read a lot of research, and that psychology writ large is a deeply flawed and complicated field despite me signing my entire life and career over to it]

TLDR: killing eve, like pretty much every tv show in the entire world, reduced “psychopathy” to a set of media tropes and tried clumsily to do a “nature versus nurture” conflict that, in my opinion, fell flat. in this post: me bagging on psychologists from the 40s, overanalysis of pre-eve villanelle, and quotes from my reluctantly-owned copy of the DSM-5.

the fundamental assertion of villanelle as psychopath has never sat right with me. she certainly exhibits many of the traits that would be considered within the “dark triad” (yes, it’s really called that, i hate psych scholarship), and she technically meets the criteria for ASPD, but she violates many of the core tenets of “psychopathy” as it’s currently understood. she is, of course, a fictional character and therefore a creation of people who were working off of popular tropes of psychopathy. but i’m going to overanalyze her anyway and YOU CAN’T STOP ME.

(an aside: you can’t be diagnosed with psychopathy, you get diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder or ASPD, and the criteria are influenced by the paradigmatic text of psychopathy scholarship written by legendary homophobe and freudian disaster hervey m. cleckley in the 40s. literally, i’ve read this guy’s book, and it’s 500 pages of absolute wildness. further, the whole section on personality disorders in the DSM is highly controversial and by a lot of beliefs, mostly useless.)

(another aside: that dude they brought in for s2 to give a presentation on psychopathy said literally nothing correct. while you are free to disagree with my opinions, do NOT use that as a refutation!!!)

if we take the diagnostic criteria as at face value, one of the commonalities of those with ASPD who act criminally is that they will typically do so in absence of any significant external reward. villanelle’s first kill (to our knowledge, besides whoever might have died in the fire she set at the orphanage) was anna’s husband..and y’all, villanelle was sixteen and having sex with an adult teacher. you really think anna had no part to play in all that? anyway, after that, villanelle has very CLEAR external rewards for criminality--she’s literally bankrolled by murder. so her criminal behavior in connection to the twelve isn’t necessarily evidence of psychopathy.

“impulsivity and failure to plan ahead” is another important criteria, which villanelle does NOT show at all--we see her obsessively planning, adjusting and readjusting on a dime, learning skills and languages to do her job, etc. “reckless disregard for safety of self or others” also doesn’t really describe her--before she meets eve, she actually has pretty admirable self control (we don’t see her drink or use drugs to excess except in connection with eve, she has a very strong sense of self-preservation). “consistent irresponsibility” also isn’t quite there--though she goes off the rails (again after meeting eve), she’s shown to be relied on by the twelve to get her jobs done and done well.

however, villanelle also isn’t just a product of her circumstances. she’s shown a predilection for violence from a young age, but having a terrible mother and growing up in an orphanage after being abandoned isn’t prescriptive of becoming a career criminal. she has trauma in spades and that certainly contributes to the choices that she makes, but it feels completely reductive to her intelligence and character to just say “the circumstances made her do it.” which is why i found the shift in season 3 pretty jarring, and it didn’t make a lot of sense to me.

my preferred interpretation of villanelle is that she’s a hot evil lady who is assumed by some to be an emotionless killing machine and to others as a pathetic victim of circumstance, and who is actually neither of those things. she knows how to play both parts, and she does it to her advantage. she loves deeply, shows it in the most fucked-up ways imaginable, is traumatized and anxious, and also incredibly intelligent and motivated.

#i really did want someone to ask me this LMAO #killing eve #villanelle #villaneve #angelic asks #morerevenge

[ramblings-of-a-mad-cat]

Please tell me you understand that Frisk and Kris are not responsible for the player's choices. Please please say you get that.

Alright, this is a tricky one, because I know how touchy the fandom can get about this subject. Short answer, yes. Of course I understand that. Long answer? I don't think it's that simple or that cut and dry. I think that's one interpretation, but it's not one that I disagree with, especially when it comes to Deltarune.

Still, the UT/DR fandom, or at least the parts that I interact with, are very dead-set on the player being responsible for the evil routes. They treat this as absolute fact and literally won't hear a word otherwise, will mock people who disagree for not wanting to "take responsibility." And so on. I'm not gonna say this goes too far, just that I don't take it that seriously, and I can understand both arguments. Because technically, that isn't fact. It's heavily implied, perhaps, that the player is an existent force within the story and universe of both games. But it's deliberately ambiguous and as such, I think it's only fair to be respectful to both interpretations.

What sort of helps and hurts is that these "You are responsible, just accept it" posts is that they tend to be grouped in with similar posts that shame players who misgender Frisk, Chara, and Kris. This is one area in which there are not two arguments to be made. All three of these characters only ever use they/them pronouns. It's right there in the text, and this representation matters. This has nothing to do with the player's role, I'm just bringing it up briefly because these two points are so often made together, and by the same people in the fandom. Let there be no doubt that the kids are canonically nonbinary and I stand with them.

I believe the player is responsible for No-Mercy and Snowgrave, just as I believe the player to be responsible for the pacifist routes. However, we have to allow people to discuss the characters, and interpretations of them, that do not involve the player. Here's the thing: Some people will want to experience this as a narrative without being forced to involve themselves directly in the story. Some people want to experience Undertale/Deltarune with the safety and comfort of the fourth wall. Given the writing of these games, that's borderline impossible, but far be it from me to try and tell other players that they're not allowed to keep the distance that they're able to. Everyone interprets and enjoys media differently.

Others might feel like it devalues the characters and their agency to reduce them to vessels for the player. Technically, that's what every video game protagonist is. This verse' makes a much bigger deal about it, but even if I don't vibe with the head-canons that make Chara, for example, into a demon child...those head-canons belong to the players who subscribe to them. I don't feel so protective of the UT/DR kids that I want to pick fights with other players for how they interpret the story. (Again, this does not apply to misgendering because that's not a headcanon, that's just transphobia.) Which is not to say that the fandom is guilty of this, I'm not trying to call anyone out or accuse anyone of picking fights. Just explaining why other people's interpretations don't bother me.

I've made an extensive post about my feelings on Chara, (and I think you may have seen it, based on this message) but the summation is that I think they were a good person, if emotionally damaged. I find Frisk to be a good person as well. Though I'll admit that I enjoy the idea of Frisk eventually becoming as jaded and tired as Flowey and eventually trying No-Mercy for this reason, but one could argue that this is simply translating the journey of most players onto the protagonist. Then again, and I've made this point before...people are quick to argue that the characters are absolved of guilt for the darker routes...yet still give them credit for the lighter routes. If Frisk is being controlled against their will...that would apply to all endings, wouldn't it?

Kris is a bit of a different discussion. Deltarune is clearly building up to some kind of plot development regarding their motivation, when they have agency and when they don't, and that tricky relationship to the player. It is clear that we don't know everything about this character, they're very much an enigma. The Spamton Neo fight suggests that Kris is aware of the player's control, as does that shot at the end of Chapter One where they smirk at the camera. There are other clues, like how the game independently refers to both Kris, and "you." I wonder if this has anything to do with that cold open of chapter one, and the vessel the player creates which is immediately "discarded." We still don't know what happened there.

Point is, Kris' story is far from over and we're bound to get huge reveals about who they are, and how all of this works. There is a plan for this character, that much is obvious. So on the one hand, it seems to be suggested a lot more directly that they're under the player's control and that this will be true within the walls of the game's story...but on the other hand, we just don't know enough yet to make any iron-cast conclusion. All theories are valid at this point. If nothing else, Kris...doesn't seem to necessarily be heroic even when they're free of the player. They're creating the Dark Worlds, and even learning the truth about what will happen during Chapter 2, does not seem to have deterred them.

#Undertale #Deltarune #Deltarune Spoilers #Undertale Analysis #Frisk Undertale #Chara Undertale #Kris Deltarune #Chara Dreemurr #Kris Dreemurr #Deltarune Chapter 2

[mashkaroom]

Lengthy analysis of Holes, as promised!. This will include spoilers, which will be marked. Just gonna go through the book and the philosophy/themes/connections I caught onto this time around. Stuff discussed, in order: connections to Camus, on the question of children’s books, systems, cycles, and why Stanley is gay and jewish 😏

Camus:

The first and perhaps most obvious set of texts/theories it makes sense to put Holes in conversation with is the works of Albert Camus. Holes starts out with a description of the sun and the heat, which readers of the Stranger will remember are major themes there. The heat continues to be a prominent part of the story, though thematically, it functions very differently in the two books. In The Stranger it primarily represents the indifference of the universe (or at least so claim a ton of sources and I’m inclined to agree) and the lack of control we exert over our own lives while in Holes it’s basically the opposite of that. The heat and drought is implied to be a semi-divine punishment for a past injustice and, moreover, the elite adults of the camp have air conditioning and access to shade: the sun does not affect everyone equally in Holes as it does in The Stranger (though even that is debatable: I don’t think this was Camus’s intent, but it’s notable that it’s only the white englishman who’s driven to murder by the sun. This could certainly be read as critique of colonizers who cannot/refuse to coexist with the land and environment and how the indigenous population always suffers for it, but I digress). The other Camusian parallel one is immediately inclined to draw is that, of course, of Sysiphus: there’s the repetitive and seemingly meaningless act of digging holes not to mention that carrying stuff up a mountain is both thematically and plot-wise a very important part of Holes. But, once again, it is eventually revealed that both acts do carry an inherent meaning. Holes does not present the image of an uncaring universe: on the contrary, destiny and semi-divine influence plays a major role. The story may start out with a series of seemingly random and inherently meaningless events, but as the story progresses, people, actions, items, and events become increasingly imbued with meaning. In the Holes universe, one must imagine Sisyphus redeemed, not through the act of rolling the stone but by rebelling against it. I have difficulty imagining that Sachar was not thinking of Camus while writing Holes, or, at the very least, that if he encountered Camus afterwards, he must have been struck by the similarities. I don’t know if there was a specific intent in creating a story so embroiled in Camusian absurdism, especially since the target readership is (allegedly) children who almost certainly are not recognizing specific allusions to Camus, so perhaps the similarities are purely aesthetic — after all, everything that is nominally similar does play quite different thematic roles. However, I would never pass up the opportunity to talk about the myth of sisyphus and I think placing Holes in dialogue with Camus can raise some interesting questions about the nature of meaning.

Is Holes a children’s book?

Speaking, though, of the target audience, the audience for this book is in fact children. What about it makes it a children’s book makes it difficult to say: the protagonists are children (and, I would argue, it is not a coming of age story, despite the claims of one piece of lit crit about Holes in which i disagreed with almost every claim made, but i digress once more) and the writing style is fairly simple: you can read it with a second-grader’s vocabulary. Also, of course, being a children’s book doesn’t (and crucially shouldn’t!) mean that it’s lacking in depth and complexity. However, I think most thematically rich children’s books tend to be quite allegorical. The Little Prince is a good example. Holes is just way too specific for its sole market to be children. It’s either intended to be read by multiple generations at once or for child readers to return to it as an adult. It addresses themes of racism (and not just generic racism, anti-black racism in the reconstruction south), homelessness, intergenerational trauma. and the modern carceral system. These are social critiques that will probably go over most kids’ heads (certainly over mine). However, the themes of the text are not inaccessible for children. You don’t have to understand the particular history of the US criminal justice system or even that Sachar is making a comparison to anything specific to get that the system that he’s portraying is unjust. Knowing the real-world context just adds another layer to the text. Holes also has one of the hallmarks of children’s books that I really like, which is a particular type of absurdism that the child characters come up against. This always rang true to me as a kid and well into my teens, when you start understanding that your life is controlled by some set of systems, but you haven’t quite gotten what those systems are or why and how they came about. Like nowadays, I can say “we did this in elementary school because of a state law, that because of a federal law, that because of the history of puritanism, and this because we got a grant for it”, but as a kid nobody tells you these things or really even cares to explain why the rules are as they are, and the systems that govern your world, often with no small degree of violence and almost always with an inherent disregard for your agency, are ineffable and slippery, and good children’s books capture this really well (Series of Unfortunate Events is probably my favorite example of this, where a secret organization that everything is implicated in and more more tragicomic details about it get revealed until the Baudelaire children find themselves to some degree members with mixed feelings is honestly an excellent coming-of-age allegory. oh, not to mention the constant conflict with bureacracy. god that series is so good, everyone read it). Back to Holes, Sachar weaves the more fantastical ineffable elements in with real-world issues so neatly. Stanley’s family is allegedly cursed, which is why Stanley keeps having bad luck, but he also lives in systemic poverty, which is also why he keeps having bad luck. Sachar eschews neither the allegorical elements common in children’s literature nor the more direct systemic critiques more often found in YA and adult lit, and it creates a really unique vibe. I think the story really benefited from having a children’s author, and I would love to see more authors in both children’s and adult lit do this!

Systems

Speaking of the systems, this book is surprisingly radical. Like it’s full-on an abolitionist text. The law is pretty much only ever presented as adversarial, both in the story of Stanley’s present time, and in Kate and Sam’s story. It’s implied if not stated repeatedly that Stanley and the other boys are pretty much victims of circumstance and have been imprisoned pretty much for the crime of being poor. The hole-digging is shown to be cruel and bad for the boys. It’s noted that in digging the holes Stanley’s heart hardened along with his muscles. This is of course very evocative of the system of retributive justice we have in America. Additionally, Camp Greenlake’s existence can ultimately be traced back to an act of racist violence, also in close parallel with our prison system. Hole’s stance on justice is very restorative. Punishments are never shown to work: only through righting the wrongs can true justice be achieved. Moreover, Holes even gives the opportunity for redemption to a minor antagonist when [minor spoiler] Derrick Dunne, the kid who was bullying Stanley in the beginning ultimately plays a small role in helping Stanley regain his freedom [spoiler over].

Cycles

Cycles are a major theme in holes, and Sachar creates a unique temporality to support this theme. There are 3 interwoven stories: that of Stanley’s in the present date, that of Stanley’s ancestors, and that of the land that Stanley is on (though, as I will delve into later, it’s at least a little implied that Stanley is descended from the characters in that story also). The stories from the past reach in and touch the present. You can’t untangle the past from the future. Looking at this again through a social justice lens, it could be seen as fairly progressive commentary on what to do with regards to America’s past wrongs. The past cannot and will not be left in the past: it must be dealt with on an ongoing basis. Even the warden, the greatest villain of Stanley’s story has a sympathetic moment at the end where it’s revealed that she, too, is stuck in a cycle of intergenerational trauma she can’t break free from.

Stanley is gay and jewish

Ok, I will now talk about how Stanley is a queer Jew, but this entire section will be riddled with spoilers, so read the book first and then come back!

A queer Jew?? i hear you ask. You’re just projecting. Yes, 100%. However, I think that interpreting Stanley as both these things adds to the thematic richness of the text. Let’s start with the Jewish bit: it’s not explicitly stated that Stanley is Jewish, but his great-great grandfather is a nerd-boy Latvian immigrant with the last name Yelnats, and his great-grandfather was a stockbrocker, so, like, ya know. Louis Sachar is also himself Jewish, as was the director of the movie, who cast Jews in the roles of Stanley and his family (dyk Shia LaBeouf is Jewish?? i did not), so I know I’m not the only one interpreting it this way. And honestly, does it not resemble the book of exodus quite a bit? They escape what is pretty much a form of slavery and wander in the desert. Sploosh resembles the well of Miriam, and then they ascend up a mountain to the “thumb of god”, perhaps in a parallel to Moses receiving the commandments. Is this a useful way to look at the text? Who knows. But what I think we do get from reading Stanley as Jewish is a more nuanced discussion of privilege and solidarity. If Stanley and his ancestors are Jewish (or at least Jew-ish), then what placed the curse upon his family (and, we see, Madame Zeroni’s family isn’t doing so great either) is the breaking of solidarity between oppressed people. But also, the fact that you are also marginalized does not wash you of the responsibility to other marginalized groups. I don’t think Sachar intended it this way, because I think he probably would have talked about it more if he had, but I would say this book can be read as a call to the American Jewish community to take an active role in forging solidarity with other marginalized groups and actively righting the wrong you, your ancestors, and your community wrought upon them.

Now, why do I think Stanley and Zero are gay? Before I go into how it augments the text thematically, I bring to your attention this passage.

Two nights later, Stanley lay awake staring up at the star-filled sky. He was too happy to fall asleep. 

He knew he had no reason to be happy. He had heard or read somewhere that right before a person freezes to death, he suddenly feels nice and warm. He wondered if perhaps he was experiencing something like that. 

It occurred to him that he couldn't remember the last time he felt happiness. It wasn't just being sent to Camp Green Lake that had made his life miserable. Before that he'd been unhappy at school, where he had no friends, and bullies like Derrick Dunne picked on him. No one liked him, and the truth was, he didn't especially like himself. 

He liked himself now.

 He wondered if he was delirious. He looked over at Zero sleeping near him. Zero's face was lit in the starlight, and there was a flower petal in front of his nose that moved back and forth as he breathed. It reminded Stanley of something out of a cartoon. Zero breathed in, and the petal was drawn up, almost touching his nose. Zero breathed out, and the petal moved toward his chin. It stayed on Zero's face for an amazingly long time before fluttering off to the side. 

Stanley considered placing it back in front of Zero's nose, but it wouldn't be the same.

Girl, I’m sorry, that’s gay as shit! It’s such tremendous tenderness, not to mention the traditionally romantic imagery of moonlight and the flower petal. There’s also the non-romantic aspects. Stanley’s inexplicable happiness and suddenly liking himself evokes, for me, at least, the experience of coming out to yourself, of realizing who you are. Later in this chapter, Stanley contemplates running away with Zero despite the fact that it would make them lifelong outlaws. This book, remember, was written in 1998, and homosexuality was decriminalized in 2003, and the book takes place in Texas. It would have been, if anything, even more evocative of gayness when it was published. Now as to how this increases the thematic richness of the text: obviously, in carrying Hector up to the thumb, giving him water, and singing the lullaby, he redeems the wrong done by his ancestor, after which his family’s luck immediately changed. However, after Hector and Zero return to camp Greenlake, rain falls there for the first time. What was redeemed here? Remember that earlier on we learn that what caused the drought was the fact that Sam the onion man (who was black) was murdered for kissing Kate Barlow (who was white) — so what would a [post-factum wronging of that right look like? Zero, as we remember, is black while Stanley is white, so them being in a romantic relationship would be a successful interracial relationship to redeem the one Kate and Sam weren’t able to have. It’s also, as I said earlier, implied that Stanley is descended from Kate Barlow on his mother’s side: Stanley remembers seeing the other half of the lipstick tube with her initials on it in his mother’s bedroom. I’d also argue that Sam the Onion Man is implied to be descended from Madame Zeroni (chronology-wise, I think he’d be her grandson). First of all, there’s no follow-up with Madame Zeroni’s son who moved to America, and pretty much all other plot threads are followed up with in Holes. Secondly, Sam mentions water running uphill, just like Madame Zeroni does. Even without these speculations being true, Stanley and Hector being gay would redeem the land they’re on, but If they are, the parallel with the other ancestral redemption arc becomes to much to imagine it was unintentional.

So anyway, those are my thoughts on Holes, now everyone go read it!

#was trying to express my dad that shia labeouf is jewish but couldn't remember how to pronounce his name #so i was like. dyk sheeya labeeoof is jewish? indiana jone's son. shaya labyof. Pap. Indiana Jone's son. you know who he is. Pap come on #when he figured out who he was he asked if harrison ford was also jewish #as a joke #and turns out he fucking is! his maternal grandparents are jews from minsk! #quoth my father: 'they're everywhere. nothing is sacred' #lololol #anyway this fucking booooook you guys

[gffa]

OKAY, IF I’M GONNA DO THIS, I’M GONNA DO IT PROPERLY.  WHICH MEANS YEAH IT’S GONNA GET REALLY LONG. A couple of things to say ahead of time:  Lucasfilm’s Story Group has always said CANON > WORD OF GOD when it comes to these matters, so when I quote canon examples from supplementary materials that contradict what he says, that’s LF’s official position, but that doesn’t mean that an influential person like Dave’s views couldn’t affect how things will be shaped in the future, like Deborah Chow listening to this may be influenced by it on the Obi-Wan show, despite that Master & Apprentice contradicts him.  It’s an incredibly murky area!  Mileages are going to vary.   Another thing to keep in mind is that Dave Filoni never worked on The Phantom Menace, that was long, long before his time at Lucasfilm (which I think he joined sometime around 2007? and TPM was released in 1999), that he has worked with George more than probably anyone else, but we cannot and should not treat him as infallible or the True Authority on things, because even Dave himself has said things like: “I mean, I know why I did that and what it means, but I don't like to explain too much. I love for the viewers to watch stuff and come up with their own theories -- and they frankly come up with better things that I intended.”  --Dave Filoni, Entertainment Tonight 2020 interview Or, in the same episode as the above Qui-Gon interpretation:

So, when I dig into this, I’m not doing this out of a sense of malice or even that I suddenly hate Dave or don’t appreciate all the incredible things he’s brought to SW, but in that I disagree with his take, Dave understands that he doesn’t always get it right, that he enjoys that fans come up with different things than he does and sometimes he likes those even more.  There’s room for both of us and, for all that Dave mentions George a lot (and, hey, fair enough, the guy worked with George and I’m just quoting what George Lucas has said) doesn’t mean that this is straight from George, especially because I have never seen George Lucas utter so much as a peep about how the Jedi were responsible for Anakin’s fall.  He has explicitly and frequently talked about how Anakin’s fall was his own choice, as well as I’ve never seen him say anything Jedi-critical beyond “they were kind of arrogant about themselves”.  I have read and watched every George Lucas interview I could get my hands on and maybe I’m still missing something, but that’s literally the extent of him criticizing the Jedi I have EVER seen. (It’s from the commentary on AOTC where he put in the scene with Jocasta to show they were full of themselves, but I also think it’s fair to point out that Obi-Wan immediately contradicts this by going to Dex for help, showing that it’s not necessarily a Jedi-wide thing.) Before I go further, I want to say:  this is not a post meant to tear down Qui-Gon, he is a character I actually really do love, but the focus is on showing why the above interpretation of him is wrong, which means focusing on Qui-Gon’s flaws. He has many wonderful qualities, he is someone who cared deeply and was a good person, I think things would have been better had he lived!  But Anakin’s choices did not hinge on him, because Anakin’s choices were Anakin’s, that has always been the consistent theme of how George talks about him, the way he talks about the story is always in terms of “Anakin did this” or “Anakin chose that”, and the Jedi are very consistently shown as caring, they believed very much in love and Dave’s own show (well, I say “his own show”, but honestly TCW was George’s baby primarily and he had a lot of direct, hands-on say in crafting it, through at least the first five seasons) is plenty of evidence of that. I’m not going to quote the full thing because this is already a monster post, I’m just going to focus on the Jedi stuff, because I like the other points a lot, but if you want the full text, it’s here.  The relevant part is: “In Phantom Menace, you’re watching these two Jedi in their prime fight this evil villain. Maul couldn’t be more obviously the villain. He’s designed to look evil, and he is evil, and he just expresses that from his face all the way out to the type of lightsaber he fights with. What’s at stake is really how Anakin is going to turn out. Because Qui-Gon is different than the rest of the Jedi and you get that in the movie; and Qui-Gon is fighting because he knows he’s the father that Anakin needs. Because Qui-Gon hasn’t given up on the fact that the Jedi are supposed to actually care and love and that’s not a bad thing. The rest of the Jedi are so detached and they become so political that they’ve really lost their way and Yoda starts to see that in the second film. But Qui-Gon is ahead of them all and that’s why he’s not part of the council. So he’s fighting for Anakin and that’s why it’s the ‘Duel of the Fates’ – it’s the fate of this child. And depending on how this fight goes, Anakin, his life is going to be dramatically different. “So Qui-Gon loses, of course. So the father figure, he knew what it meant to take this kid away from his mother when he had an attachment, and he’s left with Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan trains Anakin at first out of a promise he makes to Qui-Gon, not because he cares about him. When they get Anakin, they find him on Tatooine, he says “Why do I feel like we’ve found another useless lifeform?” He’s comparing Anakin to Jar Jar and he’s saying “this is a waste of our time, why are we doing this, why do you see importance in these creatures like Jar Jar Binks and this ten-year-old boy? This is useless.” “So, he’s a brother to Anakin eventually but he’s not a father figure. That’s a failing for Anakin. He doesn’t have the family that he needs. He loses his mother in the next film. He fails on this promise that he made, “mother, I’m going to come back and save you”. So he’s left completely vulnerable and Star Wars is ultimately about family. So that moment in that movie which a lot of people I think diminish, “oh there’s a cool lightsaber fight”, but it’s everything that the entire three films of the prequels hangs on, is that one particular fight. And Maul serves his purpose and at that point died before George made me bring him back, but he died.“  --Dave Filoni  I’m going to take this a piece at a time to show why I really disagree with the content of both the movies and The Clone Wars supporting what Dave says and, instead, contradicts it a lot. The rest of the Jedi are so detached and they become so political that they’ve really lost their way and Yoda starts to see that in the second film. He doesn’t explain what this means, but I’m pretty sure that he’s referring to this conversation: OBI-WAN: “I am concerned for my Padawan. He is not ready to be given this assignment on his own yet.” YODA: “The Council is confident in its decision, Obi-Wan.” MACE WINDU: “The boy has exceptional skills.” OBI-WAN: “But he still has much to learn, Master. His abilities have made him... well.... arrogant.” YODA: “Yes, yes. A flaw more and more common among Jedi. Hmm... too sure of themselves they are. Even the older, more experienced ones.” MACE WINDU: “Remember, Obi-Wan, if the prophecy is true, your apprentice is the only one who can bring the Force back into balance.” OBI-WAN: "If he follows the right path.” None of that has anything to do with being “detached” and, further, I think this is something that’s come up with Dave’s view of Luminara a lot, because he’s described her (re: the Geonosis arc):  “We were trying to illustrate the difference between the way Anakin is raising his Padawan, and how much he cares about her, and the way Luminara raises her Padawan. Not that Luminara is indifferent, but that Luminara is detached. It’s not that she doesn’t care, but she’s not attached to her emotionally.” Here, he says that the Jedi care, in the above, he says that the Jedi don’t care, which makes me think there’s a lot of characterization drift as time goes on, especially when fandom bombards everyone with the idea that the Jedi were cold, emotionless, and didn’t care.  However, look at Luminara’s face in that arc, when she’s talking with Anakin:

That is not the face of someone who doesn’t care.  She even smiles brightly in relief when Barriss is shown to be okay, that this really doesn’t convey “detached” in an unloving or uncaring way.  (We’ll get to attachment later, that’s definitely coming.) (I’m also mostly skipping the political thing, because I think that’s just a fundamental disagreement of whether Jedi should or should not lean into politics.  My view basically boils down to that I think ALL OF US should be leaning more into politics because we are citizens who live in the world and are responsible for it, and the Jedi are no different.  This is evidenced by:  - M&A’s storyline has Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan saving the day specifically because they play politics, that’s how they manage to free the slaves, through playing politics and being part of the Republic/having Senate backing. - The Clone Wars has shown that the Jedi believe “lasting change can only come from within” and “it’s every citizen’s duty to hold their leaders accountable” when Ahsoka teaches the cadets on Mandalore, as well as that politics are not inherently bad, given that Padme and Bail are working to make the system better or “create lasting change from within [the system]” - "Trying to serve the greater good does not always make you popular” says Padme Amidala in a very caring speech - Star Wars Propaganda makes the case that the Jedi might have won the war had they leaned more into politics. - Sometimes the Jedi get unfairly accused of playing politics when there’s just no good choice and they still have to choose one or the other.) But Qui-Gon is ahead of them [re: caring and loving] all and that’s why he’s not part of the council. This is flat-out wrong in regards to canon.  Mileages are going to vary, of course, on how much one takes a novel into consideration, but Dave Filoni is not a fan with the luxury of deciding what is or isn’t canon, he works on Star Wars where canon is canon.  Now, does that mean canon will never contradict itself, especially if Dave gets to write something for Qui-Gon?  Of course not, SW isn’t immune to continuity errors and they themselves have never said otherwise, even when fans want to hold them to that standard. However, this is still pretty much a big “that’s not what happened” instance.  In Master & Apprentice, the Jedi Council offer a seat to Qui-Gon on the Council, specifically BECAUSE he has different opinions from them and they welcome that.  (Excerpt here.)      “We hope it will also be our gain,” Mace replied. “Qui-Gon Jinn, we hereby offer you a seat on the Jedi Council.”      Had he misheard? No, he hadn’t. Qui-Gon slowly gazed around the circle, taking in the expressions of each Council member in turn. Some of them looked amused, others pleased. A few of them, Yoda included, appeared more rueful than not. But they were serious.      “I admit—you’ve surprised me,” Qui-Gon finally said.“I imagine so,” Mace said drily. “A few years ago, we would’ve been astonished to learn we would ever consider this. But in the time since, we’ve all changed. We’ve grown. Which means the possibilities have changed as well.”      Qui-Gon took a moment to collect himself. Without any warning, one of the turning points of his life had arrived. Everything he said and did in the next days would be of great consequence. “You’ve argued with my methods often as not, or perhaps you’d say I’ve argued with yours.”      “Truth, this is,” Yoda said.      Depa Billaba gave Yoda a look Qui-Gon couldn’t interpret. “It’s also true that the Jedi Council needs more perspectives.” Ultimately, Qui-Gon is the who turns them down and gives up a chance to shape the Jedi Council because he doesn’t like the shape they’re taking.  That he does become less political, but this is after he’s argued that the Jedi should be working to push the Senate harder, so when he has a chance to help with that, he turns it down.  It has nothing to do with caring and loving, it’s about Qui-Gon’s desire to not have to deal with the work himself, when he wants to be more of a hippie Jedi.  (I’ve written a lot about Qui-Gon in M&A, why I actually think it’s really spot-on to someone who can be both really kind and really kind of a dick, but it’s not the most flattering portrayal, even if narrative intention likely didn’t mean what came across to me.  I think this post and this post are probably the most salient ones, but if you want something of an index of the web that’s being woven with all the various media, this one is good, too.) So he’s fighting for Anakin and that’s why it’s the ‘Duel of the Fates’ – it’s the fate of this child. And depending on how this fight goes, Anakin, his life is going to be dramatically different. I have only ever seen George Lucas talk about Anakin’s fate in one instance and it’s this:  “It’s fear of losing somebody he loves, which is the flipside of greed. Greed, in terms of the Emperor, it’s the greed for power, absolute power, over everything. With Anakin, really it’s the power to save the one he loves, but it’s basically going against the Fates and what is natural.“ –George Lucas, Revenge of the Sith commentary I’ve made my case about why I think Anakin’s fate is about that moment in Palpatine’s office, and so I’m not fundamentally opposed that “Duel of the Fates” is about Anakin’s fate, but here’s what George has provably said about the “Duel of the Fates” part of the story: - In the commentary for The Phantom Menace during “Duel of the Fates” and none of Dave’s speculation is even hinted at, there’s more focus on the technical side of things and the most George talks about is that it’s Obi-Wan who parallels Luke in going over the edge during the fight, except that instead of a Sith cutting off a Jedi’s hand, it’s a Jedi cutting a Sith in half, drawing the parallels between them. - He does say of the funeral scene that this is where Obi-Wan commits to training Anakin and how everything is going to go (though, in canon we see that Obi-Wan still struggles with this a bit, but Yoda is there to support him and nudge him into committing even more to Anakin, because the Jedi are a supportive community to each other).  This is some solid evidence for that Obi-Wan is already caring about Anakin beyond just Qui-Gon. - Then here’s what he says about the “Duel of the Fates” fights and themes of them in "All Films Are Personal": George Lucas: “I wanted to come up with an apprentice for the Emperor who was striking and tough. We hadn’t seen a Sith Lord before, except for Vader, of course. I wanted to convey the idea that Jedi are all very powerful, but they’re also vulnerable — which is why I wanted to kill Qui-Gon. That is to say, “Hey, these guys aren’t Superman.” These guys are people who are vulnerable, just like every other person. “We needed to establish that, but at the same time, we wanted the ultimate sword fight, because they were all very good. It sort of predisposes the sword fight between Anakin and Obi-Wan later on. There’s real purpose to it. You have to establish the rules and then stick with them. The scene illustrates just how Jedi and Sith fight and use lightsabers.” “So Qui-Gon loses, of course. So the father figure, he knew what it meant to take this kid away from his mother when he had an attachment, and he’s left with Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan trains Anakin at first out of a promise he makes to Qui-Gon, not because he cares about him.  We’ll get to the “attachment to his mother” thing in a bit--but, for now, let’s just say, George Lucas’ words on this are not that attachment to her was a good thing. Fair enough that “not because he cares about him” is up to personal interpretation, but canon has also addressed the topic of Obi-Wan’s treatment of Anakin and Obi-Wan stepped up to the plate on this.  In addition to how we see Obi-Wan REPEATEDLY being there for Anakin and being concerned and caring about him, they specifically talk about Qui-Gon and overcome this hurdle.

No, Obi-Wan is not Anakin’s father figure, on that we definitely agree.  Anakin never really even treats Obi-Wan like a father--he says “you’re the closest thing I have to a father” in Attack of the Clones, as well as he says Obi-Wan practically raised him in The Clone Wars “Crystal Crisis” story reels, but Anakin has never actually acted like Obi-Wan is his father--”then why don’t you listen to me?” Obi-Wan points out in AOTC--as well as Obi-Wan glides past those remarks, which I’ve always taken that he doesn’t want to reject Anakin’s feelings, knowing that Anakin can be sensitive about them, but neither does he want to confirm them. This does not mean Obi-Wan was not supportive, caring, and loving.  He says, “I loved you!” to Anakin in Revenge of the Sith, he asks after him and if he’s sleeping well in Attack of the Clones, and even George Lucas himself said that the elevator scene was set up TO SHOW OBI-WAN AND ANAKIN CARE FOR EACH OTHER:

PUTTING THE REST UNDER A READ MORE FOR A BETTER LENGTH REBLOGGABLE VERSION, IF  YOU WANT.

This is further evidenced by how the Jedi do see themselves as family, they just don’t need to put it into strict nuclear family dynamics:     - “You were my brother, Anakin!  I loved you!”  [–Obi-Wan Kenobi, Revenge of the Sith]      - “We are brothers, Master Dibs.” [–Mace Windu, Jedi of the Republic - Mace Windu]      - “Did your parents bicker?” she asked. “The adoptive ones, I mean.”         A slow smile broke across Ashla’s face, curling first one side of her mouth and then the other. Whatever she was remembering, Kaeden could tell it was good.         "All the time,“ Ashla said, almost as if she were talking to herself. [–Kaeden Larte, Ahsoka Tano, Ahsoka]      -  Vos, brought to the Temple even younger than most, felt that he had hundreds of brothers and sisters, and it seemed that whenever he went into the dining hall he ran into at least half of them. [Dark Disciple]       - “It was not his birthplace, exactly, but the Jedi Temple was where Quinlan Vos had grown up. He’d raced through its corridors, hidden behind its massive pillars, found peace in its meditation hall, ended-and started-fights in rooms intended for striking blows and some that weren’t, and sneaked naps in its library. All Jedi came here, at some point in their lives; for Quinlan, it always felt like coming home when he ran lightly up the stairs and entered the massive building as he did now.” [Dark Disciple] Brothers, sisters, and other more non-traditional kinds of family are not lesser and Obi-Wan and Anakin absolutely were family, just as the Jedi are all family to each other, so, no, there was no “failing” Anakin, except in Anakin’s mind, perhaps.  (In that, I can agree.  But not on a narratively approved level, canon too thoroughly refutes that for me.) Rebels as well pretty thoroughly shows that non-traditional families are meaningful and just as important--we may joke that Hera is “space mom”, but she’s not actually Ezra or Sabine’s mother, Kanan is not actually their father, and even if they sometimes stray into aspects of those roles (as the Jedi do as well in the movies and TCW), that they don’t need that traditional nuclear family structure.  Mentor figures--and Kanan is Ezra’s mentor--are just as meaningful and needful as a “dad”.  And I’m kind of :/ at the implication that anyone without a dad/father figure or mom/mother figure is being “failed”. When they get Anakin, they find him on Tatooine, he says “Why do I feel like we’ve found another useless lifeform?” He’s comparing Anakin to Jar Jar and he’s saying “this is a waste of our time, why are we doing this, why do you see importance in these creatures like Jar Jar Binks and this ten-year-old boy? This is useless.” Whether or not Obi-Wan is being genuinely dismissive in this movie (I think you could make a case either way), the idea that Qui-Gon is better than Obi-Wan about this, as shown through Jar Jar isn’t exactly very supported given how Qui-Gon and Jar Jar first exchange words:

QUI-GON: “You almost got us killed. Are you brainless?”   JAR JAR:  “I spake.”   QUI-GON: “The ability to speak does not make you intelligent.” Qui-Gon is just as bad as everyone else to Jar Jar, he’s not somehow elevated above them. It’s also baffling because, Dave, I have watched your show.  The Jedi are specifically shown to be kind to people and creatures, not considering them “useless”.  Henry Gilroy (who was the co-writer for The Clone Wars and frequently appeared in featurettes on the same level as Dave Filoni) explicitly draws this to The Jedi Way, that “life is everything to the Jedi“, when he said this about the Ryloth episodes:

(Caps cribbed from Pan’s blog, because I cannot make another gif, save me, please.)      Henry Gilroy in an Aggressive Negotiations Interview:  "Obi-Wan truly is a Jedi in that he’s like, ‘Okay, I’m not going to murder these creatures [in the Ryloth arc of The Clone Wars].  They’re starving to death.  They’ve basically been unleashed against these people as a weapon, but it’s not their fault. They’re just doing what they do.  They’re just animals who wanna eat.’     "So the idea was–and I think there was an early talk about how, 'Oh, yeah, he’ll go running through them and slicing and dicing them and chop them all up or whatever, and save his guys.  And I’m like, 'Yeah, but that’s not really the Jedi way.  He’s not just gonna murder these creatures.’     "And I know the threat is [there], to save one life you have to take one, but the idea of him [is]: why can’t Obi-Wan just be more clever?  He basically draws them in and then traps them.     "It says something about who the Jedi are, they don’t just waste life arbitrarily.  And someone could have gone, 'Oh, yeah, but it would have been badass if he’d just ran in there with his lightsaber spinning and stabbed them all in the head!’  And 'Yeah, you’re right, I guess he could be that, but he’s trying to teach his clones a lesson right then, about the sanctity of life.’       "That is the underlying theme of that entire episode.  Which is:  A tactical droid is using the people as living shields.  Life means nothing to the Separatists.  The droids.  But life is everything to the Jedi.  And even though he doesn’t have to say that, it’s all through the episode thematically.“ It’s also Obi-Wan who teaches Anakin about kindness to mindless creatures in the Obi-Wan & Anakin comic:

"These beasts are nearly mindless, Anakin.  I can feel it.  They are merely following their nature, they should not die simply because they crossed our path. Use the Force to send them on their way.” Now, fair enough if you want to say Obi-Wan was taught by Qui-Gon, but also Qui-Gon is dead by that point and Obi-Wan growing into being more mature is his own accomplishment, not Qui-Gon’s, especially given that we see Qui-Gon himself being pretty dismissive to Jar Jar in TPM. This isn’t unique thing either, Padme is incredibly condescending to Jar Jar in “Bombad Jedi” and expresses clear annoyance with him to C-3PO when sighing over him.  Jar Jar is a character you kind of have to warm up to, pretty much the only one we’ve seen consistently being favorable to him is Yoda (and maybe Anakin, though, Anakin doesn’t really interact with him a ton) and Mace Windu warms up to him considerably in “The Disappeared” and even specifically is shown to be teaching him and helping him, which is a huge theme of the Jedi and how much they care.

So, ultimately, the point I’m winding my way towards is--the other Jedi do show kindness and consideration to Jar Jar Binks, including characters like Mace Windu, so if you’re judging the Jedi based on that, the conclusion of Qui-Gon somehow being more compassionate and loving is really pretty thoroughly disproved by The Phantom Menace and The Clone Wars themselves. So, he’s a brother to Anakin eventually but he’s not a father figure. That’s a failing for Anakin. He doesn’t have the family that he needs. He loses his mother in the next film. He fails on this promise that he made, “mother, I’m going to come back and save you”. So he’s left completely vulnerable and Star Wars is ultimately about family.  You could be charitable and say this is just from Anakin’s point of view that it’s a “failing”, but within the context of what Dave’s saying, it’s clearly meant as a more narratively approved take, not just Anakin’s point of view, and I really, really dislike the idea that Anakin--or anyone, really--needs a traditional nuclear family, ie a “mom” and/or a “dad”, or else it’s a “failing” for them. Setting aside that the idea that Qui-Gon would need to be Anakin’s dad to be kind to hi (which is ?????) is contradicted by The Clone Wars as well.  Yes, Qui-Gon is warm with Anakin in several scenes, which is what Dave is presumably drawing on to show that Qui-Gon believed the Jedi should be caring and loving, but you know who else is warm to younglings?  OTHER JEDI COUNCIL MEMBERS.

Those two scenes have the exact same kind of warmth to them.  Ie, THE JEDI ALL BELIEVED IN BEING LOVING AND KIND, NOT JUST QUI-GON.  The things evidenced to show Qui-Gon was loving and kind are evidenced just as much in other Council members, in Dave’s own show. As a bonus--have Mace Windu, known Jedi Council member, being super kind and loving towards a young Twi’lek girl he just met in a canon comic:

But I know that this is about the way the Council treated Anakin in The Phantom Menace testing scene, but here’s the thing--when I go back and I watch that scene and the Jedi aren’t ever mean to him, they’re neutral in an official testing situation, where they are trying to determine if he’s able to adapt to the Jedi ways.  They never once say he’s bad for holding onto his fear, only that he does--which Anakin digs his heels in and gets angry about, he can’t really even admit that he’s afraid and that’s a huge deal for the Jedi. I’ve made a longer post about it here (and here), but the basic gist is: - That scene has Yoda giving the famous “Fear leads to the dark side” speech which is almost word for word how George Lucas describes how the Force works, showing the Jedi are narratively correct - “Confronting fear is the destiny of a Jedi” may be from the sequels, but it is thoroughly supported by the movies and TCW and Rebels and even supplementary canon material, including that the Jedi literally design their tests around both Masters and Padawans for it (Ilum, the Jedi Temple on Lothal, etc. - Anakin cannot admit to his fears in that TPM scene - We have examples of Jedi younglings do admit to their fears and the point isn’t not to have them, but to face them--the younglings in “The Gathering” are the most blatant example of this, but it’s also pretty much the entire theme of Jedi: Fallen Order, especially when Cal goes to Ilum to face his fears and get another kyber crystal. The point isn’t that Anakin--who has very good reasons to be afraid! nothing in the story or the Jedi have said he didn’t!--is wrong or bad, but that he’s not a great fit for the Jedi life because he is “unwilling to accept [Jedi philosophy] emotionally”.  And they’re right about this, because this is how George Lucas describes Anakin in commentary: “The fact that everything must change and that things come and go through his life and that he can’t hold onto things, which is a basic Jedi philosophy that he isn’t willing to accept emotionally and the reason that is because he was raised by his mother rather than the Jedi. If he’d have been taken in his first year and started to study to be a Jedi, he wouldn’t have this particular connection as strong as it is and he’d have been trained to love people but not to become attached to them.”  --George Lucas, Attack of the Clones commentary And so this brings us to A T T A C H M E N T, which, yeah, we’ve been having this discussion forever, but I’m going to state it again:  Within Star Wars, ATTACHMENT IS NARRATIVELY A BAD THING.  It is consistently tied to possessive, obsessive relationships, to greed and an unwillingness to let things go when it’s time (letting go is a huge theme in Star Wars) and equating love with attachment is fundamentally wrong according to George Lucas’ Star Wars worldbuilding: “The Jedi are trained to let go. They’re trained from birth,” he continues, “They’re not supposed to form attachments. They can love people-- in fact, they should love everybody. They should love their enemies; they should love the Sith. But they can’t form attachments. So what all these movies are about is: greed. Greed is a source of pain and suffering for everybody. And the ultimate state of greed is the desire to cheat death.” --George Lucas, The Making of Revenge of the Sith If attachment and love were the same thing, then he would be saying, “They should love their enemies, they should love the Sith.  But they can’t love.”  The way George makes the distinction shows that, no, attachment and love aren’t the same thing at all, attachment is not caring.  Further, there’s another instance of him showing there’s an important distinction between relationships and attachment and the association of attachmets with possession:  "Jedi Knights aren’t celibate - the thing that is forbidden is attachments - and possessive relationships.” --George Lucas, BBC News interview So, yes, when Anakin is attached to people, it is directly tied to obsession, possession, and greed, all things of the dark side: “He turns into Darth Vader because he gets attached to things. He can’t let go of his mother; he can’t let go of his girlfriend. He can’t let go of things. It makes you greedy. And when you’re greedy, you are on the path to the dark side, because you fear you’re going to lose things, that you’re not going to have the power you need.”  --George Lucas, Time Magazine  “But he has become attached to his mother and he will become attached to Padme and these things are, for a Jedi, who needs to have a clear mind and not be influenced by threats to their attachments, a dangerous situation. And it feeds into fear of losing things, which feeds into greed, wanting to keep things, wanting to keep his possessions and things that he should be letting go of. His fear of losing her turns to anger at losing her, which ultimately turns to revenge in wiping out the village. The scene with the Tusken Raiders is the first scene that ultimately takes him on the road to the dark side. I mean he’s been prepping for this, but that’s the one where he’s sort of doing something that is completely inappropriate.“ --George Lucas, Attack of the Clones commentary ATTACHMENT IS BAD IN STAR WARS AS THEY DEFINE IT. Finally, I’m going to circle back to: Because Qui-Gon is different than the rest of the Jedi and you get that in the movie; and Qui-Gon is fighting because he knows he’s the father that Anakin needs. Because Qui-Gon hasn’t given up on the fact that the Jedi are supposed to actually care and love and that’s not a bad thing. Here’s the thing about this:  You know who else, by this logic, Qui-Gon should have been a father to?  OBI-WAN KENOBI. This isn’t said as “Anakin specifically needs a father” (which I think would be an interesting idea to bandy about and I’m not disagreeing, though, it’s complicated because of what Anakin refuses to accept emotionally), it’s said in a bigger context, that Qui-Gon is better than the other Jedi because he understands the need for fathers (and thus this ties into Return of the Jedi) and he’s ahead of the other Jedi, who apparently think loving and caring about people are bad things, but Qui-Gon does not treat Obi-Wan like his son.  Or, if he does, he’s not exactly a stellar dad about it. Within Master & Apprentice, there’s an incredibly consistent theme of how Qui-Gon thinks supportive things about Obi-Wan, but never says them aloud.  He thinks he should talk to Obi-Wan about the upcoming decision to be on the Council and then never does.  He could have explained why he kept Obi-Wan training the basics but he never does.  There are multiple instances showing that Qui-Gon is actually really, really bad at actually handling a young apprentice who needs him to talk to them about important things.  Qui-Gon continues this in From a Certain Point of View where he still never talked to Obi-Wan about everything that happened, even after he became a Force Ghost.     Damn, damn, damn. Qui-Gon closed his eyes for one moment. It blocked nothing; the wave of shock that went through Obi-Wan was so great it could be felt through the Force. Qui-Gon hadn’t thought Kirames Kaj would mention the Jedi Council invitation. It seemed possible the soon-retiring chancellor of the Republic might not even have taken much note of information about a new Council member. --Master & Apprentice     That comment finally pierced Qui-Gon’s damnable calm. There was an edge to his voice as he said, “I suspected you would be too upset to discuss this rationally. Apparently I was correct.”     “I thought you said my reaction was understandable,” Obi-Wan shot back. “So why does it disqualify me from hearing the truth?”    Qui-Gon put his hands on his broad belt, the way he did when he was beginning to withdraw into himself. “…we should discuss this at another time. Neither of us is his best self at the present.” --Master & Apprentice     Obi-Wan walked toward the door, obviously outdone. “At the beginning of my apprenticeship, I couldn’t understand you,” he said. “Unfortunately, that’s just as true here at the end.”     Only yesterday they had worked together as never before. How did Qui-Gon manage to get closer to Obi-Wan at the same time he was moving further away?     Just before Obi-Wan would leave the room, Qui-Gon said, “Once, you asked me about the basic lightsaber cadences. Why I’d kept you there, instead of training you in more advanced forms of combat.”     Obi-Wan turned reluctantly to face him again. “I suppose you thought I wasn’t ready for more. The same way I’m not ready to believe in all this mystical—”     “That’s not why.”     After a long pause, Obi-Wan calmed to the point where he would listen. “Then why, Qui-Gon?”     “Because many Padawans—and full Jedi Knights, for that matter—forget that the most basic technique is the most important technique. The purest. The most likely to protect you in battle, and the foundation of all knowledge that is to come,” Qui-Gon said. “Most apprentices want to rush ahead to styles of fighting that are flashier or more esoteric. Most Masters let them, because we must all find our preferred form eventually. But I wanted you to be grounded in your technique. I wanted you to understand the basic cadences so well that they would become instinct, so that you would be almost untouchable. Above all, I wanted to give you the training you needed to accomplish anything you set your mind to later on.”     Obi-Wan remained quiet for so long that Qui-Gon wondered if he were too angry to really hear any of what he’d said. But finally, his Padawan nodded. “Thank you, Qui-Gon. I appreciate that. But—”     “But what?”     “You could’ve said so,” Obi-Wan replied, and then he left. --Master & Apprentice     "I owe you that. After all, I’m the one who failed you.“     "Failed me?”     They have never spoken of this, not once in all Qui-Gon’s journeys into the mortal realm to commune with him. This is primarily because Qui-Gon thought his mistakes so wretched, so obvious, that Obi-Wan had wanted to spare him any discussion of it. Yet here, too, he has failed to do his Padawan justice. --From a Certain Point of View, “Master and Apprentice” (Further, in Master & Apprentice, Qui-Gon thinks that the Jedi give Rael Averross--who is HUGELY paralleled to Anakin--too many exceptions, were too soft on him because he came to the Jedi later than most and has trouble thinking of them as his family, and he thinks they should have been stricter with him.) It’s also readily apparent within The Phantom Menace itself:

You can take some charitable views of this scene, that Qui-Gon was pushed into a corner where he had few other options (and this is the view I generally take even!), but this is after the entire movie where he’s never once indicated that Obi-Wan was ready, has instead indicated that he still has much to learn (not just of the Living Force, but in general), as well as made it clear that he’s still teaching Obi-Wan, like on the Trade Federation ship. And I do think Obi-Wan got over this because he understood, because Obi-Wan actually is a very selfless person, he clearly cares (which is furthered by how we see him warm up to Anakin very quickly), but look at their faces. This was not a good moment, and they do somewhat make up, where Qui-Gon says that Obi-Wan has been a good apprentice, that he’s wiser than Qui-Gon and he’ll be a great Jedi--but if we’re counting that as Qui-Gon being this great Jedi, then you can’t say Obi-Wan failed Anakin, given that we show him doing the exact same thing, except better.  He tells Anakin, “You are strong and wise and will become a far greater Jedi than I could ever hope to be.”, echoing Qui-Gon’s words, but also he never threw Anakin aside for someone else. This is kind of a major undercurrent throughout The Clone Wars, where Obi-Wan never takes another apprentice, where he continues to teach Anakin, to support him, even to the point of occasionally co-Mastering Ahsoka with him.  “This has been quite a journey for our Padawan.” Qui-Gon’s treatment of Obi-Wan in this scene isn’t the worst, he’s kind about it later (though, he never actually specifically apologizes for this), but we can see that this is a moment where Qui-Gon hurts Obi-Wan and knows it. And you know what George Lucas has to say about Qui-Gon?  This: “So here we’re having Qui-Gon wanting to skip the early training and jump right to taking him on as his Padawan learner, which is controversial, and ultimately, the source of much of the problems that develop later on.”  –George Lucas, The Phantom Menace commentary There’s nothing about Qui-Gon being right or better than the other Jedi, but instead that Qui-Gon’s actions here are a source of much of the problems that develop later on. So, ultimately, I liked some points Dave made in that speech, it’s a beautiful and eloquent one, but I thoroughly disagree with his interpretation of George’s intentions for Qui-Gon and I thoroughly disagree that that’s what the movies, The Clone Wars (DAVE’S OWN SHOW), and the supplementary canon show about Qui-Gon and the other Jedi.  I still stand by my appreciation of Dave’s contributions to SW as a whole, I think he does a really good job at making Star Wars, but he doesn’t always get everything right and this is one thing where I think the canon and George’s commentary show otherwise, as much as I love his desire to defend the prequels’ importance in the story.  Because, my friend, I have felt that every single day of my SW life.

#anakin skywalker #qui gon jinn #jedi order #george lucas #dave filoni #meta #long post #really long post

[ouyangzizhensdad]

RE: WWX and his arc being about trauma. I got into the fandom through CQL and the first time I saw it I actually read a lot of his actions post the burning of Lotus Cove as being influenced by his trauma. He's paranoid even before getting thrown into the burial mounds. He seems to be self medicating with alchohol (which WQ kinda calls him out on). He over-reacts to a lot things, which seems to me like a nasty case of emotional dysregulation as a result of PTSD. He avoids all kinds (1/3)

Of reminders of his tramua, his sword being the greatest example but there were other little things. He never gave much of a fuck about propriety but the way he completely igonres it (and the possible social fallout) later speaks to me less about not caring and more about not *having* the emotional capacity to care, much like what happens with depression. Plus, a lot of his behaviour can be read with various shades of being self destructive, and there are just in general a lot of points (2/3)

Where it's made clear that he's in a pretty bad headspace (him crying about being useless in the burial mounds for example), but none of that ever really gets dealt with so all of those issues are still hanging under the surface even if they're not apparent all the time. I mean, this is just my take, but at least imo WWX ticks a lot of the checkboxes for PTSD in the drama and it explains a lot about the way he acts and the bad decisions he makes. Hope this was helpful! (3/3)

I'm only referring to the drama btw, not the novel (which I haven't read yet). My memory is terrible so I'm not sure if I made it clear or not lol. Anyways, have a good day ^^

Hi there, 

I am always curious when people who have only engaged with CQL end up engaging with my novel-only meta blog but perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised: if CQL posts end up in the mdzs tag, why not the opposite? I’ve seen some of my novel meta reblogged and tagged with “the untamed” and “CQL” so maybe the answer is already out there, staring at me in the face! 

I’ll start by saying that I do not wish to really argue with people’s interpretations of CQL since I consider that MDZS and CQL are very different works because so many changes were made in the process of adapting the novel, and I personally have no interest in analysing CQL except wrt  how it can help us better understand the novel (seeing certain elements removed or changed may help us understand why they mattered in the first place or what their use was). So I will speak to the arguments that could be applied to the novel and why *I* don’t think WWX’s arc in the novel is about trauma, and why I don’t think that picking up certain behaviours that can be exhibited by people with PTSD (but not exclusively by people with PTSD) is enough in itself to support the idea that a character’s arc is about trauma/shaped by PTSD. That does not mean that my interpretation is the only acceptable one--I am aware that a lot of people disagree with me on this and see trauma as a central theme/central part of WWX’s arc--and so I expect that a lot of people will disagree with my points (hopefully after they’ve read this post in good faith). And that’s perfectly fine: how likely is it that we can find another person who will agree 100% with our own interpretation of a work of fiction? And having divergent opinions floating around the fandom, or having to develop counter-arguments is a good way to strengthen our own pov if we don’t find ourselves convinced by that other interpretation, so it’s all good. 

So first, I’ll address the biggest point of my argument before moving to address more specific points you raise in your ask. For me, WWX’s characterisation is not about trauma but about resilience. 

So first, let’s clarify some things. Going through adversity/experiencing a situation that is difficult =/= experiencing trauma. Trauma is a concept referring to a potential response to going through adversity/experiencing something distressing or disturbing. In short, trauma as it is conceptualised and understood is not universal: not only in the sense that is a spatiotemporally specific concept used to make certain experiences intelligible, but as the reaction to difficult events (as well, what is considered to be an experience that falls under that concept is not itself universal and can take many gorms, and the behaviours and thoughts associated with trauma are generally not exclusive to it, ie having certain behaviours/thought processes is not an automatic proof that someone is dealing with trauma/ptsd). So after all this word vomit I want to clarify that my intent is not to suggest that WWX doesn’t go through experiences that are likely to cause trauma, but that to me, what is being portrayed is a different reaction to these events: resilience (if a slightly more “fictional” portrayal of resilience than what it would be presented in psychology/psychiatry). 

Resilience refers to how people adapt or recover successfully from adversity/distressing situation/stress. That does not mean that people’s first reaction to adversity/distressing situations will be not defined by negative emotions, of course. For instance, I don’t think WWX’s heightened paranoia/emotional state directly after the fall of LP when he goes to look for JC is an indication of trauma because at this point WWX is still deep in the middle of that moment of adversity: he’s still a fugitive in the middle of a war, in the middle of danger. This also doesn’t mean that people cannot still have some temporary negative reactions to things that happened to them, afterwards: WWX having to pause when JC presents him with Suibian after he returns from Mass Grave Hill is not inherently an indication of trauma as it can be read that his sword a reminder of the difficult sacrifice he made--and the consequences he faced as a result (just because a situation was not traumatic doesn’t mean we enjoy revisiting it).

Why I think that WWX’s arc or characterisation is about resilience rather than trauma is because of many things, but mostly I want to point out two sections of the novel in particular. 

First, this characterisation of WWX through JYL that we get relatively early in the novel:

Most memories from back then were already blurred. Yet, Jin Ling’s mother, Jiang Yanli, remembered all of them, and even told him quite a few. She said that, after his father heard of the news that his parents both died in battle, he had always dedicated himself to finding the child that these past friends had left behind. After searching for a while, he finally found the child in Yiling. 

The first time they met, Wei Wuxian was kneeling on the ground, eating the fruit peels that somebody tossed on the ground. Yiling’s winter and spring were quite cold, yet the child only wore thin layers. His knees were already tattered, and on his feet were two different shoes that didn’t fit at all. As he was looking down, searching for fruit peels, Jiang Fengmian called him. He still remembered that there was a “Ying” in his name, so he lifted his head. Although his cheeks were both red and chapped from the cold, he still wore a smile. 

Jiang Yanli said that he was born with a smiling look. No matter what unfortunate thing happened, he wouldn’t cling on to them; no matter what situation he was in, he would be happy. Although it sounded a bit heartless, it really was not bad.

This refers to a time of his life that is extremely difficult: he lost both his parents suddenly, at a young age, became suddenly homeless with no means to feed himself except to beg, and yet the only trauma he seems to carry from this experience is related to dogs. To me, this is a clear move from MXTX to position WWX as the kind of protagonist who can face a storm and keep his smile on his face. I can imagine that some people take it perhaps as a subversion, as the text telling us that WWX is weathering it all with a smile but underneath it all he is just a bundle of unaddressed trauma. And that’s certainly a possible interpretation, but it’s not mine. In this case I think the text is being straightforward. What we see of WWX also seems to support that: the way WWX just rolls with being brought back from the death, how easily he finds a way to adapt to things, etc.

I also find it meaningful that the novel choses to include in its ultimate chapter this discussion as part of its wrap-up of WWX’s journey and of Wangxian’s relationship.

After they left the shop, Wei Wuxian still sat on Xiao Pingguo while Lan Wangji held the reins in front.Swaying left and right atop the donkey, Wei Wuxian took the flute from his waist and placed it by his lips. The limpid notes flew across the sky like birds. Lan Wangji halted and listened quietly.

It was the song he sang for Wei Wuxian when they were stuck in the Xuanwu cave. It was also the song that Wei Wuxian just so happened to have played at Dafan Mountain, the song that enabled Lan Wangji to confirm his identity.

When he finished, Wei Wuxian winked his left eye towards Lan Wangji.

“How was it? Beautiful, huh?”

Lan Wangji slowly nodded. “For once.”

Wei Wuxian knew that ‘for once’ referred to how his memory was good for once. He could not help but smile.

“Don’t always be so angry about it. It was my fault in the past, alright? Besides, my terrible memory should be accredited to my mom.” Wei Wuxian propped his arm on Xiao Pingguo’s head, spinning Chenqing in his hand. “My mom said you have to remember the things others do for you, not the things you do for others. Only when people don’t hold so much in their hearts would they finally feel free.”

This was one of the only things he remembered about his parents.

Of course, this is not a direct reference to resilience as it is explored in psychology. But to me it speaks to that idea: one of the biggest lesson WWX has kept with him, one of his only memory of--and thus legacy from--his parents, is this idea that we should not hold so much in our hearts. It also reframes his bad memory as being the result of a philosophy, of an approach to life that not just about being grateful/paying your debts to others, but also a form of resilience, in a sense. 

As well, I find that a lot of people who go with the trauma interpretation see WWX’s actions and thoughts processes dyring his YLLZ’s days as being the result of his ptsd, where I personally read it as the influence of modao. I am aware as well that some people do not think that modao actually harmed WWX during that period of his life, but I don’t think that LWJ would have been worried if there were not reasons to believe it would:

One against two, Lan Wangji still refused to back off. He gazed at Wei Wuxian, “Wei Ying, for cultivating an evil path you would eventually have to pay. Throughout time, there has not been a single exception.”

Wei Wuxian, “I can pay.”

Seeing how unconcerned he seemed to be, Lan Wangji lowered his voice, “The path would not only damage your body, but your heart as well (此道损身，更损心性。)”

So now, onto the specific points you raised in the ask.

Self-medicating with alcohol: WWX is shown to enjoy and drink large amounts of alcohol before the fall of LP and after most of the events of the novel have unfolded. In the novel, while WQ tries to make WWX stop drinking, it is as likely to believe that it is for his health (now that he doesn’t have a golden core) than it would be because she was worried he was self-medicating. As well, heavy drinking is a very normalized behaviour (although most physicians don’t think it’s a good thing) in a lot of cultures and times, and considering WWX’s higher tolerance and his general demeanor while imbricated, his drinking is not shown to have a negative effect on his ability to live his life. The line between “self-soothing” (normal aspect of being humans dealing with emotions and hardships) and “self-medicating” (pathological) is hard to trace with alcohol consumption. As well, just because people with PTSD may self-medicate with alchohol doesn’t mean all people who self-medicate with alcohol do it because of PTSD. 

He's paranoid even before getting thrown into the burial mounds. As I mentioned briefly before, WWX is at the time a fugitive in the middle of a war: he’s still in the middle of those stressful events and his paranoia is not necessarily a maladaptive response since they are still very much fugitives in the middle of a war. Trauma is not really your reaction during but in the aftermath. It would be more telling if WWX were still exhibiting signs of paranoia in situations where he would have no reasons to. 

He over-reacts to a lot things, which seems to me like a nasty case of emotional dysregulation as a result of PTSD. I’m not certain at which reactions you are referring to here, but especially considering that some of this might be chalked up to acting choices since this is based on CQL, I probably won’t address this one point too much in relation to the novel. I do want to emphasize though that we’ve seen prior to Sunshot campaign that WWX can be quite impulsive in certain situations (hitting JZX for insulting Shijie, which he does both before and after the events of the Sunshot Campaign). As well, I do think it’s important to remember that he is still in the middle of the war during the Sunshot campaign, and that he is also hiding something pretty important from the people close to him and living a sort of double life, on top of experiencing fatigue/hunger in a way he hasn’t for years due to the loss of his golden core. In short, there are a lot of things going on that can be used to explain what can be seen as “over-reactions” without necessarily going with PTSD.

avoids all kinds  reminders of his trauma, his sword being the greatest example but there were other little things. I’ve broached in my previous discussions, but it’s also pertinent to remember his mom’s philosophy: we can also see this as WWX trying to leave in the pass this difficult sacrifice he made in order to move forward. 

He never gave much of a fuck about propriety but the way he completely ignores it (and the possible social fallout) later speaks to me less about not caring and more about not *having* the emotional capacity to care, much like what happens with depression. I have to disagree with that interpretation of WWX and WWX’s actions, but again this might just be a case of CQL-only vs novel-only interpretations of the character. One thing WWX thinks about being reborn in a “lunatic’s” body is that he’ll get to have fun, the way he never could when his actions reflected on others. So while at times WWX flaunts propriety, he is aware of how his actions can impact others and show in different situations that he is aware of propriety. His choice to protect the Wen Remnants goes against that, for sure, but it isn’t necessarily a case of not understanding the possible social fallout so much as putting other things (ie his life-debt towards WN and WQ) before propriety, as we can see for example in this exchange.

Jiang Cheng, “I’m the one who fucking wants to give you a thrashing! Yes, they helped us before, but why in the world don’t you understand that right now any remnant of the Wen Sect is a target of criticism! No matter who they are, with a surname of Wen they have committed a most heinous crime! And those who protect the Wen are at risk of being condemned by everyone! All the people loathe the Wen-dogs so badly that the worse they die the better. Whoever protects them is against the entire world. Nobody would speak for them, and nobody would speak for you either!”

“I don’t need anyone to speak for me.”

[...]

Swords unsheathed, the two stared at each other for a while. Neither was willing to take a single step back. A while later, Jiang Cheng spoke, “Wei Wuxian, have you still not realized what the situation at hand is like? Do you really need me to say it out loud? If you insist on protecting them, then I won’t be able to protect you.”

“There’s no need to protect me. Just let go.”

Jiang Cheng’s face twisted.

Wei Wuxian, “Just let go. Tell the world that I defected. From now on, no matter what Wei Wuxian does, it’d have nothing to do with YunmengJiangShi.”

“… All for the Wen Sect…? Wei Wuxian, do you have a savior complex? Is it that you’ll die if you don’t stand up for someone and stir up some trouble?”

Wei Wuxian stayed quiet. A while later, he answered, “So that’s why we should cut ties right now, in case anything I do affects YunmengJiangShi in the future.”

a lot of his behaviour can be read with various shades of being self destructive Which ones, specifically? I’m not trying to be obtuse, but I’m not sure which ones you mean. 

he's in a pretty bad headspace (him crying about being useless in the burial mounds for example) It needs to be said that the crying is only in CQL (it was an acting choice by XZ). My memory is playing tricks on me, but I think pre-rebirth we only see him cry after he kills JZX and after JYL’s death? Someone please fact-check me on this. 

Since I don’t believe it was MXTX’s intent to make WWX’s characterisation and arc about trauma, I do feel like interpreting the different behaviours as signs of his PTSD might lead us to miss out on other potential interpretations or meanings behind these choices, if we put aside the PTSD angle. It may also lead us to deny the text the possibility to signify something different through these behaviours and signs, especially on a thematic level--to explore something about how events and emotions shape us in a manner that exists outside of modern psychiatric classification.

TLDR (because god this got long): My point is not that WWX is unaffected by the things that happened to him or the things he’s done during this portion of his life: of course he is! Especially as they are happening to him, or when he is still stuck in a very difficult situation. But I don’t think his character and his arc is about trauma but instead about resilience. That, at the end of MDZS, WWX is still the person JYL described: No matter what unfortunate thing happened, he wouldn’t cling on to them.

#wintersrchild #mdzs meta #mdzs #wwx #maybe i should tag this as unpopular opinion? just in case

[dappersheep]

Food Fantasy: An Analysis on what killed a Golden Goose (3/3)

Ladies and gentlemen, we've arrived at our final destination.

Again before we start, we have our obligatory disclaimers. I do not own the game or its characters, nor do I claim to know the true history and likely fate of this game. I am entitled to the thoughts and opinions written within this post. Feel free to agree or disagree with the points being made.

This post also remains untagged from the main foofan tag. Only my followers will see this.

We are in the third and final stretch, and the checkpoint is past the cut.

Community

So... here we are, fellow Master Attendants.

As consumers of this piece of entertainment media, we are free to enjoy it however we wish. Appreciating what is there, creating something new from what exists, playing the game by the meta or however you want to play it (within your means and at your own risk of course). There's no one true and absolute way to experience the game.

However, just as you can enjoy something, doesn't mean you can't also point out flaws or shortcomings of the media in question. As an active veteran player, I've already pointed out the many gameplay design flaws  already. And I'd be pretty dumb to say that Food Fantasy's writing is perfect. Hell, it has a lot of holes from a worldbuilding consistency standpoint. 

And what of things from the community side? Yes, there will be times you'd see content you consider cringe, or something in fanon you don't agree with. Or there happens to be fan theories and fangirling posts you don't like the take of because of X or Y.

And that's fine. If we all happen to play the same way, like the same thing, agree on the same thing and produce the same thing, well, this would be one helluva boring community, wouldn't it?

But what if someone decides the way you're playing the game is wrong and harasses you over it? What happens if someone decides that their interpretation of the game's flavor text and lore is more important than what anyone else thought about it? What happens if someone decides that they're absolutely right, and you and everyone else who disagrees deserves to be bullied out of the fandom?

As much as I want to say we aren't part of the problem why the game is deteriorating, we are unfortunately, part of the reason why the game is as such even if most of the blame is directed towards Funtoy and Elex themselves.

⦁ Whale Authority. Whales will always be part of a gacha game's ecosystem. Without them, the game won't be able to maintain its upkeep costs, moreso  for one that services global regions instead of just one. But when a game decides to cater its decisions of what features should be prioritized and when it should be launched around only its most elite paying players' voices  -even if that influence has since tapered off-, you know there is something wrong with the publisher's management team and priorities.

⦁ Interguild drama. While I did not personally follow any of this, this has certainly been the peak of in-game tension back in the day. Poaching good players from both competitive and smaller guilds, guild mergers that often ended up making the annexed guild/s the equivalent of UK colonized India or Australia, suck-ups chummying up to guild leaders to keep a spot in an active, high ranking guild (for bragging rights!) despite never contributing much to overall damage, and just general dislike of certain players' attitudes. Actions like this have disillusioned many players about their playing experience and the reason why many eventually just lost the motivation to log into FooFan.

⦁ Cheaters. You know very well about the Hacker-teme I've mentioned before, but that was in context of Elex being incompetent with dealing with them. Here, I would like  to point out the players who are desperate to dominate  the playing field for whatever reason to the point that they would resort to cheating the ranks with forceful modifications of the APK. Whether it is to rank high in catacombs weekly, get a top spot in daily disaster damage, or weasel their way into the competitive whale ranks of a major ranking event, these are the people who have no qualms messing with the code to give themselves an easier time with the game. And if they're caught? Some pretend that they've made a mistake, some quickly sell the account to escape the blame, some others just scamper away into the dark and hide in the lower ranks where they can't be found. Others simply don't care and keep cheating until Elex decides to finally ban them... if Elex ever decides their rebates score isn't worth saving the account.

⦁ Ship wars. Ah yes, a staple of drama in any fandom. There doesn't need much explanation to this as we've all had our fair share of running into a battleground in whatever fandom we visit. Someone ships BB52 wholeheartedly? Nope, problematic 'age gaps'. Someone likes Napoleon with Pastel? Someone's bound to misinterpret their bios in order to justify that Napoleon was being abusive. Spaghetti and Borscht? Borscht is minor coded, ship her with Vodka instead. Whiskey and Pizza or Cassata? Cancelled! And I've never heard of the Foe Yay trope or pretend I don't know about it! Rarepairs? Disgusting! No fanon in my canon playground! Turkey and Eggnog? Gasp! How dare you, you pedo-shipper-even-though-you-never-said-you-shipped-them-romantically-but-that-isn't-my-point!

⦁ Character Obsession: Bias. On one hand, you love a character so much. Relate to a character so much. You have thus pulled this character into the folds of your bosom and coo at them like a mother dove and get so minutely triggered if someone so much as makes one disagreeable or joking comment about the character that you fly into an overreactive ballistic rage that would make a Canadian goose honk in fear. You don't care what they are in canon. You don't care about the possibility of mistranslation. What matters is the fanon space you carved out for them to exist in and that's all that matters. The problem with this is when this obsession takes over common sense and social etiquette and it steps into harassment territory. You begin to think: I'm the only one who 'understands' the character. I'm the only one who wishes better for the character, everyone else is out to defame them! Oh wait, you like them too? Do you like them the way *I* like them? No? Maybe if you're my 'friend', I'd let it slide. But to everyone else? No one else has the right to like them as much as I do. No one! Never mind that they're completely fictional- No one hurts my bias because in turn, they're hurting *me*!

⦁ Character Obsession: Anti. On the other hand, you hate a character so much. This character just makes you see so much red. Their smug little smirk just makes your blood boil. Their fictional backstory makes you recoil in disgust. You hate that someone else loves a character you hate so much.  You cannot *believe* that someone could be so daringly stupid to like a problematic character. They must be problematic too then. They must be hiding real life secrets that are problematic! Yes, yes. That's right. That person's a supporter of abuse. That person's into pedophilia. That person is into military lolita fashion that Japan started the trend of but clearly Japan was part of the Axis Powers! And that... that person... that person... is a roleplayer and a yaoi fangirl properly interacting with minors and adults. How dare they...!

⦁ Fan Translations.  Normally it wouldn't be a problem that a group or two or several are translating pieces of the game's lore ahead of the official. But with Elex's very delayed translations and extreme allergic reactions to translating Food Soul bios, people have become dependent on fan-translation groups to get their fix. The problem herein lies... is when the translators get drunk off the power that they are one of a handful in a small community who can magically transcribe the oriental moonrunes into English. The problem starts when the translator starts to have an inclination. The problem starts when the translator loses their professional detachment and start adding in details here and there into the fan translated product that ultimately changes the meaning and direction of the entire story. The problem is also escalated when that translator's embellished product is touted as the truth by their followers. If there was an upcoming character whose backstory is connected to a character they hated (either because of someone or they just don't like the character) and you were hoping to read the fan translation? How would you know that what you get isn't something doctored to the point it's basically fanfiction?

⦁ Social Justice Vigilantism. Sometimes someone does not have a character obsession or need it to be annoying. Sometimes, someone just wants to ring the alarm over something they find 'problematic' in order to police and sanitize the enjoyment of the media for 'everyone'. They no longer really take enjoyment out of a new Food Soul design being leaked, they no longer read the lore just to enjoy what it has to offer. Instead, they nitpick bits and pieces of the design and point it out repeatedly as a reason why the whole thing is bad. They point out bits of the story and inject their interpretations of it without really comprehending what they've read in full and react badly to it. What's worse is that they have no qualms publicly posting their reactions and eagerly and hungrily await those likes and echoes of agreement that they were right.

⦁ Circles of Influence. Everyone has a group they eventually gravitate to in a fandom. It comes with its own pros and cons. Sometimes you join a group because someone you admire is in there, sometimes you join a group because you just want to mingle and see more content. All valid reasons. Arguments can't be avoided in a group, it has to happen... But you have to take care. You have to take care to feel the change in the air of the group. When someone starts pushing people to agree with them. When your most admired people start to feel overly sensitive about certain characters or issues. When you start to feel obligated to spy on other groups outside of this one for 'nonbelievers', 'traitors' and 'heretics' who do not think the way this group does, and that bringing back bits and pieces of gossip as offerings would somehow make you more favored in the eyes of the inner clique or remain inside it. There is a gripping sense of annoyance when that person comes in to complain but you can't do anything about it but nod and agree. There is a pervading sense of fear and apprehension of overstepping an invisible boundary. There is fear that you might be next on the chopping block, after witnessing one of the others being ganged up on and thrown out without a second thought, their name spat upon like they're worth less than dirt. And so reluctant you are to give up what you have with them that when they push you to do something you are reluctant to do, all in the name of 'harmony and justice'... You do it. Even though it would mean offering yourself up to the mob with no salvation, and the stark realization that... [they] never cared about you as a friend.

And we've come to the end of this analysis trilogy. The writing got a little bit strange in this post, but honestly this is the best way I could put it. I'm aware things can and will be more complicated than the bullet points I've written but I'm just one person and I tried very hard to keep details of all the drama that happened in this fandom as vague as possible. Of course, that wouldn't work if you know what I am talking about.

The community is quiet now for the most part, the game is somewhere between limbo and the living plane. Things could be better for us, but I don't really count on it.

I wish I could leave a bit of a moral warning or something. But rather than do that, I just hope this was an entertaining read into one individual's eyes into Food Fantasy and everything that makes it up.

#ravings of a madman #food fantasy but not tagged right

[mysticmachmir]

Tarot Through a Jewish Lens (Part I)

Is Tarot Jewish?

No. Tarot was not a Jewish creation and nor does it come from Kabbalah. When Waite made his famous RWS deck, he was a Christian occultist/magician and part of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and also formed his own Fellowship of the Rosy Cross. He was a Catholic involved in 'western esotericism' and fell under the learnings of Eliphas Levi. Eliphas Levi was not a Jewish man. He was a French gentile occultist who changed his name from Alphonse Louis Constant to Éliphas Lévi Zahed -- why? He wanted his magical works to sound more authentically exotic (aka, Jewish) because he appropriated from Jewish mysticism and skewed it for his own wants. He believed that Kabbalah was the "linking factor between the Old Testament and the New Testament", and that is rooted in Christian supersessionism, a violent ideology that has resulted in many murders of the Jewish people. Another example is the french occultist, Court de Gébelin, who claimed that the Major Arcana were numbered to correspond to the 22 letters in both the Egyptian and Hebrew alphabets. It didn’t seem to trouble him that at the time different versions of the deck that was in circulation sometimes had more than and sometimes less than 22 Major Arcana cards. Or that ancient Egyptians didn’t use an alphabet. 

So no. Tarot was created as a playing card game, sprung up in Italy, Germany, and France. It was not intended for 'occult' use until much later. And still, in no way shape or form, was it ever Jewish in origin. In the Torah, besides certain kinds of divination/tools, divination is forbidden and Tarot is considered avodah zarah (idolatry) because it is a non-Jewish practice.

Now I'm sure you're asking: Well you read tarot, why are you telling me this? Aren't you incriminating yourself? I'm telling you because I want to stress and push back against cultural appropriation and Christian supersessionism that is rooted in these beliefs, and I want to make it clear that the relationship between a Jew, halacha, and G!d is on them - but to not fool oneself claiming a non-Jewish practice is actually Jewish. That, I think, is more ludicrous than just using tarot.

Alright, now onto the fun parts and what you are here for.

My Jewish Theology with Tarot

So, this is all my personal theology which obviously you do not have to share. I am Jewish and practice religious Judaism. I believe that there is only one G!d, Hashem, and that They are everywhere and in everything. In academic terms, I am a monotheistic panentheist. This aligns with a lot of Jewish mysticism, especially Chassidus, and consider myself a crossover between the Conservative Jewish denomination and Renewal, with a solid base in the American Neo-Hasidic movement . (Conservative =/= political right-wing in the Jewish movements). I deeply respect Jewish traditions, halacha, and have put a lot of thought in what I believe and how it relates to tarot. There will be of course Jews who disagree with me, but I'm not here to dwell on that. When I read tarot, I am not asking the cards to tell me the answer I am seeking - the cards are a tool, an object, and do not possess spirits of their own. I am asking G!d. Now, angels won't interfere, but sheydim (demons) can. I will talk about protections/rituals one can use to avoid sheydim meddling later. As for questions like: How does one ethically divine? How much power do interpreters have? Does G!d plan everything? Do we have free will when it comes to our future? Let’s look to source texts. “All is foreseen, but free will is given.”  —Rabbi Akiva, Pirke Avot 3:15 "Rabbi Bena’a: There were twenty-four interpreters of dreams in Jerusalem. One time, I dreamed a dream and went to each of them to interpret it. What one interpreted for me the other did not interpret for me, and, nevertheless, all of the interpretations were realized in me, to fulfill that which is stated: All dreams follow the mouth of the interpreter." —Berakhot 55b "The Gemara asks: But doesn’t Rav say that any divination that is not like the divination of Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, when he went to seek a bride for Isaac (see Genesis 24:14), or like the divination of Jonathan, son of Saul, who sought an omen as to whether he and his arms bearer would defeat the Philistines (see I Samuel 14:8–12), is not divination? Since Rav did not rely on the omen in his decision making, he did not violate the prohibition against divination, and there was no reason for him to penalize himself." —Chullin 95b "What is a diviner? One who takes his stick in hand and says, (as though he were consulting it), “Shall I go, or shall I not go?” So does it state, (Hoshea 4:12) “My people ask counsel of their stick, and their staff declareth unto them” (Sifrei Devarim 171:6). (3) מעונן — Rabbi Akiba said, Such are people who assign times (עונות plural of עונה “period”, “time”) — who say, “This time is auspicious to begin some work”; the Sages, however, say, It refers to those “who hold your eyes under control” (who delude by optical deception; they connect מעונן with עין “eye”) (Sifrei Devarim 171:9)." —Rashi on Devarim 18:10-12 "... here he does not rely on the אות which he had stipulated, but where he asked G’d in prayer for help, saying that if certain things were to happen he would regard this as a sign that his prayer had been answered favorably (compare Ibn Ezra there). When the Talmud Chulin 95 כל נחש שאינו כאליעזר עבד אברהם ויהונתן בן שאול אינו נחש, the meaning is that “any divination which is not like that of Eliezer or that of Yonatan ben Sha-ul is not a divination,” i.e. is not permissible, but is akin to relying on witchcraft [Unless the person requesting a sign does so as a prayer directed to G’d it is forbidden. Ed.]" —Sforno on Beresheit 24:14 “The true power of the tarot lies in its ability to channel a clear path for our deep intuition to shine through. Consulting the tarot can help clear creativity blockages, clarify ambitions, work through complex decisions, and make sense of emotions and relationships.” —Holistic Tarot, Benebell Wen

In my interpretation of these quotes, I gather a few things:

1. In Jewish thought, dreams are 1/60th prophecy. However, dreams follow the mouth, i.e. interpretations. Multiple interpretations can be true. Being a confident and learned interpreter is important. While I did not quote it, the sages also advise the one should pay your interpreters fairly. 

2. Hashem has given humans free will, so we can make our own choices. That is unique to us as beings, unlike angels. G!d already knows the possible outcomes.

3. It is not divination to notice and realize patterns or answers as long as you do not use it as an omen to change immediate course - examples the sages mention in specific are "a piece of bread falls from your mouth, so you decide not to walk to the lake", i.e, seeking 'signs' and omens randomly to direct your life.

4. Rashi's explanation of what a diviner and sorcerer are, compiled from different Jewish texts. Now, I am not here to say "and this is proof Judaism and halacha are actually fine with divination!" Nope, in Bamidbar 23:23, it is very clear that Jews are told to get what they need from prophets or G!d themself, and do not need augury. What I am arguing here is that by these specifications, and connecting to my final point of what tarot actually is, tarot may not fall under that category depending on how you use it.

5. I wanted to highlight Sforno's commentary here because the way I read tarot is via prayer. Tarot is a tool, and when I begin a reading, I am not asking the cards, I am asking Hashem to use these cards as a sign and communication.

6. Finally, I quoted Benebell Wen because of her poignant understanding of how tarot is less about "fortune-telling" and more about a creative psycho-spiritual exercise for intuition and is more like a mirror to our subconscious telling us what is true. Fusing this with the ideas above, this is my short rundown of how I see and view Tarot: Tarot is a prayerful, spiritual tool as a way I can interpret and communicate from G!d, and I understand the cards themselves are not going to tell the future. Tarot is a mirror for the subconscious and a way for us to work through things we do not feel we can do on our own, be'ezrat Hashem (with the help of G!d).

Jewish Tarot Spreads

As I don't want to just post photos, I am instead going to include links to the tarot spreads I have found, to their origins so you can know the creator!The Archangel Spread The Divine Threads Spread Wisdom of the Hebrew Priestess Spread Vessel, Offering, Ally Spread Do Not Play It Small Spread Rooting and Releasing Spread

Jewish Tarot and Oracle Decks

Eht/Aht Netivot Oracle Deck

Tu B’shevat Oracle Deck

Moon Angels Oracle Deck

Malakhim Meditative Cards

Raziel Tarot Deck (Out of Print)

Jewish Tarot (Never Printed, Can See All Cards Virtually)

72 Names Deck

Tokens of Light Deck

King Solomon Deck

Revealed by the Letters Deck

Cleansing and Protection

So, of course, this is so dependent on what you think is most important for you, as it is your practice. However, I will share what I do.

When it comes to doing readings, I have a very specific ritual. First, I light incense or a candle depending on what I feel like doing at the time. This is something I am still working on and trying what fits best for me and my cards. I will use incense smoke to cleanse cards or the "knocking" card trick. Then, I say two prayers - I recite the blessing:

"Blessed are you G!d, Ruler of the Universe, who opens the eyes of the blind. The reason is because of the allegory that intuition and divination are connecting to a special type of sight. Then, in the case of the concern with sheydim messing with the reading, I have decided to use the protective angel prayer: 

"In the name of the Lord, G!d of Israel: 

May the angel Michael be at my right side, 

and at my left side, Gabriel,

before me Uriel, behind me Raphael,

and above my head, Shekhinat El, G!d's presence." This is traditionally recited at night, but I felt it was just as appropriate to call on these angels for protection. Plus, Uriel is associated with illumination and is a useful presence to have during these readings. In Jewish gemology, lapis lazuli is good for bringing understanding and grounding intuition, so I use that gemstone as well while I read. Eventually, I'd like to also get an onyx as it is associated with enlightenment and wisdom in Jewish gemology. I also use a tarot cloth with a hamsa and have a protective amulet pendant.

Finally, when I shuffle my cards, I sing a very specific phrase - the "ein od milvado" from Kohelet 1:2, in a tune that puts me into a meditative headspace - and I shuffle with my eyes closed, only stopping when I feel it is right to do so. I also use a kabbalistic meditation technique to allow the divine flow (shefa) from G!d's light flow through the crown of my head. 

If you liked this work and information, consider tipping me at: https://ko-fi.com/ezrasaville!

Sources (I will post this in every post of this series): Sefaria Chabad Tarot and the Gates of Light by Mark Horn Torah, Tarot, and Tantra by William Blank The Jewish Dream Book by Vanessa Ochs Magic of the Ordinary by R. Gershon Winkler Tarot Wisdom by Rachel Pollack The Wisdom in the Hebrew Alphabet by R. Michael Munk The Encyclopedia of Jewish Magic, Myth, and Mysticism by R. Geoffrey Dennis https://www.telshemesh.org/ https://hsastrology.weebly.com/hebrew-zodiac-signs.html https://ohr.edu/this_week/ask_the_rabbi/2394 https://www.gatesoflighttarot.com/ http://www.devotaj.com/ http://www.peelapom.com/

#jewish mysticism #judaism #jewish witch #jewitch #jewitchery #jewish witchcraft #tarot #jewish tarot #tarot readings #witchblr #tarotblr #divination #my post #mine #jewish #jewish tarot series #antisemitism #christianity #goyim you cannot use this info #it is not for you

[himbo-buckley]

The Big Buddie for Dummies Guide

Hello party people and welcome to whatever this was supposed to be!

Quite a while ago I got an ask by someone about doing a guide on all the canon indicators for Buddie to explain the ship to non-shippers and about 5 anxiety attacks and four weeks later, I finally did it!

So read, enjoy, reblog, validate, disagree!

Also here are some notes before we get started:

Buddie has been around a while now and there are some incredibly people writing about them and doing meta posts for them, some of which I asked for their opinion which I will link at the end and some of which I am quoting in a way / have been inspired by (Also feel free to send me all and every post related and I will link it in the text as I will try to do the same)

This Guide is organised by the following themes we find in the show with Buddie: trust - coparenting - connection and love life - subtext

I’m not gonna lie, this is incomplete af because tbh? There is so much stuff that can be interpreted as evidence for Buddie but this is too long already so I left some stuff out, I hope ya’ll don’t mind … (also the reblog  option exists for reason, just add on what I missed, I’m not gonna bite!)

I’m gonna assume the person who reads this has a general understanding of the show and its scenes because I cannot explain every scene down to it’s very detail (I mean I can but that’s another 20000 words worth of meta and not sure anyone wants to read that … again) but I will try and link fitting gifsets (again, send them my way if you feel I should include sth.)

I should also add a warning for the fact that I, personally, think I am hilarious but others might not but fellas, Idc! (Also I cuss, some people don’t like that?)

So let’s get this show on the road then, shall we? I call this meta : „We might end up real close.“

(alternate title: „Buddie stans ship hard but canon ships harder“ or „This is Timbo’s story (of becoming more famous than Joss Whedon) and I’m just it’s vessel“)

Trust

We’re gonna start this off strong (I mean all of them are strong themes) by talking about the biggest theme with Buddie which is trust. It goes all the way back to 2.01 and the gym scene and Buck basically telling Eddie he doesn’t trust him (complaining about Eddie’s comfort level, anyone?) and that he needs to earn that - which rude but also I get it.

In fact there are two main themes which I combined into Trust which begin in 2.01:

„You’re my problem“ and „You can have my back any day“ both of which sort of sum up Buddie, because from the get go Buck decides hey, this guy is my problem and then he proceeds to make everything about Eddie his business. Eddie meanwhile tells Buck he’d love to have him watching his back - meaning Eddie trusts him and wants Buck to be his partner.

(Side note: isn’t it beautiful how that is a complete reverse of their usual attitudes? Usually Buck trusts way to easy and Eddie never does but with each other it’s the opposite!)

Let’s look at the episodes in order, okay?

2.01: „I think I’ve seen this happen in porn before“

- „You’re my problem“: I’m gonna talk about the gym scene later a bit more but this sort of establishes the dynamic Buddie has? Because both are fascinated by and focused on each other from the get go. I mean: Eddie got to the 118 and everyone seemed to be nice to him except this one guy and instead of giving him a few days, thinking he’ll come around , Eddie is like: nah, I’ll confront him! Why? Maybe it’s gay, maybe it’s Maybelline, maybe Eddie „I am not enough“ Diaz was just sick and tired of everyone putting trust in him because soldier and craved the vibe check?

- „You can have my back“: Basically what happened was, they got the bomb out (being partners and in sync even when they didn’t like each other yet) and they stood outside and Eddie tries a new approach cause for some reason Eddie decided out of everyone at the 118 he needed Buck to like him specifically and so he pays the guy - who was nothing but rude to him so far but who is also very competent - a compliment and Buck gets all flustered and thankful - and „You’re my problem!“ gets rephrased into „Or you know, you could have mine!“

(Also the look of pure elation on Buck’s face when Eddie compliments him, you know the person Hen has basically said is so awesome and pretty it transcends sexualities? And he picks Buck of all people to have his back? Buck has no choice but to stan!)

- In terms of Trust we also get the pool scene which is our second instance of them being in sync and partners by both jumping into the pool and getting the guy out basically at the same time

2.02 / 2.03: „Why Edmundo Diaz hates earthquakes part 1 and part 2 (of 2)“

- „Where do you want us, Cap?“: Now looking at the timeline of 2.01 they’ve known each other for approximately four days as this is their fourth shift together (we see) and yet Eddie is already comfortable enough to answer for himself and Buck several times. He’s the one who decides they will go in and he answers the roll call later for the both of them. This is our first real instance of them being in sync and just their whole interaction, from Eddie going along with Buck’s plan about the elevator to everything else just shows how much they already trust each other.

- „I, uh, I love kids“: Also Buck in this episode, why was it so important that Eddie knows you like kids? Please share!

- “Eddie, you’re kid is in the safest place he can be.“: Connected to this is a sub-theme I like to call: ‚They know each other better than anyone else does‘ which is established here with Buck realising that Eddie is full of shit when he pretends not to worry about Chris so Buck spends some time trying to assure Eddie Chris is safe at school.

- „Is everything okay?“: Of course, the fact that Buck was the only one to check in with Eddie’s mental state from the truck scene onwards is very telling, because everyone else likes and trusts him but they don’t really care (yet)

- And the episodes end with everyone reuniting with their families, including Eddie - while Buck watches from the car because Buck drove him there because he has his back (also see Subtext)

2.04: „Hearteyes, motherforker“

This whole episode is what made several people ship Buddie and well, I can see it and I will talk about a lot of it with the other themes but for now:

- „I just feel bad for him. (…) Eddie’s working on it“: This episode really leans into the whole „You’re my problem“ with Buck apparently driving Eddie to the hospital (or at least coming along) to Buck clearing Chris coming to the station with Bobby to worrying about them at home until finally he introduces him to Carla.

Mind you, they haven’t known each other that long, yet Buck feels the need to meddle in Eddie’s life and fix his problems for him which, yes, is very Buck thing to do but still: Considering Eddie was introduced to us as this super capable guy, it’s interesting that Buck immediately saw through him and decided: yeah, that guy needs me to take care of him.

Or you know, to have his back.

2.07: „*Tommy Wiseau voice* Oh, hi Shannon!“

- „I needed someone to have my back“: This episode establishes the significance of „You can have my back“ even more because in this episode Shannon comes back and you know what they fight about? Eddie not having her back. Shannon quite literally says „I needed someone to have my back“ which is almost the same exact  Eddie tells Buck in 2.01 and with that wording as well ...

In the same scene Shannon also says how Eddie always knows best and is the one to make the decisions which  is another parallel you can draw to Buddie where Eddie began like that in 2.01 (the scene at the mechanic’s) and then began to follow Buck’s lead (the elevator shaft) / let Buck help him (Carla))

2.10: „It’s all about ‚figured it was none of my business‘“

I love this episode very much because there are several Buddie hints in there.

- “I think it’s none of our business.“: Connected to the topic of Trust is the scene between Chimney and Buck when they buy the Christmas tree and Buck keeps talking about Shannon coming to the station and the fact that Shannon and Eddie hooked up while Chim seems exasperated by this and frankly doesn’t care and he tells Buck as much, saying it’s none of their business. Except it is because Eddie is Buck’s problem, remember?

- „So … not gonna say anything?“: And then the „None of your / my business“ gets repeated in the scene when Buddie sits at the fountain talking about Chris and Shannon and they both say it’s none of Buck’s business. Yet Eddie then still tells Buck all about it sounding all defensive.

- It’s also the first instance of Eddie willingly searching out Buck’s advice about Christopher.

- And related to the topic of knowing each other well, considering how surprised Buck is by all of this, one sort of has to wonder how often they hang out outside of work. Because the way Buck acts makes one assume it’s quite a lot, which is why Buck is so hurt he doesn’t know about it.

- Also the fact that they so casually go somewhere with Christopher and the way Buck talks about him making it clear they have done this before.

- „Trying to protect your kid.“: On the topic of Trust I also wanna mention the fact that Eddie doesn’t trust Shannon with Christopher. Which is a direct parallel to 3.03 when Eddie tells Buck there is no one he trusts more with his son. And also 3.09 when Buck gets to be back in Chris’s life after the lawsuit as soon as Buddie made up yet Shannon needs to really beg for it? I mean, yeah.

2.13: „ Evan *I colour coordinate with bae while my sister is abducted and my brother is dying* Buckley“

- „Oh, no, I know what you were thinking.“: The scene at the hospital between Buck and Eddie does have a bit of subtextual relevance but I do think we should note the fact that this scene was in the show at all like this because wouldn’t Bobby have made a bit more sense? After all they spent one and a half Season before that making him the guy Buck goes to for advice and he has sisters as well, yet here we get Eddie being the one to talk to Buck.

We get Eddie basically telling Buck exactly what he needed to hear and while not exactly condoning his actions, he is also not judging them. Instead Eddie is telling Buck he might have done the same, because Eddie and Buck know each other and see each other.

So I wouldn’t necessarily call that scene Buddie-hinting but it does definitely play into the whole ‚having each other’s backs‘ and ‚knowing each other well‘ thing they got going on.

Also compare it to 3.06 in the way that both times Buck did something wrong and it was Eddie who actually took the time to listen to Buck’s reasoning and be the one to understand him, which is a very important part of their dynamic.

And the line „I wasn’t worried about that.“ in response to how Buck thought he would get away with all of this might be one of the top 10 heartbreaking lines of this show for me and that is saying a lot with 911!

2.14: „‚It’s a miracle… bro #nohomo’“

I am not fully sure if the scene of Buck freaking out about Eddie going back in to save the kid really fits in here, but I’m also very unsure were else to put it, so Trust it is!

- „Eddie, what are you doing?”: It does fit into the whole having each other’s back thing with Buck immediately jumping into action to try and help Eddie

- But in all honesty prior to 3.14 this would have not made the cut as I would have been like: eh, that’s just who Buck is as a person - but as 3.14 will proof / has proven, he can be calm and collected even when his sister, his ACTUAL family is in danger and while I would argue it was in part because there was less he could do to actively help in 3.14, it still deserves to be mentioned now

- Side note: considering 2.13 / 2.14 and 3.14 / 3.15 this marks two occasions were Buck being worried for Maddie’s life was followed by an episode of Buck being worried for Eddie’s life and that too deserves mentioning

2.18: „insert *Jane Austen film*-gif: It’s about the hands!“

- I’m not really sure if this is really connected to Trust but Eddie holds Buck’s hand the whole time, even after he has dragged him out from under the firetruck until they disappear in the ambulance.

- Also the fact that Eddie, who is probably stronger than Chimney, is the one helping Hen drag Buck out from under the fire truck while Chimney helps lift it is … worth a mention.

- Definitely connected to Trust is Buck’s insistence to going to Eddie’s ceremony because this is Eddie and he has his back

3.01: „How you know he no sleep naked?“

Yes, this scene has a lot to unpack. In terms of *trust* / how well they know each other:

- „He’s just sulking, Cap“: Eddie says about Buck. In my opinion the phrasing combined with how before that they were talking about how Maddie can’t get Buck to leave the house and he won’t answer any of Bobby’s calls implies that either a) Eddie too has tried to contact Buck with no success or b) is actually in contact with Buck, has talked to him and has concluded based on what he saw that Buck is sulking - and yes, I am leaning toward b).

- “Maybe you’ll learn something.“: Which brings me to the fact that it’s Eddie who makes the  plan to get Buck out of his funk and prove to him that he still has stuff to live for, despite how dismissive he had been about Buck’s feelings before, calling it sulking and saying Buck should just brush it off. Because Eddie has Buck’s back despite it all and is there for him and trusts him.

- „He’s hanging out with his Buck today“: In terms of actual Trust there is the fact that Buck is very much depressed in this episode - and what does Eddie do? Puts his son in his care, you know, the most important person in Eddie’s life, convinced that Buck will be able to take care of him despite how low and bad he is feeling about himself. One) because it has been the case for Eddie probably. Two) because this is who Buck is as a person even while depressed and Eddie trusts that. And three) because even before the Tsunami Eddie was very sure about how much Buck loved Chris.

- „Honestly I don’t know how to help him.“: This also parallels Maddie with Eddie in an interesting way because Maddie spends the whole episode worried about Buck and thinking he cannot take care of himself, while Eddie trusts in Buck to not only take care of himself but also his son. Which yeah, interesting.

3.02 „Eddie hates earthquakes - the remix“

- The episode sort of proves that while the others may have known what Eddie was gonna do, Operation „Buck up Buck“ was his plan because he is the one who has Buck’s back. (Considering for example Maddie doesn’t know about it as she thinks Buck is home and had Chim been involved he would have told her beforehand meaning this was Eddie’s plan and he executed it and then told the others about it while at work.)

- Also in terms of literal Trust: LA is hit by a Tsunami and Eddie doesn’t worry about his son once because Buck said they are going to the movies next and also because Eddie trusts Buck to protect Chris like he would.

3.03 „‚Do it for the trauma!‘ - Buck-edition“

Once again a subtext-mill but there is some textual evidence as well:

- “How do you tell your best friend that you lost his son?“: At the VA hospital Buck calls Eddie his best friend when he talks to Maddie which I always found weird in this context? Because it should always be hard to tell another person about how you got their child killed (which is not my opinion but the way Buck sees it here, okay?), yet the writers choose to put in a reference to how much Eddie means to Buck.

- Which connects to another subtext and text thing which is the voiceover which has Buck say the lines: „To be seen. To be found. Isn’t that what we’re all looking for?“ after talking to Eddie, which no longer just implies this is about Eddie but actually straight up says it - and it connects to the sub-topic of how well they know each other, cause Buck says in this episode: Eddie is my best friend and he sees me for who I really am. Which, yeah, is stuff one usually finds in connection to a love interest. (Will talk about it more with Subtext though)

- Also before that the voiceover has Buck say „Sometimes being lost is not knowing how to get from where we are to where we wanna be, where we need to be.“ right as Eddie knocks on the door, which basically states that Eddie and Chris might be where Buck wants to be but also how Eddie apparently knows how to get Buck there. Because he knows him so well. (He literally calls Eddie his life raft in the voiceover!)

- „Buck, there is nobody in this world I trust with my son more than you”: Now the Trust theme in regards to the loft scene is interesting in how it compares Buck to two people in Eddie’s eyes / life: Shannon and himself. Shannon, as I already said, we have with 2.07 and 2.10, both of which talked about how she left Chris (and Eddie) and how Eddie no longer trusts her because of this and refuses to let her back into Chris’s life. Which is different to how he always lets Buck back into Chris’s life, even after the lawsuit with virtually no hesitation once they made up as far as we can see. Meaning he trusts Buck more than he trusts Shannon. Who is, you know, his wife?

As for Eddie himself, I’m gonna flashforward a bit to 3.08 and the conversation between Eddie and Bobby. Because in 3.03 Eddie talks about messing up with Chris, yet how he never stops trying and how he knows Buck is the same way - which is interesting considering 3.08 has Eddie basically say that he has not forgiven himself for all those mistakes. Yet he forgives Buck both for the Tsunami and abandoning them during the lawsuit.

And now I wanna say something very controversial and hurtful but also connected to how I read Buddie and Trust which is that in my opinion? Eddie includes himself here. Eddie tells Buck here he trusts him more or at the very least just as much as he trusts himself with his son. Which is pretty big, considering he barely trusted his wife, the mother of said son, who he has known for at the very least about 11 years during Season 2? Someone he himself said he loves? Someone he at one point planned his future with? (Meaning he most definitely plans his future with Buck in it now…)

3.04 „discount!Buck in the house“

- Two things are in this episode, both of which are very much not about Trust in the literal sense but how much time Buddie spends together outside of work:

“Can’t fight city hall.“ Eddie being the only one on board with the fire drill Buck’s leading because he is a boy scout who follows all the rules but also because Buck probably talked to him about his job as fire marshal beforehand and so Eddie knows how important what is happening here is to Buck.

„You don’t know math.“: now, you can think this is another dig at Buck’s intelligence but you also have to acknowledge that at one point Eddie might have either heard someone reference Buck’s math knowledge in front of Eddie or Eddie has seen Buck try doing math and has remembered that well enough to immediately be able to pull out that dig. (Which brings us to a parallel I will talk about later!)

- “Uh, who - who’s that?“: I also firmly believe that Buck would have not been as willing to go along with the lawsuit, despite Bobby’s betrayal, had Eddie not immediately rushed off toward Lena at the firehouse, making Buck think Eddie (his partner) has replaced him. Does no longer need him to have his back.

3.05: „What if we fight like a married couple in a grocery store downtown LA, bro?“

Ah, yes, that episode! Filled with Buddie signs!

- “And if Cap says he’s not ready, he’s not ready.“: What I find interesting in terms of Buddie and Trust is the fact that Eddie apparently trusts Bobby’s judgement more than he trusts Buck’s. Which I find OOC. Or not because Eddie is a soldier and Eddie grew up fairly authoritarian it seems his first instinct will be to follow the chain of command / do as the person in charge tells him to.

- Now everything else that happens after including and specifically the street fighting storyline? That was a direct result of the lawsuit and the deposition in which Buck betrayed Eddie’s trust by revealing the info about Shannon. Which Buck is aware of because up until this point we see him still looking up, yet after this he drops his eyes and doesn’t really look at anyone again during the deposition.

- “And I’m not allowed to talk to Buck.“: Yet. YET despite this massive betrayal in Eddie’s eyes what stops him from calling Buck later is the fact that he wasn’t allowed to do so! Nothing else. Also the phrasing is very interesting as it gives us three entities Eddie considered to call: his abuela, Buck and the 118, meaning Hen, Chim and Bobby - the people he will call his family about 6 episodes later - are an uniformed mass but Buck is his own person - because up to this point Buck always had Eddie’s back. And we all know he still would have had! (Sidenote: this line is what made me an actual shipper and why ya’ll can read posts like this, so maybe say thank you to Lyndsey Beaulieu? Or fuck you, depending on your opinion of me ;P)

- „And now I can’t even talk to you.“: This whole scene gives huge character exposition and I’ve talked a shit ton about the fight in the grocery store before as have a lot of other people, but basically what it boils down to is that Eddie is mad at Buck because he revealed things about them to his lawyer but mostly because Eddie thought they had each others back and trusted each other and apparently Buck doesn’t trust and care about him the same way Eddie does for him because he didn’t even consult Eddie about the lawsuit? And Eddie misses Buck a lot. And Chris misses Buck a lot. And Eddie is already mad because Shannon wanted a divorce despite how hard he tried and then she died, meaning she left him again and now Buck left him as well and why is Eddie never enough for anyone?

And of course, as always, Eddie is mad at himself the most because he wasn’t enough for Shannon and he wasn’t enough for Buck and he’s probably not enough for Chris who is struggling so much and Eddie just feels angry and lost all the time!

I think this is the moment Buck finally understands how much he means to Eddie truly. How Eddie meant every word in 3.03. How for once someone actually trusted him, depended on him - and he let them down. Which was never his intention because Buck never understood that he could (which is not the topic of this post though).

- “Why can’t you see my side of things?“: On Buck’s side, while he isn’t nearly as mad as Eddie, he does raise the question of why Eddie didn’t have his back - which is a very fair question but Eddie is still too mad at Buck here to hear it.

- What is also very interesting about this scene is that no one, not even Bobby who was actually sued by Buck, is as mad at him as Eddie is and no one dares steps between them. Probably because everyone recognises they are closest with each other, so the conversation hits a bit different and also is about a lot more than the „stupid lawsuit“. Yeah.

(Real talk I have been very mad at friends before and I am known to make scenes but damn, this scene does not read platonic at all, it reads ‘married couple fights in grocery store in LA - what happens next will surprise you. News at 11.’)

- In other news, Eddie didn’t come to the rage room in the end and Buck was very very sad about it.

3.06: „*cries about the framing*“

(Sidenote: I feel Eddie so much in this episode, I too would be too embarrassed to talk to Buck had I just screamed at him in a grocery store in full view of all our coworkers. I too would avoid everyone like the plague and maybe join a fight club just so I would not have to deal with those feelings. I get it, my dude!)

- “Whew, dude, are you okay?“: We’ll talk about it with 3.08 as well, but it is very significant and pointed that Buck immediately knows something is wrong with Eddie when no one else at the station had seemed to be aware of that.

- “I don’t know what you want from me, Buck“: The apology scene is very subtext heavy but what it comes down to in the whole having each other’s back / knowing each other well / Trust - column is the fact that after being mad and avoiding him all day Eddie still sticks around and more importantly actually listens to Buck - which, as shitty as that sounds, but considering how he acted before if Eddie hadn’t wanted to still be Buck's friend he could have said something shitty and left or stayed and not actually listened to what Buck had to say - but he didn’t because as hurt as Eddie had been by Buck’s betrayal he still trust him and he wants to understand, which I do think sets Eddie apart from everyone else because Hen and Chim forgive Buck but they don’t ever try to figure out where he is coming from while Bobby is … being Bobby about all of. Eddie meanwhile, who has the most or maybe the only right to actually be mad about the lawsuit, still trusts Buck enough to know that he had his reasons and actually takes the time to listen to them. Even if he is being sassy.

- And on Buck’s side we do have his need to reconnect with Eddie the whole episode and we have him notice stuff about Eddie no one else did and we also have the really beautiful and mature line of Buck saying: „I just want you to talk to me. Even if it’s just to say you’re still mad.“ Which I love very much and tells us a lot about Buck and communication, because Buck values openness so much.

- “And I just wanted to…“ - „Punch someone?“: Also while it was important for Buck to explain himself to someone - it was especially important for him to explain himself to Eddie, both because he considers Eddie his best friend and also because the grocery store scene showed him how much he means to Eddie which probably floored Buck because as we learned before and also after: Buck is not used to people needing him as much as he needs them.

3.08: „XOXO gossip (fire)fighters“

- “Whoo. Nice truck.“: One thing about 911 is that it’s a very plot and action driven show, meaning sometimes it will lack the time to actually show us certain things, especially when it comes to relationships, so it relies a lot on telling us things about characters and their relationships and as these scenes here show us they do a good job at it. Buddie talking about Eddie buying a new truck is very casual and banter-y / flirty (this is a Buddie post so I call it like I see it) and light and shows us: hey, they are friends again and close again and they know each other very well - while also showing us: Eddie still keeps stuff from Buck but Buck knows something is off.

- “Eddie too.“: Which brings me to my next point and the thing I love most about this episode aside from Heidi which is Buck running around and going: ‚something is wrong with Eddie‘ while everyone else is like: ‚Eddie? Are you sure? I haven’t noticed anything‘

Which leaves two ways to read this:

Eddie and the rest of the 118 aren’t as close as it seems and they do not care about Eddie that much - which considering all the deep talk between Eddie and Chimney in 3b especially and the fact that he calls them his family would be fucked up and also doesn’t seem like the vibe they are going for OR

BUDDIE! I mean, look at what has been going on with the street fighting storyline, essentially the writers went: okay, so Eddie can't talk to Buck so he goes completely off the rails but no one will know because Eddie hides it so well - EXCEPT Buck will realise sth is wrong the second he looks at Eddie and once the lawsuit is done he will spend two episodes running after Eddie and trying to figure out what is going on

3.09: „#tw: mild adult themes & implied sexual content / #pwp - porn without porn“

- “He’s kind of obsessed with natural disasters.“: Honest question: Is Buck really obsessed with natural disasters or does Eddie have earthquake related trauma and Buck has been googling stuff and telling him facts to calm Eddie down every time the earth vibrates a little because a train or something passes them by?

In any case it’s a very cute scene with Eddie once more revealing how well he knows Buck and the writers confirming to us that yes, these boys spent a lot of time with each other and talking to each other - without needing to show the scenes

- “I could still take you“: AFTER ALL they needed the runtime to do this other little scene this fandom has not talked about at all ever mainly because it is so very straight basically people stopped shipping after.

I’m just kidding, obviously the whole scene was very queer both in subtext but especially in text, I mean, what even was that line about still taking him, Buck? There is a child not even 15 feet away, where is your sense for decency and decorum? DO YOU WANT TO TRAUMATISE HIM EVEN MORE???

A few notes on this scene:

- It’s been pointed out to me that Maddie complains about how everything around there gets shared with the 118 and how Buck … turns around and shares everything about his sister with Eddie, which I love because it seems so normal and comfortable between them like they do that all the time, which is way cute and domestic!

Added to that considering the conversation Eddie had the week before with Bobby about Shannon and the throwaway reference about thinking his marriage having been complicated, I wonder: Did Eddie talk to everyone about the street fighting and Shannon after his talk with Bobby in 3.08? Did he just talk to Buck about it? Did Buck know about Shannon wanting a divorce all along? (Yeah, you know were I am leaning, right?)

- “Especially if you aren’t around to see that they need saving“: As for the apology in and off itself, I’m not gonna talk about the character implications again cause been there done that, send an ask if you wanna know more, but what it comes down to is: Buck acknowledging that he should have been there for Eddie and he didn’t consider the Eddie of it all when he sued Bobby, which is interesting because OFFICIALLY Eddie really is just his best friend and coworker at this point so did he really have to consider his feelings all that much?

Also Buck is saying - and Eddie is not contradicting this - that Eddie street fighting would not have happened if Buck had been around, which, to quote a good friend of mine: Uff!

I think we can admit that while Eddie was mad at Buck, his anger was not primarily about Buck but it was amplified by Buck abandoning him. We can admit that Buck was what ultimately caused Eddie to lose his control and considering everything that Eddie went through in the past year with Shannon and considering everything Buck went through in the past two years: this is as close to unconditional love as these two can manage at the time and that is very beautiful and does support Buddie 100%. They are each other’s anchor and person the one they turn to in a crisis.

Or well, Buck is for Eddie. Buck does have more people like that in his life with his sister there and I do think before the lawsuit he wasn’t fully aware that he could depend on Eddie so fully because Buck always doubts how committed other people are to him because abandonment issues.

3.11: „Bist du single? Nein, eher Album!“

- „This is Eddie’s house. I’m not really a guest.“: Incredibly strong indicator / implications toward how much time these two boys spent with each other, considering how comfortable both of them are in each other’s space (and I don’t mean physical but material space). Eddie has a key to Buck’s apartment and just let’s himself in willy-nilly, while Buck is around in Eddie’s place often enough to not think of himself as a guest there. (And while that might be normal best friend behaviour to some of us, Maddie’s words imply that it is not for her / the Buckleys.)

3.14: „Frank says ‚Thank you, this paid for my new house!‘“ / 3.15: „MY therapist also says ‚Thank you!‘“

I’m gonna group these two together, since 3.14 in itself doesn’t have any relevance considering Eddie isn’t even in the episode but it does become relevant in regards to 3.15!

- Basically what it all comes down to is the contrast between Buck’s reaction to Maddie being in danger and his reaction to Eddie nearly dying!

Now I already said while talking about 2.14 part of it was that Buck was aware he was in no position to help Maddie and might actually make stuff worse if he intervenes while with Eddie he was HIS ACTUAL LIFELINE! He was actually responsible for getting Eddie out of the well and home to his family. BUT (!) it’s still very pointed, especially remembering they apparently changed the order of episodes around? Meaning we are really hit with the contrast and we have to consider the implications of it all!

- Also just Buck’s reaction in general, even with Chimney and Maddie in Season 2 he wasn’t this frantic, he wasn’t freaking out like that! This really seems like all those scene’s shows like that usually do to confirm one person is in love with the other by having them completely loose it at the prospect of the other dying.

And damn, does 911 delivers here, not just with Buck literally trying to dig down to Eddie with his bare hands but also with his conviction for the rest of the episode before going sort of catatonic near the end. Basically Buck was going through the 5 stages of grief over Eddie during the course of this episode and we just? Let him?

- Of course we should mention Buck has Eddie’s back always, so he doesn’t give up on him and doesn’t entertain the notion of Eddie possibly being dead for even a microsecond because this is Eddie and Buck needs him!

- And to add to the list of heartbreaking lines we have Hen saying: „Why? So we have two cut lines?“ because yes, Buck would choose to stay down there rather than let himself be saved if Eddie was already dead - and if Eddie wasn’t he would force Eddie to trade lines with him so Buck could be the one to die because Buck thinks Eddie’s life is more valuable than his and also he is a selfless idiot who loves Eddie more than himself - which frankly is a mutual thing if we look at 3.03

Option #3 btw would be that Hen knows Eddie has a legitimate reason to cut his line and he would explain that to Buck and - considering who they are - Buck would immediately agree and cut his line as well.

Anyways, no matter which option the writers were thinking off this line is heartbreaking and the implication interesting!

To sum it all up, the episode basically said: Buck would die for Eddie and he loves him more than anything else

- The Eddie implications of this episode are mostly Subtext, so we’ll get to them later in case you thought I forgot!

3.16: „The rope was a metaphor after all“

Tbh I do not think that this episode was really about how no person can be happy / live without regrets / not be lonely unless they are in a relationship with someone or they would not have put that much focus on the relationship between Maddie and Buck and the fact that his abandonment issues stem from her leaving.

- “He’s not gonna do it alone“: As for Buddie, the episode goes back to them being partners and in sync with the roof thing and yay, it has a different ending then the reversed situation the episode before but also it features a metaphor we will talk about later

- “Hey, you’re more than welcome to come and celebrate with a bunch of 9 year olds.“: Just like we will talk later about Eddie inviting Buck to the sleepover! Because while I don’t think the invite was all that serious and I don’t think even considering everyone else, Buck would have taken him up on it because celebrating with a bunch of 9 year olds around isn’t what Buck had in mind, it’s very interesting that the first person taken out of the equation is the guy Buck is closest to and probably spends the most time with.

- And now let’s talk about the playing pool scene because it once again shows that 1) Buck and Eddie are very alike, 2) they know each other very well and 3) they care about each other the most!

Because for 1) I do wanna point everyone to the fact that Eddie doesn’t have anyone outside his family and the 911 either or they would have mentioned him staying in contact with his army buddies or something.

2) Eddie is the only one who actually listens to what Buck says and gets what Buck is really asking, while Bobby, Hen and Chim are all too focused on their own experiences to get that the reason Buck tries so hard to help Red is because he thinks he is Red (I mean they do get it, but they don’t really realise how serious this is for Buck - yet)

3) There is also a lot of focus on Eddie in this scene which we will talk about later as well but it picks up the whole ambiguous „us“ from the grocery store which technically refers to the whole firefam but the way it’s said still implies that it is about the two of them especially.

To anticipate a bit: every time the word „Us“ is used in this scene Buddie only looks at each other. When Buck says „I mean that would never happen … to us.“ he looks at everyone else but turns to look at Eddie as he very pointedly says „to us“ and keeps his focus there for a moment. Eddie meanwhile technically turns to the pool table while he says the word „us“ but he only focuses on Buck before this and doesn’t look at anyone else because to him: Buck is the important aspect here. And no one else!

Not to mention the intense look Buck gives Eddie (and only Eddie) when he says „Better not.“. Like damn, in 3 Seasons Buck has never sounded this threatening before!

Basically the way this scene is acted combined with the words that were written it sort of reads like them going: We’re all family here but you and me will most definitely never leave each other!

I mean there is a reason why Buddie used the ambiguous „us“ while everyone else talked about the firefam being friends or being family.

(And yes, that might be a bit of a reach but this is a Buddie guide after all, so we are going with the buddie-est interpretation!)

3.17: „‚Don’t say her name‘-challenge“

- “Uh no, someone else.“: More of a subtext scene but it does seem pointed that Buck refuses to admit that he was thinking about Abby here, considering Bobby most definitely knew that Buck was talking about Abby because he was there for the hot-air balloon date, so even if he did not remember right away he knew the second Buck said he didn’t know from Maddie and since Hen and Chimney weren’t there in the truck (and also, they probably would have known who Buck was talking about as well) the only one Buck was hiding from was Eddie.

Which makes sense, even if you only look at them as best friends, because Eddie only saw the aftermath and what we canonically know that he heard about Abby were things like Buck’s speech in 2.08, so … even as just Buck’s friend he must really dislike her

(Also there is that whole parallel one can draw between Abby and Shannon which I talked about here)

- „Buck invites Eddie“: So I’ve been going back and forth on what to write here for a few hours now and what it comes down to is this: despite being 6500 words deep into a meta on Buddie and knowing full well the writers so far have no intention of actively doing Buddie, I would not accuse 911 of queerbaiting. HOWEVER, if the show ends and Buddie doesn’t happen I will consider this scene queerbaiting because there would have been ways to write this that did not leave the implications it did because the way it has been written the text is:

„If I bring my romantic life-partner to dinner with my best friend he will bring his romantic life-partner who will invite her brother who will invite his best friend and then we have to invite this other couple we are all close with.“ and well, one of them is not like the others, right?

(Well, technically two but Maddie and Buck are most definitely siblings despite that scene in 2.01)

Because essentially what that scene did here was say: If I bring my wife the evening turns into this couples night with all our friends - except Buck and Eddie aren’t a couple.

And sure, just like all great queerbaits there is a reasonable explanation as well as a completely platonic way to read this because of course Buck would not wanna be all alone with two couple so he would bring his best friend and the we’d have to invite the other couple we know as well so they don’t feel left out.

EXCEPT - and this is why it feel pointed and queerbait-ey: We have already seen the 118 hang out without Athena and Bobby at Chimney’s birthday and it was never mentioned to us whether they were invited and didn’t come - or Chimney didn’t invite them. Both explanations sort of make Hen’s point moot because it does proof that they can hang out without their boss slash friend and his wife slash her best friend without it being a big deal meaning especially if this was a make-up dinner for Chimney’s birthday they wouldn’t have needed to be there.

There is also the fact that supposably Alfred is still in town? You know, Chimney’s brother? So if they wanted to avoid the Buddie implication they could have also thrown in how Chim might bring his brother like:

„I invite you, so he invites Maddie, Maddie invites Buck, Buck invites Eddie, Chim might invite Alfred,  and now we gotta invite Athena and Bobby“ - see how that has a completely different feel? Now there are three single guys and two of which are siblings of someone else in the group while the third is friends with the rest of the group, making this sound less like couples night out and more like a group of friends hanging out.

But they didn’t do it like that so now it feels like they are pointedly equating Buddie with the canon couples of the show which is quite queerbait-ey.

3.18: „TrainCRASH? More like train WRECK? *cries*“

Okay, so this episode is a little hard to do because there is so much going on and a lot of it is very hard to categorise! As for the topic of Trust and having each other’s back:

- I do think that a lot of Eddie here come down to having Buck’s back - even when Buck might not think that’s what Eddie’s doing like in the train car, but he probably realised later which is why we see Buck talk about it with Bobby but not with Eddie because they are at this point where you no longer need to have clarifying talks (about stuff like that, once romantic!Buddie hits they’ll have to do all the talking).

And that’s basically it when it comes to Trust because most of what is happening in the episode when it comes to Buddie is Subtext!

Coparenting

I think this theme needs less of an explanation - though I do wanna point out that while I think Buck has fatherly feelings for Chris and Chris loves Buck a lot, Buck is not actually his parent / father. He is slowly getting there and if or when Buddie happens he might become Chris’s other parent but right now he is not. So this theme is about Buck being a honorary member of the Diaz family in general and Eddie’s treatment of him most of all.

Because the way I see Eddie him dating anyone would always be tied to his son. Eddie has been shown to be someone who would do anything for family and his son in particular, so the fact that Buck is tied into this family is important. It also shows how much they are already a family without actually dating and proofs they spent more time with each other than we see and more than with anyone else.

I should also say that there is a very heavy overlap between this and the category of Subtext so some things will be repeated but all of them deserve to be repeated so there is that.

2.02 / 2.03: „Why Edmundo Diaz hates earthquakes part 1 and part 2 (of 2)“

- Like I already said when I discussed Trust Buck is the only one asking who Eddie is trying to reach, he is the only one trying to reassure Eddie and he does so even though Eddie is being sarcastic and pretending he doesn’t need to be comforted - also a staple in their relationship

And I think this is also were their dynamic of Buck being Eddie’s go to person when it came to Chris came from. Buck told Eddie he liked kids and then he proceeded to actually show Eddie he means it and he cares and considering Eddie says the mother isn’t in the picture and Chris has no one else (which as we learn throughout the show is not 100% true because technically Eddie's parents are there, even if they have no idea how to properly raise Chris, but in LA Eddie doesn’t really have anyone (yet) he feels comfortable burdening with his fears about Chris), so that must mean one hell of a lot.

- “Hey. Service.“: There is also the moment at the end of 2.03 when Buck immediately tells Eddie: hey, service is back! and then he drives Eddie to pick up Chris which is a scene that has so much subtext so we’ll talk about it later! It does however give us our first‚ Diazs plus Buck‘-family moment because while we see everyone reuniting with their loved ones, we see Buck with Eddie and Chris and yeah.

2.04: „Hearteyes, motherforker“

- One of my favourite things about Buddie is how they manage to be exactly what the other person needs - or in case of this episode figure out exactly what the other person needs and giving it to them. It’s happening here and again in 3.01 and 3.03 and some other smaller moments as well (see 2.01 honestly).

It’s also interesting that Buck is the one to drive Eddie again because we saw he has a car! So why is that? Maybe because he knows the way better?

As for the coparenting happening here, aside from Buck introducing Eddie to Carla because he knows she is what Eddie needs, we also have Buck clearing Chris coming to the station with Bobby which is something Eddie apparently hadn’t considered but Buck had and instead of telling Eddie he needs to do that - he does it for him! Because that’s who Buck is but also because Buck realised in this episode how much Eddie really needs someone to have his back and just do stuff for him.

2.07: „*Tommy Wiseau voice* Hi Shannon“

- And in terms of having each other’s back this episode really shows the significance of this phrase with Shannon pointing out, like I said before, that from her point of view Eddie didn’t have her back. She needed him to be her husband and her coparent and he wasn’t.

Now we can argue whether that is true or not but it’s still an important parallel and puts Eddie turning toward Buck for advice into a new light.

Because as Shannon points out Eddie was never good at letting other people make decisions for him or with him before yet we continuously see him turning toward Buck for exactly that: sharing the load with him. And to put that even more into perspective: Buck is the youngest from their friend group, he is the one considered immature and he is the one without kids or younger siblings, yet he is the one Eddie choose for helping.

2.10: „It’s all about ‚figured it was none of my business‘“

- The interesting thing here is that Buck as Eddie’s friend really doesn’t have any right to know about what was happening between Shannon and Eddie if Eddie didn’t want him to, but Buck as Eddie’s family does (a little).

But either way this episode gives us another instance of Eddie confiding in Buck about his family problems - problems he again is the one most inexperienced with. In other words Eddie talking to Buck about it was really about Eddie wanting Buck’s opinion specifically.

There is also the fact that Buck came to see Santa with Eddie in the first place which is most definitely a family affair as far as I know US customs? (We don’t do this in Germany / Bavaria, okay? We have the Child of Christ and around the 6th we gather in the town square and shoot at it.)

It’s even brought up in text with the Elf telling Buck they make a beautiful family - and Buck not disagreeing because honestly it’s just easier and he probably knows how they looked. But yeah. That!

- Also not to repeat myself but the topic of trust is important here! Eddie not trusting Shannon in 2.07 / 2.10 with Chris vs. trusting Buck in 3.03 / 3.09 / 3.10 is important!

Yes, sure Shannon is his actual mother so Chris has stronger feelings for her and the potential to get hurt is way bigger. Yes, Buck was only gone from their life for a few weeks while Shannon was gone for about 2 years. Yes, Buck apologised twice while Shannon just played the victim card tbh (even though she did have a point with some of the stuff she said). But still:

Eddie is very hesitant to let Shannon back into his son’s life (and really his as well) while he does have no such qualms about Buck once Buck apologises to him in 3.06. In fact their relationship returns to normal with Eddie asking Buck for help with Chris numerous times while say 2.15 makes it clear Eddie still keeps Shannon at arms’ length and out of a lot of aspects of raising Chris.

Of course, giving advice to Eddie is not the same level of involved as actually parenting the child and part of it is probably growth on Eddie’s side when it comes to Season 3 but right here: it’s a stark contrast and it deserves a mention!

2.17: „*fridges female character for man pain* Haha, we’re so random!“

- „Ice cream? Oh, I do not envy you putting him to sleep tonight!“: There is the scene here where Eddie facetimes with Shannon and she is out and about with Chris and Abuela and they are getting ice cream and Eddie is all like: damn you’ll regret that later - which is the same thing he says about Buck in 3.02

3.01: „How you know he no sleep naked?“

- Buck gets a card from Chris which is a child thing to do but also should be mentioned because Buck does not get a card from Danny or Harry. And considering how much Buck likes children and how good he is with them we do have to mention that we only see Buck interact with Danny once and never with Harry while it’s been implied several times before the tsunami already that Buck does spend a lot of time with Chris. (Of course, in part this is due to how much closer Buck is with Eddie than Hen and especially Athena but still)

After all the season ends with Chris giving a card to his literal father, tying these two scenes together. And pointing out once again how important Buck is for Chris and the Diaz family.

- Also as I mentioned during Trust there is that parallel / contrast between how Maddie and how Eddie see Buck with Maddie sort of treating him like a child who needs to be dealt with while Eddie is basically like: let’s give him something to do so he feels less useless! (Guess who had the right idea! Just guess! And you have one try!)

- „Are we the only one’s without kids?“: There is also the cut from Madney talking about being the only one’s without kids and then remembering Buck to Buck getting woken up by Eddie so he can babysit Chris which I won’t say confirms Buck being a father to Chris but does accentuate everything he does for Chris after and gives the vibe that Buck does indeed have some fatherly feelings for Chris. It does at least place the idea of the Diazs WITH Buck being a family firmly into our heads.

3.02 „Eddie hates earthquakes - the remix“

- „How’s operation Buck up Buck going?“: Buck sending Eddie updates and pictures of Chris and himself hanging out is just really cute

- Also Eddie isn’t worried about his son at all!

- And we do have that tweet from Oliver Stark about jumping into the receding water at the end of 3.02 being basically suicide but Buck still doing it because the director told him, he’d do it for his own kids.

3.03 „Do it for the trauma - Buck-edition“

- I talked about it before with Trust but basically Eddie, who has parents who are still alive and physically able and love his son very much, even if they have different ideas of how to raise his son, and a sister with at least one child not that much older than Chris and a grandma and an aunt and probably some more family in LA AND Carla who he literally pays to take care of his son, literally tells his best friend he is the one he trusts the most with said son. That is fucking meaningful!

3.05: „What if we fight like a married couple in a grocery store downtown LA, bro?“

- „You know how much Chris misses you?“: The fact that Eddie brings Chris up at all and to hurt Buck specifically is - in part about Eddie deflecting from himself but also about Christopher actually missing Buck, which says a lot about the relationship Chris and Buck have and how much time they spent together if that is something Eddie would bring up here.

3.09: „#tw: mild adult themes & implied sexual content / #pwp - porn without porn“

- „I’d rather be at home with my kid, enjoying the one good thing I got going on.“: Eddie says these words during therapy and where do him and his son spent the following evening or at least an evening that same week? With Buck at his loft. Because even though Buck wasn’t mentioned here as part of the family time Eddie would much rather have, apparently he is part of it.

3.10: „Parenttrapping for Beginners“

- „Well, I thought it would be nice to bring the boys together for a playdate.“ - „All three of `em.“: this speaks for itself, Buck being invited in the first place was … an interesting choice? A dig at Buck’s mental age? Exposition? What exactly, Tim? Like what was the vibe in the writers room here?

- „Hey, Buck? (…) Can I spent Christmas with you?”: The fact that Chris would rather spent Christmas with Buck than with his grandma and the rest of their family is interesting as well and again points toward Buck being an integral part of the Diaz family.

- The way Eddie looks at Buck here and the little head shake implied to me that Buck and Eddie had the same conversation Eddie and Hen have right then already.

3.11: „Bist du single? Nein, eher Album!“

- “Well, that’s what the 118 is. The family we chose.“: Again maybe more subtext than text but when Eddie talks about the 118 being his family the camera pans to *drumroll* Chris, his actual blood family, Albert, Chim’s actual blood family - and Buck, who is basically Chim’s little brother and Eddie’s, well, best friend? Coparent? Partner in work and life? SOULMATE?

Yes, it’s a little subtext, but it’s interesting that this scene shows only one character neither of them are related to and it’s Buck, emphasising once more that these two and especially Eddie (because he’s the one talking here) think of Buck as their family.

3.12: „There’s a horse loose in a hos… school“

- “(…) we should try it together”: Again with the emphatic inclusion of Buck in family scenes! (But this time Carla gets to be there as well - though only to record them?)

This episode introduces Ana Flores as a potential love interest for Eddie and then spends the whole episode contrasting and paralleling her with Buck, as one does …

In this episode as well Eddie gets advice about Chris from several people and it’s interesting that the one person whose advice he follows without disagreeing or trying something else first is once again Buck. 

The episode also maybe implies that Buck was the one to built or buy or find out about the skateboard.

But really what matters here is Eddie reaffirming that there is no one he trusts more with his son (because he refused to take Carla’s advice right away but he did listen and think about what Buck had to say right away - despite his joking) and Buck being included in the family scene.

3.15: „MY therapist also says ‚Thank you!‘“

- „I’m always gonna fight to come home to my family.“: I’m not gonna comment on the lack of Shannon in the montage because I do believe part of it was that they didn’t really have scenes that fit and would have had to film them specifically which would then have to fit into the timeline / storyline before and also mostly it was about Shannon already being dead meaning she is no longer part of the family Eddie can come home to, so it makes a hell of a lot of sense for her not to be included, guys!

That being said I do believe Buck being in it quite a lot means something about how much of a part in Eddie’s family he is! Which is a big part and something I love about them a lot!

- Also Buck was so very happy Chris came to visit and then immediately walked over, which doesn’t really have any relevance except I thought it was cute and this is my guide.

3.16: „The rope was a metaphor after all“

- Obviously it was meant jokingly, but Eddie would have loved if Buck came and not just because being alone with a bunch of 9 year olds is no one’s idea of a fun evening and Eddie could probably use the help (still hoping Carla was there with him and still surprised Eddie was in such a good mood during the pool scene after), but because he likes to spend time with Buck and he did wanna celebrate with him - but he was also very aware that spending the evening with 9 year olds was not what Buck envisioned so he said it jokingly.

3.18: „Traincrash? More like train WRECK? *cries*“

- “Whoa! Whoa! Two weeks from home? Isn’t Chris kinda young for that?“: I don’t think I need to say more about that scene really, I think everyone who saw it understood that it confirmed the 118 but especially Buck being fairly involved in Christopher’s life and how that confirms: Buck = part of the Diaz family.

- Also all the interactions between Buck and Chris at the party both with and without Eddie around I mean, yeah, again, meaningful!

- In conclusion: Eddie, Chris and Buck are family and dems the facts!

Connection and love life

Now, this is where we are slowly going subtext and also really interpretation heavy!

The title might be a bit missleading but I didn’t really know how else to sum all aspects up. Basically this theme is about their love live but also about the parallels between their storylines - especially when it comes to their love life!

Also this theme isn’t organised by episode but by subtopics because I summed up so many different aspects here.

Parallels in their storylines:

- 3.15 / 3.16 and the rope metaphor as a metaphor for their dating life:

Technically the rope is a metaphor for their lives and them letting go of things in general but especially about their dating life because for Eddie in my opinion this is when he really fully comes to terms with Shannon’s death while Buck finally admits to his abandonment issues, in part caused by Abby leaving.

(Side note: the fact that Eddie choose to cut his line just like he choose to actually do therapy to deal with his issues for Christopher’s sake while Buck’s burns away and he is literally forced to deal with his issues through being confronted with Red and running into Abby at the train crash is … something.)

Their dating life is being paralleled:

This really isn’t technically something that explains why you should ship them but I do think it’s interesting that from the get go their love lives have been happening in parallels / contrasts to each other? As if they were connected? Magnets?

So yeah, that and also it goes like this:

- 2.01: Eddie references Buck being single

- 2.02 / 2.03: Eddie first mentions Shannon but indicates a break-up / Buck meets Ali and seems to bond with her

- 2.04: both refuse to hook up with any of the girls at the bar and don’t want to date because they consider themselves taken (I know Eddie says it’s about Chris but Buck called bullshit here and text told us to trust Buck on what he says about Eddie)

- 2.06: Buck flirts with Taylor and Eddie acts a bit jealous

- 2.07: While Buck finally comes to term with his break up with Abby in her absence, Shannon returns and we learn that Eddie has sort of been holding out hope so far (they kiss in the end) (Also Eddie and Shannon and Buck and Taylor both happen in parking lots which probably only means they ran out of location money but still!)

- 2.08: Buck hooks up with Taylor, then meets with Ali and begins dating her

- 2.10: it’s revealed that Eddie has been sleeping with Shannon and Buck is miffed

- 2.11 - 2.16: we get a few mentions of Ali and some scenes between Eddie and Shannon reminding us both these relationships are happening and they are growing closer

- 2.17: Shannon thinks she is pregnant, Eddie wonders about their relationship, Shannon wants a divorce but dies before they can go through with it

- 2.18: Buck gets a new apartment because of Ali, their relationship seems ready to become more serious, then Buck gets hurt and Ali is traumatised by this and tells Buck she needs to rethink the relationship

- 3.01: it is revealed that Ali and Buck broke up

- 3a: both of them work through the trauma of the past few months, no references to either of them dating are made, romantic and / or domestic scenes happen between them instead, the ambiguous „us“ happens

- 3.11: they are asked about their relationship-status to remind us about them being single (AND THEY LOOK AT EACH OTHER? Wow.)

- 3.12: It’s pointed out again that Buck is single but he says he prefers it that way while Eddie meets Ana and shows some interest in her, then during a call Buck indicates that he might not be as happy being single as he told Madney and Josh while also seeming a bit happy Eddie won’t be dating Ana (probably)

- 3.15: Eddie finally fully comes to terms with his past, including his relationship with Shannon and her dying

- 3.16: Buck reveals he might still be hung up on what happened with Abby and he realises he needs to move on, the ambiguous „Us“ is brought back

- 3.18: Buck runs into Abby and actually moves on

- Side note: considering 2.08 and 2.10 and 3.09 and some remarks made throughout the show, Buck and Eddie are somewhat aware of the relationship struggles the other had which isn’t really relevant but also sort of is

Parallels with canon couples

This is TV and TV and especially shipping lives through tropes and parallels inside the story to subtext tell you something you need to know without actually having to say the words, but just to plant the idea in the viewers head.

For example, and please I am just spitballing here, you are writing a show about Lifeguards. And there are these two characters who are named … Paddie and Tucker. They have amazing chemistry and they are best friends and love each other a lot. Now, you, as the showrunner, are considering making them a romantic item but you need to do it slow cause while you do have queer characters and a queer following this show is fairly mainstream and also the characters have presented as straight in text so far. So you need to do crumbs, right?

Okay, so how do you best do that? Well, Tucker is known as this really caring guy and very open with his feelings and he freaks out when someone he loves is in danger - so you put Paddie in danger, right? Proofs he loves him, right?

But then you want it to have some deeper queer implications, right, in case you do decide on making them romantic? So how do you best do that? Well, lucky for you, Tucker has a sister. And you were planning on putting her in danger as well this season anyways, so you just have Tucker react a bit more subdued here, right?

But then you really want it to hit people, like you need people who are more casual and mainstream and might not have noticed the romantic undertones Tuddie has had to notice that, right? So you put these two episodes back to back.

Except „Paddie Begins“ is set to air first and well, Tucker IS known to lose his shit about people he cares about being in danger, so they might not actually notice anything more. Or they will just consider Tucker not reacting as hard about his sister, Sadie, being in danger bad writing. And you can’t have that!

So how do you fix that? Well, you just change the episode order! Now the episode with Sadie in danger airs first and people will spent a week complaining about how out of character Tucker was and it will be still on their minds when „Paddie Begins“ happens and Tucker goes feral and it will hit EVERYONE! Like damn, apparently Tucker cares more about Paddie than Sadie? Why? What makes Paddie so much more important?

Anyways, this is how you test out an idea in TV and why tropes and parallels are important…

Moving on:

- 2.14: „‚It’s a miracle… bro #nohomo’“: Now I have already written a bit about Buck’s reaction to Eddie potentially dying to safe the kid and while it is fairly tame for Buck it’s still something you usually see a guy do for a love interest (Any of ya’ll watch „Chicago Fire“? Because I watched like the first two Seasons and the main „Will they / won’t they“ - couple had a scene like that about once every three episodes. Cause it’s a trope!)

- 3.02 „Eddie hates earthquakes - the remix“: This is a teeny tiny bit of a stretch and there wasn’t even any nice cuts to anyone in the firefam to indicate they were referenced (which I found odd, considering this would have also fit for Bobby) but the guy who got impaled with his son in law said: „She‘s the love of my life but he‘s her‘s.“ which considering this episode has Buck doing everything to protect Christopher means a lot and I think about it once a day, okay?

- 3.14 vs 3.15 vs. 3.16 vs. 3.17 vs. 3.18 - Losing the love of your life and how to deal with that:

This may be the biggest parallel of all, and maybe I could have included 2.14 as well but I didn’t because it’s a whole season removed. It also seems meaningful that this episodes happen one after the other, making us naturally compare the scenes and see / look for patterns.

But to explain real quick:

In 3.14 Maddie is in danger and Chimney, who is her boyfriend and told her he loves her just one episode earlier, freaks out completely

In 3.15 Eddie might die / is considered dead by several of his friends already and Buck utterly looses it! We are talking frantic screaming and trying to dig Eddie out by hand and running around trying to figure out ways to save Eddie only to turn full on catatonic when none of that works. I mean, his mood turns faster than mine when I am hangry while on my period and that is saying sth!

3.16 could be considered a bit of a stretch but we do see Red lash out a lot when he realises that Cindy, the woman he considered the love of his life and someone he pined after for quite a while doesn’t exist like that anymore.

In 3.17 Athena is put in great danger and Bobby is forced / able to listen to it and while I am not sure if the blank look on Bobby’s face is bad acting, a deliberate but accidental acting choice OR done consciously in a way that mirrors Oliver’s acting in 3.15 - it’s there and it’s a parallel and we can watch it and compare it and see it.

To bring this whole thing home for us they contracted another outside player in the form of Connie Britton playing Buck’s ex-girlfriend Abby, who similarly to Red and Buck, turns frantic upon possibly loosing her fiancé and starts panic and lash out a little, which is fair and also part of a motherforking pattern, ya’ll!

- Another fairly obvious parallel between 3.14 and 3.15 is Buck telling Sue - as the watch Maddie and Chimney hug - that Maddie already has everything she needs when Sue asks him why he didn’t immediately rush toward his sister. Which can be compared to 3.15 were he does immediately rush to Eddie’s side and support and hug him!

-  I’ve already written about 700 words on 3.17 and the line „Buck invites Eddie“ so I’ll just point you back toward that part of the guide where I pointed out that Buddie was actively compared to the three main canon pairings here. Which is a lot and also could have been avoided and probably queerbaiting.

- Again, teeny tiny bit of a stretch maybe but like, we’re here to talk about anything in canon pointing toward Buddie and also this is my guide and I do what I want but in 3.18 we learn that Abby is now engaged to a single father and considering she was only gone for about two years (Season 2 takes place over the course of one year and in 3.13 we learn that Madney has been dating for just under 11 months so unless there was a time jump somewhere in the last 5 episodes we weren’t really told about, we clock in at about 2 years and maybe one or two months, tops, at the end of Season 3), they have been together for less than that time, even if we think Abby already knew him when she was still dating Buck. Which timeline wise puts them meeting maybe around the time Buck met Eddie, maybe a bit after, meaning Abby met and began dating and fell in love with and decided to marry a single father in the same timespan Buddie did … whatever it is they are doing! Which is meaningful because for the viewing of the Abby/Buck relationship which I am glad more and more people are realising was very unbalanced and provides an interesting parallel to Buddie because this means Abby and Buck met and developed feelings for a single father around the same time. Idk, I understand that the whole father thing was to make Buck care even more but damn, it’s a parallel so I mention it!

- Michael and Doctor Hale vs Eddie and Ana (3.17/3.18 vs. 3.12ff.)

Now, of course we need to realise that Eddie and Michael are fairly different characters and Michael has way less relationship related baggage than Eddie has which is why he goes after what he wants way faster (also, carpe diem, he just found out he won’t die). Also of course, there is no moral component to address in Michael dating some doctor vs. Eddie dating his son’s teacher, but still:

Michael and Dr. Hale had one scene together and it wasn’t even overly flirty and yet, we knew where it was heading, we felt the chemistry and everyone ended the episode saying: I ship it, more of that - which they did give us, just one episode later. They had some awkward moments, yet the show never left a single doubt in your mind where this is heading.

Now look at Eddie and Ana:

First of all we learned more about Doctor Hale in the two short scenes than we did about Ana in four scenes. That seems deliberate.

Second, while we do realise Eddie thinks Ana is attractive from the get go she repeatedly shuts him down by pointedly saying „Mr. Diaz“.

Third, every scene between Michael and Doctor Hale was romantically coded and we know where this was heading while aside from the initial scene between Ana and Eddie and maybe the second scene there were no hints of romance between the two. In fact in 3.15, an episode that is about Eddie moving forward in his life and letting go of the past she is both mentioned and actually appears, yet there are no hints of romance and romantic interest, not from Eddie and not in form of teasing from Buck and especially Carla, who pointed out Eddie’s interest in her previously. Soooooo…

Parallels with Love Interests

Now, obviously we also cannot talk Buddie without talking about them dating in general and then relating this to each other. In other news: there are parallels between each and every love interest Eddie ever had and Buck and also between Eddie and Abby.

(Side note: I could probably also find parallels between Eddie and Taylor and Eddie and Ali but tbh both of these barely qualify as love interests, especially Ali, who despite actually being in a relationship with Buck we know nothing about (hi, original Ana! You did good and I am sorry people hate you for having boundaries!))

Eddie paralleling Abby

I mean the truth is we don’t even need Eddie paralleling any other girlfriend of Buck cause there are so many between Abby and Eddie!

- Abby and Carla vs. Eddie and Carla:

The biggest one might be parallel that both employ Carla and why. Which is in part because Buck brought Carla to Eddie but goes deeper than that.

There is that conversation between Bobby and Buck about Abby and her mother in 1.09 when Buck wanted to break up with Abby and Bobby basically said: if you wanna date someone you have to love them baggage and all and should be there for them as well - and while Buck did try doing that with Abby, well, Patricia died before he could fully step into the ring and then Abby left, BUT he showed no hesitation after that to step right into Eddie’s life, into his issues, with him. And he even brought in Carla as a baggage carrier, isn’t that nice?

Also the whole reason why they need Carla around in the first place as both of them are taking care of a family member (plus the fact that Christopher is a literal child so even without CP Eddie would need help taking care of him working the hours he has).

Also tía Pepa quite literally calls Eddie a saint and I am pretty sure Abby was called sth similar by Carla and Bobby in Season 1 though I don’t care enough to check mainly because the implication was there all through the first ten episodes about how Abby was such a great person for taking care of her ailing mother.

But really it comes down to the parallels between Bobby telling Buck that a real relationship is about sharing the load and the conversation between Maddie and Buck as well as anything else in 2.04 where Buck is so desperate to be there for Eddie and help him.

- There is also a definite parallel to be drawn between the conversation Abby and Buck had in the Jeep while looking for her mom about how Abby hasn’t had sex in a year and Buck asking Eddie about dating in 2.04. It’s a little subtextual, but between the expression on his face and the topic and the teasing and the walking shoulder to shoulder it does feel alike to me so I mentioned it.

- street fighting vs. the apology: losing yourself

Now this one I love a lot because while it does happen half a season apart and isn’t explicitly expressed on the show: Eddie’s whole ark in Season 3a is about losing control and by extent losing himself because Buck wasn’t around. Abby meanwhile talks about how she found herself after she left LA and how she would have lost herself again if she returned to Buck (which is absolute bullcrap but not the point).

- There are also some parallels to be drawn between Buck, Eddie, Abby and Shannon (and technically also Maddie) and the whole leaving each other thing, with Eddie leaving Shannon for the army without consulting her about it while Abby left Buck for Ireland and then also the lawsuit where in a way Buck left Eddie like Shannon did, being so caught up in his own feelings he didn’t consider what Eddie (and Christopher) were going through.

But we can also acknowledge how it must have felt to Buck with Lena / Eddie taking Bobby’s side like he was once again replaced / left for someone else, much like Abby left him for Ireland and Maddie left him for Doug.

Buck paralleling Ana, Lena and Shannon

Buck on the other hand side parallels Eddie’s love interest a lot sometimes down to the clothes (and yes, technically Lena isn’t a love interest but Ryan Guzman thought she was and aside from the fact that he’s into women that could beat him up (which for once, not judging you, bro) and considering the parallels with Buck … that means if Buck was a woman, well, ya know?) so let’s talk about that

- Buck and Shannon:

I’ve already talked about that one a lot so I will only mention it here real quick but the whole Eddie not trusting Shannon vs. trusting Buck despite his betrayal again like right away once he apologised (which yes, what Buck did was not as bad and far more justified) and letting him back into Christopher’s life IS a parallel, considering for example how Shannon asks about Chris missing her (though it’s been over two years, at one point children just stop asking as we know Chris did) and Eddie telling Buck Chris misses him in the grocery store scene.

Also Eddie not trusting his wife and Chris’ mother with him fully even after they reconciled and him telling Buck he was the one he trusted most in the world when it came to his son is … something.

There is also a little parallel to be drawn between 2.17 when Shannon goes for ice cream with Christopher and Abuela and Eddie is all like, well, don’t come crying to me when he won’t sleep because sugar high and saying basically the same thing to Hen and Chimney in 3.02 when they ask about „Operation: Buck up Buck“ because Chris ate loads of pancakes.

Also Shannon in 2.07 said she needed Eddie to have her back and Eddie says he always did but Shannon disagrees (which might be a little how Buck felt with the lawsuit) and you know, Buck and him agreed to have each other’s backs just six episodes earlier.

- Buck and Lena:

 Now, with Lena, despite her being most connected to Eddie, the first (and second) time we actually see her is in 3.01/3.02 through Buck, which connects the two from the get go.

Eddie then finds out she was at the pier in 3.02 (before meeting her) just like Buck (though he doesn’t know that) and then meets her in 3.03 and she spends the whole episode running around LA trying to find her Captain while injured, much like Buck is doing in the same episode.

I also mentioned in my meta-series how I think one of the reasons why Eddie likes Buck so much was that Buck wasn’t impressed by his military background like everyone else (or his looks, I mean, it was probably more about his looks tbh) and how when Buck started liking him it was really about Eddie and not whatever he had heard about him - yet Buck was / is still never afraid to call him out bullshit, much like Lena from moment one.

There is also the fact that Eddie goes to her for advice and she literally uses Buck’s locker (and will I ever stop laughing about the tape? Probably not, I think it was hilarious, okay?)?

Then of course we have Buck in 3.04 reacting quite similar to seeing her for the first time as he did with Eddie in 2.01, even saying basically the same thing.

- Buck and Ana

Now, Ana is an interesting case because we see her a total of four times and she is mentioned two more times throughout the show and each and every single moment is connected to Buck somehow and sometimes so very unsubtle to.

In „Fools“ we cut from Buck saying he likes being single to Eddie doing parent-teacher conference and yes, meeting some other teachers first but also Ana, showing us that while Buck is fine with being single - Eddie might not be. And then Eddie introduces himself as Eddie and Ana knows immediately this is short for Edmundo - unlike Buck in 2.01 who guessed Eduardo? Also, Carla’s „big blue eyes“ line which is a little clown-y, so take it with a grain of salt that it could connect us to Buck.

Then of course her next scene is Eddie getting in her face about Christopher being hurt. Later in the episode we see Buck reference this on a call, meaning either Carla or Eddie told Buck about it (I am leaning a little toward Carla making fun of Eddie in front of Buck and Eddie then having to come clean about all of it, because I cannot wrap my head about the idea of Eddie telling Buck about having a crush, I’m sorry.) (And will I ever be over Buck being so gleeful that Eddie will now be dating the teacher after all? Because boy was close to cackling which even if he was in love with Eddie at the time and therefore happy he wasn’t off the market - still quite rude for a best friend if you ask me! Like, sure, do that but in front of strangers?)

Her next scene is Eddie coming to apologise to her and she gives her speech about limitations - which we can of course connect to Buck and Eddie talking about Christopher and his limitations before that and then afterwards going skateboarding with them. (It does feel a little deliberate.)

And then of course we have „Eddie Begins“ and you guys, they could have very very easily have either Carla or Buck make a joke about Mrs. Flores and Eddie’s crush in the firehouse scene, but they didn’t! And then we do get to see her at the end where she has one whole line and Eddie barely looks at her and you know what happens? They have a child ask the same question Buck asked at the beginning about ever just wearing the medal (which sounded very not straight in its delivery, Mr Stark, what were you thinking about?), making us think of Buck. Like, it would have been enough to establish Eddie doesn’t feel like a hero if the question was asked only once - twice in the span of 45 minutes constitutes a callback, meaning we are supposed to think of the other scene and that means thinking about the other person that asked, which was Buck.

Is this … flirting

Now, some of these are quite ambiguous but there are several scenes that imply they consider each other attractive or feel like flirting and here they are:

- 2.01: „I think I’ve seen this in porn before“

Now, we all know Buck’s initial dislike of Eddie was about Eddie being to good at the job and Buck being afraid of being replaced, but considering one of the first things we hear about Eddie is Hen saying that boy is so fine it transcends sexualities and considering they talked about the calendar which chooses them based on hotness just before and then all the references to the calendar throughout, it stands to reason that Buck considers Eddie attractive.

Also their whole conversation during the gym scene, what was any of that? I mean, Buck thinks the pictures of Eddie are professionally done which means he thinks they are good which means, yes, Buck thinks Eddie looks good in those!

Plus the whole scene is riddled with (sexual) tension. From Buck constantly increasing the weight he is lifting, while throwing looks at Eddie as if double checking that he sees he could bench press him and the way he gets in Eddie’s face to Eddie’s veiled barbs about the girlfriend breaking up with him and doing the same thing as a firefighter but he was getting shot at. I mean, what was that if not the beginning of a porno? (And here we have our first parallel between Buck and Eddie as we find out later because Eddie, too, has been left by a woman. Now the real question would be does he consider them broken up?

Not to mention that when Bobby tells him at the end of the episode that he wasn’t chosen Buck immediately assumes Eddie was and also is so very happy for his new friend, because he thinks he’s hot (right?).

- 2.04: „Hearteyes, motherforker“

In 2.08 Buck has a conversation with Chimney about his pick up technique and well, did anyone in production watch this episode because when Buddie walks away from tailpipe-girl-emergency he literally does everything he described.

Also Maddie says the words „Does this man crush on Eddie mean you are finally over Abby?“ to Buck and his only reaction is „Cute.“ meaning one) Maddie has teased him about his Eddie gushing before and two) maybe Buck does have a bit of a crush?

- 2.06: „Bucky Barnes murder strut - 911 edition“

Again with the Maddie and Buck scenes!

Basically what happened was Maddie talked about how cute Chimney was but Buck assumed she meant Eddie because apparently if someone says cute, Buck thinks Eddie. This is just a fact, okay?

- 2.14: „‚It’s a miracle… bro #nohomo’“

Like my name for the episode already says, there is this scene were Buck and Eddie stand next to each other and Eddie says „That was incredible!“ and Buck who is already standing in Eddie’s space leans in further to basically whisper the words „It’s a miracle.“ into Eddie’s ears and then lean back a little and I am not sure if that wouldn’t fit better with Subtext but also Buck looks at Eddie like he wants to eat him alive and Eddie looks like he would let him and say thank you after while still embarrassed because he cries during sex.

You know, acting.

- 3.04 „discount!Buck in the house!“

Listen, I am convinced this is all Ryan considering the reaction of Kenny / Chimney and Aisha / Hen but that doesn’t change the fact that they used a take which had Eddie stare at Oliver / Buck’s butt the whole time and I mean, what horrible things happened in the other takes that made production choose this one unless they want us to see Eddie looking at Buck’s butt while Chimney and Hen stand around looking amused?

- 3.09: „#tw: mild adult themes & implied sexual content / #pwp - porn without porn“

Listen, from the moment Buck says „Cause you would prefer working it out in the ring?“ and then does this dorky thing with his arms while Eddie smirks into his beer about how he fought in a cage not fenced in (which, I’m a little unclear on the distinction I think, but I am nitpicky af so who am I to judge? Probably just stuff getting lost in translation) that whole scene changes vibes, going from apologising to teasing. And I think it’s very interesting that this is when Buck chooses to come closer (and then keep coming closer until he is right in Eddie’s personal space while touching his belt which we all learned by now means he is thinking about sex) and they have this whole conversation about who could take who which happens in sort of half sentences and does not feel like they are talking about fighting each other at all.

I mean, Buck keep coming closer, while Eddie stands there rooted to his spot, leaning against the bar, smirking, like every hot guy in a bar ever who knows one smile and a bit of smolder and they will come to him (which Buck does, playing right into it, I mean, come on, bro, weren’t you once a serial dater? How do you not know how to play hard to get?) and holding the beer (you know, phallic shaped obj- okay, I’ll stop here, it’s a reach), occasionally drinking, like maybe he tries to draw attention to somewhere or he has a very dry throat and honestly: this is how porn starts!

I don’t think my writing (or anyone’s writing really, not that ya’ll aren’t talented af) can properly express how very not platonic and innuendo-heavy this scene felt.

- 3.13: „‚Bro, what if I flirted with you in a bowling alley while out on a call?‘ - ‚Bro, what if I invited you out to lunch after telling a friend to say I love you before it’s too late?‘ - ‚BRO 😍‘“

Again, the title gives everything away but like so many scenes between these boys that moment at the bowling alley when Buck channels Arnie and Eddie is all: you’re a dork and also wrong! and then later when Eddie invites Buck to get lunch (which is sort of Eddie’s thing, remember 2.01?) after earlier telling Chimney to tell Maddie he loves her if he has a chance because he might regret it. And to really drive the point home or maybe make it in the first place, after Eddie asks Buck - and only Buck - to have lunch with him, Buck then declines because of a little blood (Evan, come one, you’ve seen worse! I know I have!) - only for Chimney to consider this the push he needed to invite Maddie for dinner so he can tell her he loves her.

So, you know, platonic.

- 3.16: „The rope was a metaphor after all“

I mean, what was that scene in the locker even with Eddie leaning against the doorway all cheeky and grinning like: yeah, come hang out with me! - obviously it was about Buck never saying yes to babysit a group of nine-year olds when he could be out drinking (as someone who works with kids, I approve), but yeah, that’s not what it felt like? So unless ya’ll cannot act anymore this was deliberately a bit over the top and ambiguous.

Jealousy

Now, no good ship works without jealousy and neither does Buddie so here are some examples of Buddie being jealous.

- 2.06: „Bucky Barnes murder strut - 911 edition“

Now, your probably saying: Bucky Barnes murder strut? That’s a tall order! But damn, Ryan nailed that, okay? Listen, we’ve seen Eddie walk out of uniform several times at this point and NEVER before and never after has he struted this predatory. Eddie walks tall and military, you know, the way he stands, Eddie doesn’t strut!

Yet, here he does! And what I love about this scene is that we see him in the background while Bobby talks to Taylor, working out with no care in the world - and then Buck comes over and flirts with her, suddenly Eddie feels the need to be part of the conversation?

And he doesn’t even wait until he is standing next to them to talk, he calls over while still sitting on the lifting things.

So yeah, that one is him being jealous.

- 2.10: „It’s all about ‚not my business‘“

- Now 2.10 is a great episode for Buddie and in part it is due to Buck’s facial expressions in the background and out of focus of the camera when Shannon comes to the station.

I mean, Oliver always plays Buck very intense and expressive and with his whole face but that was a bit much, you’d think he just found out Eddie broke a vow of chastity or had an affair while being married (which technically is what Buck compares it to later so kinda makes sense he looks like that but also doesn’t, Buckeroo, what’s the big deal? Did Eddie show up at your doorstep a week earlier telling you what a punk ass bitch his wife was, or…?)

- 2.17: „*fridges female character for man pain* Haha, we’re so random!“

„Talk to Bobby. Maybe he can get you guys a discount.“: There is a point to be made about Buck just not liking Shannon considering everything he knows about her and has heard about her, the same way Eddie doesn’t Abby, but still. This scene and this line, Buck does not sound happy for Eddie or truly interested and yeah, it’s off and it seems jealous.

- 3.04 „discount!Buck in the house!“

It’s actually not just my interpretation, it’s actually - between the similarities to 2.01 and everything that happens after with the lawsuit and how Buck explains himself - literal text that Buck was jealous here with Lena. So there!

- 3.09: „#tw: mild adult themes & implied sexual content / #pwp - porn without porn“

Tim Minear please send me over some scripts or have someone call me and explain what they were going for with the „You had sex with your therapist?“-scene because Eddie was so huffy and offended and I need to know!

- 3.12: „There’s a horse loose in a hos… school“

Buck sounds awfully gleeful Eddie will probably not date Christopher’s teacher and while that might just be him making fun of his best friend being so very overprotective and short tempered when it comes to his son (Mr. Control has left the building!), still, it reads a little like jealousy over some unknown pretty woman Chris might have mentioned some time and Carla probably described in great detail when she told Buck all about Eddie losing his cool!

- 3.17: „LegsTM“

It’s technically not really a jealous moment because it’s not Eddie being jealous but Buck simply refusing to mention his ex-girlfriend here, but considering 3.18 and also and most importantly the fact that there are only two other people in the truck, one being an unknown firefighter driving the truck and the other Bobby, who very much knows how Buck was supposed to take a hot air balloon ride with Abby, for who but Eddie was Buck concealing her identity for because Bobby already knows?

There really is only Eddie left, who probably figures out what Buck was about as well because bro may not be Buck and his out of the box thinking smart but he is fucking smart and he can figure shit out as well! Yet Buck refuses to mention Abby’s name and for what? So he can pretend Bobby and Eddie don’t know he is still bitter about her? I mean, fucking hell, send over the motherforking scripts, Minear, I am done with you!

- 3.18: „Traincrash? More like train WRECK? *cries*“

While I think Eddie is being more protective than jealous here, he is awfully involved and he is uncharacteristically out of control and emotional here and I wanna know why? Does Abby being back remind you of Shannon? Is it jealousy? WHAT IS GOING ON??? WHY YOU SO MAD, ARMY BOY???

Subtext

Now, I am first gonna talk about Subtext things in general like clothing choices, music and cuts between scenes and I am gonna be honest, I probably missed quite a few!

- One of my favourite is that while Buck wears the same colours in 3.03 as Shannon does in 2.07, Eddie wears the same exact shirt - and considering the fact that Ryan got buff between Season 2 and 3 that was deliberate, someone bought that shirt again because we are supposed to connect these scenes with each other!

- As I wrote before in 2.10 we can see Buck and his reaction out of focus when Shannon comes to the firehouse to talk to Eddie and ya know, why?

- Tim Minear himself said the elf in 2.10 was an easter egg for us Buddie shippers and he also said we can make out of the fountain in the background what we want, so there, Buddie is talking about Shannon and Eddie having sex and how much that messes shit up while a fountain shoots water in the background and yes, that is an innuendo and subtext and I hate it a little.

- 2.13 has this hospital scene I love a lot and you know what? Buddie is basically dressed the same, because the subtext of this scene is these two are alike and connected and they GET EACH OTHER.

- Another scene I really love is in 3.01 when Buck comes in for the surprise party because not only does he not hug his sister or Athene but runs up to Eddie first, Bobby actually shoves Eddie at Buck so he is the first person Buck hugs (and then the hug itself, what was that? The way they hold onto each other for a moment just looking while their hips are still touching?! Is that how you two hug because I want in!).

- Also they are dressed basically the same, should we discuss this as well?

- And still in 3.01 when Buck thanks Bobby and they talk and Bobby tells Buck he’ll find someone better and then asks him if he is doing okay, the first person the show cuts to is - nope, not Evan Buckley’s sister who is also there but his best friend, Eddie! Jup!

- And still in 3.01 when the firefam talks about helping Buck in the firehouse, Eddie first acts dismissive but the scene ends with Bobby saying Buck has them even though he may not believe that right now and half of that is said while the camera is on Eddie’s face who looks thoughtful - only to cut from them to Maddie and Josh discussing the same thing and mainly how Maddie doesn’t know how to help Buck and what he needs from her. Which you know, the episode ends with Eddie basically giving Buck a swift kick in the butt like she though he might need (and then 3.03 has Eddie basically telling Buck everything is gonna be okay, so we see Maddie talking about helping Buck but never see her doing it and instead we get two scenes of Eddie being there for Buck and also no Maddie in relation to the lawsuit but an extreme focus on Eddie? Writers, I see you and you aren’t wrong!)

- Also worth another mention is the cut between Madney talking about children, saying Buck didn’t have any either - to Eddie waking up Buck so he can babysit Christopher and specifically calling Buck „his Buck“ to make us think on their relationship and let us know how close they are and also to tell us to not trusts everything Maddie says about her brother because she gets shit wrong.

- In 3.03 after Buck tells Eddie he lost Christopher and then Eddie sees Christopher and rushes over and and Buck collapses and while Eddie holds Chris after he checked for injuries and Chim and Hen and Bobby hold Buck and Bobby asks Buck if he is okay, well, this whole time Buck is staring at Chris and Eddie and Eddie is staring back at him and Bobby, if you wanna know about me, gotta tell you, I am not okay?!

- And then we have the loft scene and yeah, okay, this deserves 5000 words of his own, from the fact that they played „Photograph“ by Ed Sheeran which includes lyrics about how they will never be alone and how loving can heal and mend your soul and the fucking song ends on the words „Wait for me to come home“ just as Eddie knocks and brings Christopher over and tells Buck there is no one he trusts more with Christopher than Buck and I am sorry, what are we supposed to think here? This show is from the US, these people speak english, it’s not like these lyrics leave much room for interpretation!

Not to mention the whole monologue Buck did about being lost and not knowing how to get from where you want to be to where you need to be before Eddie showed up and then talking about how a few choice words can sometimes be the life raft one needs to get home and how we are all just searching for someone to see us? I love Maddie and I love the Buckley siblings, but damn, she’s not the one he has been searching for!

(And I keep bringing up Maddie here because as his sister she is the person Buck could feel closest to and should care about the most and be cared about the most by and yet all canon evidence points to Eddie being that person! Also she is the person next to Eddie Buck has the most scenes outside the firehouse with.)

- This one is a bit of a stretch but Buck looks very uncomfortable during the whole deposition in 3.05 but he looks everyone in the eyes until the lawyer mentions Shannon and suddenly his lap is so much more interesting and yes, after is when all of them get asked the really hurtful question but still, this is when Buck stops being despondent and realises, fuck, I went a bit to far

- Someone please find for me where the director talked about purposely framing them as romantic in the apology scene because I cannot find the post for the life of me, but never the less: In 3.06 during the apology, in the beginning of the scene we see Buddie from quite a distance and Eddie has his back turned toward Buck and there is a column in the shot to visually indicate the divide and yeah, the whole framing is quite something and the way the camera angle goes from far away making it seem like unbridgeable distance cutting to closer shots and how we slowly see alongside the words hey, they aren’t actually that far apart, like yeah, this scene was something else!

- Not a direct cut but during therapy Eddie talks about how he wants to be at home with Chris because he is the one good thing he has going for him and the one thing he gets enjoyment out of (because he is so fucking depressed and I cry), yet when we later see Chris and Eddie together it is neither in Eddie’s house nor are they alone, nope Buck is there as well, meaning Buck is considered a part of that one thing even if he wasn’t explicitly mentioned!

- During 3.10 when they take the photo with all of them Buck is grouped between Madney and the Diaz family, like right between and not just next to them. Also earlier when the eat Buck sits next to Christopher who sits next to Eddie and therefore on the opposite side of his sister and her boyfriend.

- Yes, they were probably amused by the meddling mom asking then „Are you boys single?“ in 3.11 but come on! They look at each other and smirk? For real? Hand over the script, Timbo!

- Also as mentioned before the fact that when Chim and Eddie talk about family and the 118 being the family they choose the camera is on Albert, Buck and Christopher, no one else is in the shot. And of course the song that is playing here, another song about home.

- The callback to Buck in 3.12 of Ana immediately guessing Eddie is short for Edmundo unlike Buck as well as Carla saying blue eyes (which Buck has) is also Subtext.

- Said it before but: the scene in 3.13 when they arrive at the hospital and Eddie asks Buck out to eat and then Buck changes his mind but Chimney runs off to call his girlfriend because he wants to have dinner so he can tell her he loves her like Eddie told him to do at the beginning of the episode is … interesting.

- I already explained why I think Shannon wasn’t in that many scenes in the video in 3.15 yet Buck was in most of them but it bears repeating. Also again it’s subtext that Buck is part of Eddie’s family and Buck is very important to Eddie and Eddie loves Buck.

- Also the question about the medal in 3.15 and the little boy at the end repeating the question, sorry, were we not supposed to think of Buck here, Tim???

- Also just in general 3.15 focuses very very heavily on Buck and Buck’s reaction - much like 3.18 later does with Eddie. All the non-Eddie scenes feature Buck and Buck freaking out about Eddie potentially dying and Buck making plans and being frantic and the driving force of hope cause homeboy cannot even for a second entertain any thoughts on Eddie’s passing.

- The rope metaphor in 3.15 / 3.16 is of course also subtext but I already explained that one and don’t have anything to add really.

- This one is a little bit of a stretch but I do think there is a reason Eddie was the first one to be taken out of the equation in 3.16 and because of his son and not a love interest.

- Also the pool playing scene in 3.16 there visually we see Eddie and Buck together in nearly all shots, there are two shots of Eddie without Buck in it but not a single one of Buck without Eddie in it and considering camera angles and actors literally being told were to stand it is deliberate that Buck is only seen with Eddie by his side here.

- I’m repeating a lot of things here but Buck refuses to say Abby’s name in 3.17 even though Bobby clearly knows who he is talking about.

- „No. He stopped waiting for me a long time ago.“ cuts to „Summer Camp?“ I mean sorry, what were we supposed to think here? Because this does imply he really did stop waiting because now he has Christopher and Eddie!

- Not to mention it sort of hammers home what I wrote before how Abby is dating a single father and Buck is sort of dating a single father.

- Also 3.18 puts a lot of focus in general on Eddie and his reaction to everything when say, Bobby, who actually knows Abby and was there for the relationship would have made more sense - unless they are pushing an agenda here!

The first person we have Abby interacting with at the traincrash is Eddie and then Buck joins them and the scene literally goes: Eddie *talking to Abby* > cut to Buck, coming closer > Buck: „Abby?“ > cut to both Abby and *Eddie* > Abby: „Buck?“ while the camera is still on her and Eddie > cut to just Eddie’s face having a realisation > cut to Buck

So sorry, why do we focus so much on Eddie here, Mrs. Lynch? Is there a particular reason, oh director, who art also directed 3.01 and which has also loads of Buddie subtext?

There is also Eddie coming to stand visually between Abby and Buck when Sam is loaded into the ambulance as if he is physically putting himself between them and then Buck running back toward the traincrash and Eddie following him after and all the shots of them and Christopher during the party together and once again having Bobby asking Buck if he is okay visually connected to Eddie, though in reverse this time because the scene goes from Eddie and Chris having fun to Buck and Bobby talking. (And should we talk about how this is the first time Buck actually answers the question because finally he has an answer or are we thinking about that right before sleep today when it’s easier to cry?)

- Also very interesting subtext is the fact that Buck and Eddie wear nearly the exact same colour and a similar cut pullover when Buck talks to Abby at the end and when Eddie says goodbye to Christopher and I mean, thematically both scenes are about saying good bye and letting someone go? But also it connects Buddie with each other and connects these scenes, which Idc, I probably wouldn’t have done without the clothes?

Not sold seperatly

- Also subtext / visual thing is the fact that Buddie is basically always with and next to each other at the firehouse and on calls (and before anyone says: well, they are partners, Hen and Chim aren’t as much), and that is a long list so I am just giving examples: in 2.05 they sit next to each other at the table while in 2.06 they sit next to each other on the couch and in 3.08 they sit next to each other at the table again and then we have 2.02 standing outside and 2.04 walking away from the scene together and Eddie handing Buck a weapon in 3.17 and walking toward the ambulance together in 3.13 and several other times, the point is there are a shit ton of scenes of them being right next to each other in case you thought that was a fanfic thing!

„The Buck lens“ / „The Eddie lens“

I’m pretty sure there is an actual technical term for what I am trying to describe here but basically there are several instances where we see Eddie the way Buck does, meaning while the scene shows us Eddie doing something the focus is on Buck watching this. Sort of POV but not quite I guess? Also the reverse is true as well, even if those scene aren’t as pronounced!

- Let’s talk about 2.01 once again as we have done for most of this meta and finally, finally look at Eddie’s first scene which we all know is sort of gay and the first time we see Ryan shirtless because Tim accidentally wrote a certain quota of shirtless scenes he needed to do into Ryan’s contract and he needed to get started on those right away.

Also please remember while we as well as the core four are watching Eddie get dressed „Watta man“ plays in the background, which, considering we are introduced to Eddie through Buck’s point of view might be the song playing in his head here? Anyways, back to the topic at hand and how we as the viewers don’t see Eddie until Buck turns around and sees him as well. Which is significant because several times through the conversation between Buck, Hen, Bobby and Chimney we see the locker room in the background so they could have filmed that differently.

Instead they had Chim, who stands off centre, noticing something while Buck banters with Bobby about how he will get to represent the 118 in the calendar, then the camera changes angle so we no longer stand between Bobby and Chimney but rather behind Buck, making him centre stage and putting a focus on his reaction to Eddie. In this scene we have Buck framed by two people commenting on Eddie’s attractiveness. Now we don’t get to see Eddie until we have gotten all reactions of the core four to him, with special attention to Buck, both in filming and text with everyone taking a jab at Buck before walking over to introduce themselves to Eddie which leaves Buck alone, watching.

(Now keep in mind this scene also has Hen basically say Eddie is so hot it transcends sexualities while „Whatta man“ plays as Buck slowly turns around and Idk, mate, that does seem shippy to me.)

- Another scene that focuses very heavily on Buck is when Eddie rushes and hugs Chris at the end of 2.03. In fact for most of the scene we see Buck in the car watching them.

- Also, the hospital scene in 2.04 and how once again we see Eddie interact with Chris while Eddie watches them because fuck knows why.

- Similar to the Buck lens we have 3.10 where Eddie talks to Hen about Chris while the two (or rather Eddie since he sits at the centre) watch Buck play with Chris and Danny. This is significant because Buck is also placed in the middle, putting him opposite Eddie and also making him the focus of the camera for most shots when the scene was about Christopher and Eddie feeling guilty. Huh, we say!

- Something similar happens in 3.11, which is the next episode several months removed when Eddie talks to Chimney about the 118 being their family and while this time Chris is the one sitting in the front, Buck once again is in the middle and also in focus in a scene shot from Eddie’s POV.

Other people reacting to them / commenting on them

Now, I am not sure if this is really Subtext but who knows where else it fits in? (This is a rhetorical question, only my opinion counts around here while I write!) So It goes here! And I think the title is self-explanatory enough.

- I’m a little on the fence on the Bobby looks because - no offence to Peter Krause - he doesn’t have that many facial expressions in general, but yeah, at the mechanics Buck watches Eddie and Bobby watches Buck.

- Our first real one of those scene is the truly savage tía Pepa who is a woman after my own heart because she says the mean shit to your face and the nice things behind your back because she loves you but she loves vibe checking egos more! And well, she is understandably confused by Buck’s being there at the hospital and asks Eddie who that is and why he is here and gives one of the best lines of the show by being so sarcastic, because oh, you work together? Damn, wouldn’t have guessed from the fact that both of you wear LAFD t-shirts! (I love her!)

- In the same episode Maddie comments on Buck’s boycrush on Eddie and while I am unsure whether that is supposed to make it sound less gay or it’s Maddie saying: Bro, you sound 12! but oh well! It’s a comment on them!

- I loath a little to include the elf in 2.10 because Tim has said that was an easter egg for Buddie shippers and a tongue in cheek thing but yeah.

- Also Bobby watches the whole „It’s a miracle“ exchange in 2.14 with that look.

- In 2.18 we get some text on the screen when they help instagram girl about how hot the both of them are and also how THEY should be dating which I’m putting into the same box as 2.10.

- The fact that Bobby shoves Eddie at Buck in 3.01, like sorry, why was it so relevant that this is the first hug?

- When Eddie / Ryan stared at Buck’s / Oliver’s ass in 3.04 we see Hen and Chimney grin about it.

- I know I have said myself that Maddie’s reaction in 3.08 was due to the fact that she just said: can ya’ll stop gossiping - and Chim and Buck were like: sure thing! and then started gossiping but still.

- There is Buddie flirting at the bowling alley in 3.13 and once again Bobby gives them the look and yeah.

- In 3.15 everyone seems very worried about Buck especially and they keep reassuring as if he were Eddie’s next of kin.

- Again a Bobby look I am unsure of but in 3.17 we see him giving them the look in the truck and yeah.

Other people’s heartache

Now, as I’ve said in the beginning, I didn’t wanna just include my perspective on Buddie, so I asked a few other people about this and while this isn’t a representative statistical number it’s still interesting, right?

(Also originally this Guide was organised by episode and I would have included the comments when the things came up but alas that didn’t work and I think I turned a little grey because of that)

@buckleysbabe:

When i first watched 9-1-1, I had no idea that Buddie existed (i hadn’t been on tumblr a lot at the time so I hadn’t seen gifs or anything) and when i started s2 I really thought they were just best friends, but then 2x10 and the ”you two have an adorable son” scene happened and Buck’s ”thank you” and the shy smile AND I WAS ON BOARD!! That was really the first moment, then I got the confirmation after 3x03 and the scene where Buck sees Eddie in the tsunami scenery, and then the whole Eddie saying theres nobody in this world....like in that moment I felt like they were seriously in love 😍❤️

About the 2x10: that scene has so many things. Like the water fountain in the back, Chris in the scene with them (like they are a family), then the elf saying what she said, Buck being for a second like ”huh?” and then you see the light bulb going on when he’s like ”ohhhhhhhh yeah” and then he says thank you 😍😍😍 saying HE IS CHRIS’S COPARENT. AND THEN THE SHY SMILE

@theleftboobgrabber

Right off the bat I thought they had chemistry but I think the entirety of 2×04 is when I genuinely started shipping it. Like.... the constant heart eyes, the support, Buck trying so hard to be there for Eddie and Eddie absolutely never questioning it, the look Buck gives Eddie at the fire house was absolute fire (when Bobby tells Eddie Buck asked for Chris to stay with them) like Eddie's like you did this for me??? And Buck has just this massive Big Buck Energy from where he's sitting like "get used to it" and I remember absolutely loosing my mind that Bobby got the hug and not Buck at the end of the scene like in what universe??? And yeah the rest of the episode is just the same but that feeling of 'that's the wrong man you're hugging' was the tipping point

@emotionalsupportfirefam

Okay so mine was kinda two moments?1) when Buck took Eddie to Chris' school after the earthquake and we see his reaction to Eddie's joy and relief as he holds Christopher and then spends the next episode trying to find ways to help Eddie with finding a suitable caregiver/ support for Chris and 2) the fact the took them whole of five minutes to go from 'rivals' to the 'dynamic duo' after the grenade call.

@evaneddie

Honestly? Literally every scene they have is romantically coded. The first scene of them, with Eddie being shirtless and us seeing it from Buck's perspective with „Whatta Man“ playing? That's subtext.

You can have my back any day? Yo.

The scene when the elf Blair(e) said they have an adorable son and Buck just said thank you instead of correcting her before he literally skipped away?

Eddie showing up at Buck's apartment and Buck not even questioning how he got in?

The way Buck is like a second father to Chris and protects him like one in the tsunami?

"THERE'S NOBODY IN THIS WORLD I TRUST WITH MY SON MORE THAN YOU"?! REALLY EDDIE? WHAT ABOUT LITERALLY ANY OF YOUR FAMILY? OR CARLA? Baby, that's love.

THE HALLOWEEN HUG?!

THE KITCHEN SCENE, THE WHOLE SEXUAL TENSION IN THAT SCENE?! BUCK'S HAND ON HIS BELT, THE GLANCES, "I'D STILL TAKE YOU", ON THE COUCH EDDIE LOOKS TO BUCK'S LAP, LIKE COME ON!

"You boys single?" *Looks at each other*

"This is Eddie's house, I'm not really a guest"

Buck's breakdown when he lost Eddie under 40 feet of mud. That was not the breakdown of losing a friend, that was the breakdown on losing someone you love. There's a meta I saw once literally just for this scene alone, the way Buck dug so desperately at the mud with his bare hands, the screams of heartbreak, the way he collapsed into Bobby, the pure dissociation as Bobby was giving instructions later on, Eddie's memories filled mostly with Christopher and Buck. Sure, the others were there, but, it was FILLED with Buck and Chris.

Then the ending scene of the season?! What was he trying to do with the necklaces? Thrusting his hips towards Eddie, hitting him in the face, then that soft touch on his face?

@adamngoodbuck

Hey! Nice question and for me really easy to answer. I started watching the show back in 2018 when it first aired but I was a casual viewer. Very casual. So casual I actually watched everything up to 2x10 and then I thought it was the season finale so I forgot about it. And then season 3 started. And nothing made sense. So I checked and welp, I had to catch up. And I did and something started brewing inside of me. I wasn't part of the fandom yet. And then. The THE SEARCHERS happened. And that scene. The there's nobody in this world I trust with my son more than you scene. My icon scene. And I was done. Hook, line and sinker.

@the-family-we-choose-118 

My main ones were all the big ones: the kitchen scene, the end of 3x03, the Christmas episode one where Buck is helping Danny and Chris make gingerbread houses and then plans a whole party for the firefam, Buck clawing at the ground in 3x15, Eddie interrupting Taylor Kelly when she came to the station to do the documentary in Dosed, the fact that Eddie was introduced from Buck's POV with „Whatta Man“, the entire earthquake episode where Buck is reassuring Eddie his kid is okay and then drives him to get his kid later on, and the scene where Buck introduces Eddie to Carla in (I'm pretty sure it's) the same episode where Maddie asks him if his boy crush on Eddie means he's over Abby (that was my main one). And I was fully convinced when Eddie walked in Buck's apartment in the beginning of S3 and ripped his blankets off him and was so sure he doesn't sleep naked/wouldn't have anybody over.

And the „official“ part of the guide is done but I do wanna say something else real quick which is:

You have just read about 20.000 words I painstakingly wrote over the course of several weeks and while I get that meta is even more harrowing to reblog than gifsets or fics because meta involves so much opinion and interpretation and what if you disagree with parts of it?

Well, again, I invested a lot of time in this and also: IF YOU DISAGREE TELL ME!!! TELL ME IN THE REBLOG OR IN THE TAGS!!! Because different to fics and gifsets meta is a dialog and I can’t have a dialog unless people talk to me! I’m not here to lecture you on right or wrong, I am here to tell you: okay, this is how the scene looks from my point of view, what do you say? So honestly, please consider liking and reblogging and tagging and maybe talking a little about it with me, because screaming into the void is so very boring

(And also in general: reblog reblog reblog! All these funny posts you see on buzzfeed and instagram screenshoted from tumblr? Half of them were made great by reblogs and all of them were noticed by these sites because of reblogs)

Anyways, before I (REALLY) let you go it would be hypocritical now to not talk about some people who inspired some of this (but ya’ll have to understand I cannot talk about everyone)!

I can however say these four especially helped me write this:

- @diggorypuff , who I have never talked to but whose posts about interesting parallels actually sort of got me into thinking deeper about this show: (X)

- @ingu, who fairly recently did a series of gifsets on Buddie and how Buck is framed as Eddie’s love interest which gave me life: (X)

- @matan4il, who is such an amazing friend and does the most concice and well thought out metas on Buddie without having to watch the show a million times like other people we shall not name have to (me, I am talking about me). Find her buddie metas here: (X) 

- And most importantly my girl, my babe, my love, @chimbuckleys who is the voice of reason between us and always lets me rant about stuff and was the sounding board for this and so much else I have written - I couldn’t do this without you! (ALSO I AM GOING TO BED NOW, BABE!!!)

AND DEAR READER, you made it! Now go have a blessed day and plant some trees because earth is dying and we with it!

#buddie #evan buckley #eddie diaz #buddie meta #eddie meta #buck meta #911 meta #911 #911 fox #textpost #meta #holy shit I made it but also I think this is actually quite literally too long to be posted at once and I cry????? #FUCK #my meta #the big buddie for dummies guide

[wxlfbites]

The Church of Satan

I can only imagine the amount of criticism and hate I'm going to get for this, so I just want to preface this post by saying that in 2015 I considered myself a LaVeyan Satanist for a while. I was a teenager and felt like what I was reading was exactly how I felt, it gave me a sense of justification for the views I had. I am not just some random, misinformed individual who only read anti-satanism propaganda. In fact, I've still actually never read anti-satanism propaganda. My opinions have been formed based exclusively on what I've read on the Church of Satan's own website. These are of course, my own opinions and people are allowed to disagree... I just think it might be something to think about if you're considering becoming a satanist.

THIS WILL BE AN EXTREMELY LONG POST

Firstly, I'm addressing the membership the Church of Satan is now implementing. ~ While the Church of Satan says that you do not need to become a member in order to consider yourself a satanist, it is clear that they encourage you to do so. It has registration and payment based memberships that allow you access to confidential information, rituals, and online chat groups you are otherwise not entitled to. Their website claims these memberships have always been in place, but I do not remember any such kind in 2015. ~ It is their policy that affiliated members are discouraged from exchanging member-exclusive information with non-members. They also express that if you are a non-member of the church, you should not expect members to keep up extended exchanges or promotion of your wares. Further, your membership is subject to rejection and retraction at their discretion and they openly state that when you apply for a membership, they gather information on you to ensure you are someone safe and trustworthy to allow in. ~ Whether or not it is intentional, they use guilt tactics in order to persuade people into becoming members. To quote some of these phrases on their own website: "Those who proudly carry our red cards identifying themselves as members have the strength and dedication to implement the tools traditionally associated with Satan". "Look to your other possessions and expenses (most people spend far more than this on general entertainment) and we’re certain you can do this if it means something to you to become a member." "We’ve discovered that most individuals can muster these funds if membership is something they truly desire." ~ They describe your membership card as a key that you must show and scan to other members to prove your affiliation. They make a few references to the underground secrecy that members may or may not choose to maintain, and so to protect their identities as members, these... calling cards if you will.. are used to discretely confirm ones membership in the Church. ~ They do not tell you where the money for your registration fee goes. In fact, they say: "That is up to the administration. It will be applied to whatever is most required at the time it is received. If you feel the need to know in more detail, then don’t join." Implying you don't have the right to know exactly where your money goes? ~ Their membership application includes inappropriate questions that no organization, religious or otherwise, should ever ask. These include: " Are you satisfied with your sex life? Describe your ideal of a physically attractive sex partner." "How many years would you like to live?" "In what organizations do you hold membership?" "Are you a smoker? If so, to what extent." "Do you drink alcoholic beverages? If so, to what extent? State preferences." " Secondly, how does satanism compare themselves to other religions and philosophies? ~ The Church of Satan declares themselves to be "a formidable threat to those who would halt progress in the name of spirituality and theism of any sort." "We are a group of dynamic individuals who stand forth as the ultimate underground alternative, the “Alien Elite.” ~ They state things like "Our members and officials will not serve as teachers nor as entertainers—we have neither the time nor the inclination.", "It is our policy not to spoon-feed information to students who are too lazy to do research." and "Your schedule is of no importance to us." so it's no surprise that the satanic texts they do not provide in full on their website, including the Satanic Bible, - which is there main text and one they highly encourage you to read - cost money. ~ They believe themselves to be the only form of satanism, stating: "People who believe in some Devilish supernatural being and worship him are Devil-worshippers, not Satanists.", "Anton LaVey was the first to define Satanism as a philosophy, and it is an atheist perspective." and “Theistic Satanism” is an oxymoronic term and thus absurd." ~ Statements like: "we stand in opposition to theist religions and their

inherent hypocrisy.", [regarding the word Shemhamforash] - "So, Satanists use it for traditional blasphemy’s sake.", [regarding someones question about their experiences with demons] - "Satanists do not believe in demons or other supernatural beings, nor do we believe in spells. Seek help from local mental health professionals to assist you to get over these delusions.", "We Satanists are all anthropologists to some degree and can find that not upsetting people who think in such simplistic and erroneous terms of “belief equals goodness and truthfulness” might be worthwhile to smooth the proceedings in which one is involved. Trying to teach them that they are mistaken in such a belief may not be worth one’s efforts." are pretty much self explanatory as to the lack of consideration satanism has for other religions as being true for others.

~ This statement: "Knowing this, if you choose to affiliate with any pseudo-Satanic or anti-Satanic groups, you may well find yourself disaffiliated from the Church of Satan. Forewarned is forearmed." might sound harmless at first glance, but this kind of reminds me of an isolation tactic where cults discourage their followers to read or engage with opposing or differing opinions because it might open their eyes to the truth of things?

Finally, here are some statements that I personally don't find are morally or ethically okay?

~ In terms of kids worrying about their parents approval the Church says: "Satanism teaches that, so long as you live with your parents, you are in “their lair” and must show them respect". Which... is literally the same shit abuse victims hear all the time..... (example "you live in their house, they're your parents and you should love and respect them no matter what")...

~ "There can be no more myth of “equality” for all—it only translates to “mediocrity” and supports the weak at the expense of the strong." is a statement I just .... wish I were making up at this point.

~"The emotional drive to “change the world” is a common stage of early adult development typically beginning around age 16 and lasting until around age 24. Usually, individuals who become aware as to how the world actually functions—rather than being lost in a fantasy wherein they will be some sort of savior figure—come to realize that idealism (such as changing the world) is less important than the principle of getting what you want for yourself.",

Also! Um.. they are fully aware and okay with people who uphold discriminatory political views....

To quote their website regarding politics: "Our members span an amazing political spectrum, which includes but is not limited to: Libertarians, Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, Reform Party members, Independents, Capitalists, Socialists, Communists, Stalinists, Leninists, Trotskyites, Maoists, Zionists, Monarchists, Fascists, Anarchists, and just about anything else you could possibly imagine."

And to justify this, they say: "Members who demand conformity from other members to their particular political fetish are welcomed to depart.”, "For a Satanist to expect, much less demand, consensus on any given issue, beyond basic advocacy of individual liberty within local laws, is an enterprise which is probably as masochistic as it is insane.", "Some naïve idealists seem to think that the Church of Satan as an organization risks irrelevancy if it does not become an advocate of certain political positions—usually their own pet issues which are assumed “must” be shared by other Satanists. This fear is based upon the assumption that the Church of Satan needs to change the world or risk “fading into obscurity.”

Again, all of this information comes directly from the Church of Satan website itself. It it not "propaganda". It comes from their own mouths. You're free to disagree with my interpretation and views of the above. But if you do agree, I'd love to know.

The things above make me uneasy. They give me huge cult vibes and are actually disappointing to read as someone who once considered themselves a satanist. As an omnistic pagan now, I do believe that all religions hold truths within them and can say that there are certain things within satanism I do agree with. But overall, I feel like calling satanism a religion is a stretch and should be joined with caution if it's something you are really interested in. I am only one person, I can't tell anyone what to do. But if you were considering becoming a satanist but hold values and views that the things in this post opposed or were opposite to, then maybe satanism isn't right for you. It's definitely not right for me.

I hope this post was educational at the very least. I hope that it might help people make a decision either way if they were interested in joining the Church.

#the polymorph chronicles #satanism #the church of satan #religion #satan #satanic #spirituality #philosophy #satanist #paganism #pagan #eclectic pagan #omnism #omnist

[feathersandblue]

Dean Winchester, Character Death, and Frodo’s Return to the Shire

This will be a LOOONG post that has been stuck in my head for a while in bits and pieces - about Dean’s death, what it was and what it wasn’t, and incidentally, the Lord of the Rings has found its way in here too.

It’s pretty clear that Dabb always meant for Dean to die.

And while I strongly disagree with that, on so many levels, I think it might have been more palatable if framed in a different way, and so I’ve been trying to figure out what the ending might have looked like in a world that wasn’t quite as shitty as ours. Still shitty, but marginally less so.

Dean is notoriously bad at letting bad things happen if he can prevent them. I find it difficult to believe that Dean would ever quit hunting entirely, and for as long as he kept hunting, the danger of dying would always be present. It’s not unrealistic at all for him to die on a routine hunt. Life is unpredictable; life as a hunter, even more so. I understand that the writers might want to make that point. And it might have been valid if – and that’s the real problem – Dean’s death hadn’t otherwise been devoid of meaning.

The thing about character death – any sort of character death – is that it needs to have purpose.

And there are different ways that it can have purpose, but it depends on what sort of character we’re talking about.

Minor, often unnamed characters – the redshirts in every narrative – die to illustrate injustice or to highlight evil. Their death is a catalyst or a consequence of the events as they unfold, part of the conflict the heros have to solve. An army led into battle by a tyrant. Refugees in a camp dying of malnutrition. Murder victims of a serial killer. In all these cases, death fuels the plot but has little meaning beyond that.

There are minor characters whose death both fuels the plot and gives the hero a more personal motive to act. Supernatural is full of these. Mary and Jessica burning at the ceiling; Charlie dumped in a bathtub. Minor characters can have their own arcs, but ultimately their deaths are only important for the impact they have on the main characters.

The death of a protagonist is markedly different. Protagonists need to have agency even in death to maintain their status.

Their death has to be the reflection of their character development up to that point but it also has to tell us something about them that we did not already know – show us how they make a final decision or draw a final conclusion that marks the end of an inner conflict – which is what all storytelling is about. Character death has to serve a purpose to have meaning, and for a protagonist, the purpose must be personal.

And If it fails to do that, then that’s either a sign that we’re no longer dealing with a protagonist, or that something weng very, very wrong in the writers’ room. There is no inherent value in tragedy. In storytelling, tragedy is justified when it achieves something, otherwise, it’s just capriciousness.

Buffy’s death at the end of season 5 of BTVS is a classic example for the death of a protagonist. Harry’s decision to go and face Voldemort in the forbidden forest, even though it doesn’t ultimately kill him, is another. When Sam jumps into the abyss in Swan Song, that is his heroic sacrifice, but if he’d permanently died in season 2, that would have been bizarre and nonsensical because it was entirely beyond his control – it did not reflect his decisions, gave him no agency, and reduced him from a protagonist to a side character. In that moment, his death was something that happened to Dean. It worked because his death didn’t stick – he regained his agency after resurrection. But as an ending to his hero’s journey, it would have been singularly unsatisfying.

Dean is our protagonist, and he has been for 15 seasons. What does his death tell us about him that we didn’t know – what decisions did he make, what inner struggle got resolved, what meaning did his death have for him, personally, and then, in extension, for us?

The problem is that the finale, as is so often the case in Supernatural, tells two stories at once.

Whe the episode starts, it appears that Dean moves on with his life just fine, a well-adjusted model citizen. He’s ready to get a job, seems to be moderately happy. He even has dog. The decision to keep hunting is his, and death just accidentally happens, which of course is not unrealistic in his line of work. On the forefront, his death is brought about by the fact that he exercises free will. It tells us that he is a hunter and will always be one, that he keeps protecting people because that’s just who he is.

None of that, however, is new. It is just more of the same. All of Dean’s decisions in the finale tell us nothing about him that we did not already know. He’s trying to move on from the death of the people closest to him, as he’s always done. He chooses the hamster wheel, as he has always done. He follows in his father’s footsteps, as he has always done.

As he gets impaled, he has no choices left to make. There is no agency in his death, no inner struggle. His death furthers neither his character development nor the plot. That Dean simply accepts his death is as unsurprising as the fact that his final moments are spent reassuring Sam and telling him that he has to keep fighting.

The conclusion? Dean ceases to be a protagonist.

He dies not as the hero of his story. His death just happens to him.

After Sam and Dean had presumably freed themselves from the constraints of Chuck’s narrative, the final episode should have emphasized their agency, their freedom of choice, through change. But in the end, it only led them both to making the same choices as always, the unsurprising ones. And even the choices that did indicate a change (like Dean’s job application) were not shown to bear fruits.

What meaning does free will have when it doesn’t change the outcome? All the finale does is tell a bleak story about humanity and how we are incapable of making meaningful, consequential changes in our lives.

It’s almost like Lucifer is talking to us all the way from the Endverse of 5.04: “Whatever you do, you will always end up here. Whatever choices you make, whatever details you alter, we will always end up – here.”

Devastating as that is, there is another interpretation of the finale that is arguably worse, a different reading strongly suggested by both text and subtext.

Dean, as mentioned before, is trying to move on with his life but ultimately fails. The situation is different from the way he behaved when he lost Cas and Mary in season 13 where he was outright suicidal – his desperation is more quiet but also more profound. He seems determined to honor Cas’ and Jack’s sacrifice. But determination is not enough. Dean only goes through the motions, and it shows. He clings to the dog in the morning; the dog sticks to him closely throughout the day as dogs tend to do when they feel that their owner is in distress, almost like a therapy dog. His room looks messy, he makes an attempt to fix it but then abandons it as it requires too muh effort. Ultimately, he can’t be bothered. There are alcohol bottles standing around, a sign that he’s drinking, though not as heavily as in the past. All the while, he sems very laid-back, presumably relaxed and at peace and coping well with the loss but also weirdly detached.

When Sam mentions Cas and Jack at the pie festival, he says, “Yeah, I’m thinking about them too. You know that pain’s not going to go away. Right? But if we don’t keep living, then all that … sacrifice is gonna be for nothing.”

He feels an obligation. And he’s trying. It’s just not working very well.

He barely reacts when Sams pies him in the face.

When impaled on the rebar, Dean actively prevents Sam from calling for help. He tells Sam not to bring him back. And in the end, he asks Sam to tell him it’s okay to go. Which isn’t something he would do if he was simply dying – it strongly indicates that he wants to be allowed to die.

Prompting the conclusion that Dean is giving up on life the first opportunity he gets, not even knowing whether he’ll end up in heaven.

In this reading, Dean does have a little bit of agency. He makes a decision, sort of. His death marks the resolution of an inner struggle: He gives up.

He dies as a protagonist.

In the worst way possible.

In all honesty, I can’t decide which interpretation I hate more.

But what could the writers have done differently, if Dean was meant to die all along?

Back when the SPN finale had freshly aired, I was describing it like this:

Imagine that the One Ring is destroyed. But Merry died in the battle and Pippin went missing and was never found again. Frodo and Sam return to the Shire; Pippin and Merry are mentioned once in passing. Upon their arrival, Frodo is attacked by Wormtongue and slowly bleeds out over the span of thirty pages. Sam marries someone else than Rosie; Rosie is never mentioned again. Somehow, both Frodo and Sam are teleported to Valinor, where we are told that the real fun begins.

At the time, I only used this as an example to illustrate what a mess the finale had been. But in the weeks that have passed since, then, I’ve started thinking about the LOTR comparison some more, and it got me thinking about Dean’s death in a different way.

And it has everything to do with the difference between running from and walking toward.

As mentioned before, it’s not unrealistic that Dean would die on a random hunt. Would the Dean Winchester we know ever stop hunting? Maybe. We might want him to. Then again, would be still be Dean Winchester if he did? We know that Dean can’t help but feel responsible. He is someone who is incapable of staying hands-off.

Dean, as we see him in the finale, is trying to honor Cas’s and Jack’s memory by living, although he’s not very good at it – not outright suicidal but worn-out. Exhausted. And still he makes the decisions to keep hunting because he can do nothing else.

When Frodo and Sam returned to the Shire in LOTR, they had earned their happy ending. But Frodo, who had carried such a heavy burden that he was permanently altered by it, could no longer find happiness in Middleearth, and ultimately decided to depart for Valinor along with Gandalf and Bilbo with the promise of later being reunited with Sam. The journey had changed both of them, but it had changed Frodo to a greater degree, his responsibility had been greater, the weight on his shoulders heavier.

And I started to wonder whether the intention had initially been to show Dean in much the same state – and to frame his death as a decision to move on, the same way that LOTR has Frodo move on to the West.

Imagine the following: Cas is pulled into the Empty. His happiness and love change the Empty; he merges with it or otherwise changes it so that it’s now a more demon-friendly environment. Everyone there is at peace. Cas, in whatever form, moves on to Heaven – or maybe his soul does as it’s now mostly human.

Dean goes on a hunt and dies. Jack, or some other entity, shows up where you would expect the curiously absent reaper in order to give him a choice. Learning that Cas is in Heaven, and knowing that he will never be able to stop hunting if he remains on earth, Dean makes the conscious decision to move on. For the first time, Dean prioritizes his own happiness over his perceived duty. His death is no longer suicide by proxy, and neither is its sole purpose to illustrate the inherent meaningless of free will by turning him into a hamster-by-choice. Instead, it becomes a decision because he’s given back agency. He resolves an inner conflict and there’s even a final bit of character development as he breaks the chain of mutual co-dependency that ties him to Sam and allows himself to be with Cas. He remains a protagonist throughout the end.

And because he acknowledges his love for Cas and decides to be with him, he no longer just runs from, he walks toward.

The parallels to The Lord of the Rings get even more obvious when you take Sam into the equation because much like Samwise, Sam remains on earth in order to have a life that, for him, still holds meaning and the chance of happiness – whereas Dean can no longer be happy on earth as long as Cas isn’t there.

To be completely clear: I’d still think that such an ending would suck because it puts too much emphasis on an afterlife, and it would still send the message that characters like Dean could only find peace in death, and unless some adjustments were made to Sam’s arc as well, the ending would still suck for him.

But seeing as SPN plays in a universe where an afterlife exists, I could probably learn to live with Dean’s death if it had any sort of meaning, for him, besides dying and waiting for Sam to arrive, if it allowed for that final bit of character development. If he got to choose.

While I’ll never be able to see the finale that we actually got as anything but a complete atrocity.

#spn #supernatural #meta #dean winchester #destiel

[phynali]

more spn discussions, just skip this post y’all

 @queerbluebird​ thanks so much for engaging with my post/reply! i really enjoyed reading your response and i have a long reply here.

i’m responding to your post/reply here rather than reblogging it because honestly that thread is - so long. so very long. 

so first - 

i agree there is a difference between entitlement and what i would call, not promise, but instead “narrative follow-through”. A story that completely lacks narrative follow-through does end up feeling disappointing, or frustrating, or rage-inducing, depending on what’s happened. to me there’s a fundamental difference between critiquing a story based on follow-through and bad storytelling (which your post aims to do), versus say, creating hashtag campaigns about a character being silenced because and spreading conspiracy theories about a bad dub (among other things honestly).

and also - queerbaiting totally sucks, we definitely do agree on that.

where we disagree, i think are these two core points:

i do not see the narrative build-up that demands a follow-through. i do not see supernatural as having built up to the story that many destiel shippers seem to think was there, and no one has ever been able to point out to me any actual textual reasons that do craft that narrative build-up  

i fundamentally do not believe that destiel was ever a queerbait. queerbait involves active intent on the part of creators to tease a ship or queer representation in order to draw in $ from queer audiences without ever making it canon, so as not to alienate straight audiences. so, refering to point 1., i do not see the canon text as having laid the groundwork for a queerbait and those romantic tropes, at least not at any point in the past 7 years. and beyond the canon, the writers and producers and jensen ackles all indicated dean was straight, and that they were not writing a romance. if anyone queerbaited the fans, it was misha collins who kept teasing the possibility, and personally i would argue that was irresponsible of him. but that’s a different discussion altogether and tends to piss people off when it’s framed as such, because misha means a lot to them and it hurts to see the man who validated their feelings get criticized for the manner in which he validated them. so i’m gonna leave that aside.

beyond that, I want to engage with some of your specific quotes:

Supernatural loves to say “wait for it.” And I don’t think it’s entitled to feel betrayed if an author uses their story to say “wait for it” in order to convince you to stick with their story and then delivers the opposite after you do.

May i ask, where was the “wait for it” with destiel? this ties in directly to the queerbaiting. i indicated in my post/reply that while i see it from cas, there’s been little to no hint of any reciprocation of feelings from dean, and if anything the past 7 or so years have driven the point home that it isn’t happening. i personally am not able to see the “Wait for it” and that was the point of my question. without the “Wait for it”, i also can’t see the queerbait. 

I asked for specifics and while i totally get not having the spoons, you provided a few:

(off the top of my head for Dean though, the mixtape, his response to Cas’ death at the end of 12, subsequent grief arc, and reaction to Cas’ return in the front half of 13 rank highly. His reaction to Lucifer’s prank call in 15x19 might rate, but maybe just because it’s so recent.)

not trying to be unkind here, but i quite genuinely don’t see any of these examples as framing cas and dean in a romantic light, or as hinting at a “what if”. the mixtape is like.... okay, maybe. i had read that as being symbolic of something else, but i can see wanting to read it from a shipping lens. (i don’t however think i’d read it as baiting or “what if” - it was quite textually not framed that way. shipping, 100%, but canon build-up, not for me).

for the other examples -- grieving for someone you consider family? and being happy when they come back? that’s not shippy to me. i mean - contrast the grief he showed over cas’s death compared to his grief over, say, mary? or, less extreme, charlie? and nothing compared to how off the rails he goes when sam is dead or he thinks sam is. so i -- i just can’t see those as creating a narrative that demands a follow-through. and when your friend who is dead calls your phone? of course you hop to the door - i don’t know what is romantic about that. sam would’ve hopped just as quick if “cass” had called his phone instead.

and look - i see what is fun to ship about all that. if i shipped it, i’d be happily collecting these moments with a smile and grinning to myself about how cute they are and much they mean. but shipping it vs. it being romantically framed in the canon are two fundamentally different things. shipping doesn’t imply narrative buy-in or deliberation from the creator.

moving on, you also spoke at length about 15x18:

15x18 made the sort of statement that drew back even people who did exactly what OP said they should do, turning off the TV years ago. It wasn’t a quiet “if you’re still watching, keep waiting,” so much as a shouted “hey we’re gonna do this thing, watch this!”

i guess destiel fans vs. those of us who don’t ship it really see this as fundamentally different. because you discuss that moment as one which requires follow-through, and say that if this were heteronormative m/f love declaration, there would be that expectation of follow-through. not necessarily reciprocity, but more - more conversation, more acknowledgment, more something.

(i mean - if there was more, but that more was “hey i love you too but only platonically, sorry man” would that be better?)

but no - i actually just... disagree with your point on that front. i can see why you feel the way you do and i acknowledge that it can be read as the start of a conversation. to me though -- and clearly, now that the finale is out, how the writers saw it -- that was actually the end of a conversation. the end of, like you pointed out, 12 years. a 12-year conversation that ends in a gorgeous declaration of love, and specifically how love isn’t about being together, it’s simply about being - it’s about the fact that you love someone, and that feeling alone is the most beautiful thing in existence.

to me, that declaration can only be written and interpreted as an ending.  a sacrifice, a declaration, and a goodbye. so - while i kind of expected seeing more people in episode 20 and realize that didn’t happen largely due to covid - i’m not disappointed we didn’t see cas, because that culmination of his narrative (and then knowing he was with jack, after, rebuilding the heaven that he rebelled against and finally completing his narrative circle by fixing all the problems with it alongside the good god he sought to find all along) is kind of perfect. 

and i genuinely don’t think if cas was in a female vessel this entire time that that would change. maybe some audience members would feel differently, but i think many of us would see it for the end it was nonetheless. there’s plenty of stories with m/f ships that are one-sided and that character sacrifices themselves for the person they love, so i don’t see why this would be any different (except the bury your gays issue, but that’s a whole other and very real conversation about media tropes).

moving on to the series finale.

As many people have pointed out in praise of 15x20, Sam is the absolute most important thing in Dean’s life, his priority above anything and everything… And yet there, at the actual end of the world, Dean ignores Sam’s call and instead cries over the loss of Castiel. Dean’s loss of Castiel plays in tandem with the loss of literally the whole world. But we’re not to take that as a promise that Castiel means more to this story, or to Dean, than a couple seconds of wistfulness after the dust settles?

I... yeah. i don’t see what this even is arguing. that dean taking a minute to himself to grieve his best friend, who just died in part because dean decided to go hunt down billie (who was literally dying anyway). he’s hurting. there’s nothing about this that’s a promise - it’s an end. it’s grief. it’s the horror of losing someone you care about, and the silence that comes after. it’s fundamentally human in it’s pain. and we, the audience, are invited to grieve with dean.

so I mean - of course cas means more to this story. of course he’s meant more than a few seconds of grief, after 12 years. but just because that’s the last time we see him on screen doesn’t mean we don’t value his story, and celebrate how it too came full circle.

You mention cas as a sort of avatar for a different potential ending for the brothers, and highlight him representing:

An ending where higher powers stop yanking them around and they get to actually live in the life they’ve built for themselves.

So while i never considered cas an avatar for that, i do think we all wanted the brothers to have their freedom. “finally free.” so we can agree on wanting that end. but we disagree on whether it was delivered, i guess? because i feel it was.

you also talk about what you and many other fans conceivably wanted a happier ending to look like. can i -- i’m going to be totally honest. i have not seen a single person who’s critiquing the end saying “i just wanted sam and dean to grow old hunting together with their dog until they retire together and die of old age.”

would that be satisfying to those who are mad about the end? i personally don’t think so, but maybe my opinion is being coloured by the most vitriolic fans i’ve seen. if sam and dean got to have the life they wanted free of chuck, and dean didn’t die, and they kept going (or retired and opened a bar together!). maybe sam still had a kid, but again because romance wasn’t the point, the wife wasn’t important and they left her blurry still so we could interpret ourselves if she was a wife or a co-parent or a surrogate or what. maybe dean has a kid too, with a similar question-mark-wife. maybe we get a few images of them having a holiday with jodie and the girls. and then getting to heaven together in old age, greeting bobby with a beer, and going for a drive.

would that be an end that wouldn’t cause fandom uproar? i would enjoy it, soft an slightly discordant as it would be to me. i prefer the ending we got, bittersweet and heartbreaking though it was, but i wouldn’t be taking to social media to yell about it if we got a softer epilogue, so to speak.

on the other hand... would that still not be enough, at least not for so many of the angry fans? i’m genuinely unsure. it seems to me that so much of the ire is about destiel itself, even if people are pretending it’s about more and other things than that. not everyone, but like, a big portion of them. which leads me to believe that nothing short of dean and cas at least interpretable as together is what they wanted. if every other single thing about the existing finale was the same except that cas was the one to greet dean instead of bobby, and even with the same basic dialogue, without discussing the confession, but they have a lingering smile, and dean leaves to drive and wait for sam with the promise he’ll see cas later - 

if everything else stayed the same except who greeted dean, i genuinely don’t believe i’d be seeing almost any critique of the finale on my dash. maybe i’m cynical, but that’s where i’m at.

which is part of why i really struggle to believe that people are engaging in good faith when they critique the finale. because i feel like if it offered them either a) everything they’re purportedly asking for but still no cas and zero hint of destiel, vs. b) every other thing they claim to hate stays the same except there’s a wink and nod to destiel - i believe they would take the wink and nod. 

   On to some other things you raised:

But how can you know to walk away from a tragedy if the tragedy says “the end won’t be a tragedy, keep watching” right up until it ends in tragedy?

Oh i Get this. I hate thinking i’m consuming fun media only for it to rip my heart out at the end. i’ve literally - well, i’ve had a very unpleasant and distressing experience of this, actually. so i get it. also the opposite: i sometimes feel disappointed when i’m consuming media that is gripping and intense and painful, but then the end is too easy, too soft and happy?

BUT - supernatural never pretended it would have a happy end? the end was so. much. happier. than i ever expected. the Swan Song end was going to have Sam in hell being tortured by lucifer for eternity. according to something i read which i am fundamentally too lazy to link because who knows if it would have turned out this way but -- kripke was apparently going to have Dean jump in the cage with him at that end, if the series ended on S5? the ‘horror’ ending. completely devastating sacrifice for mankind (sam), and completely devastating sacrifice for his brother (dean). just -- oof. even if that wasn’t the plan and the series would’ve ended as the episode did - sam was still in the cage and cas was off waging war in heaven and dean was living every day knowing he was alive and his brother was being tortured.

i’m sorry if you thought you were watching a happier show. i know how much that hurts. that doesn’t mean the story was actually that happy though. sometimes, it’s on us as consumers to acknowledge we were misreading the media. i’ve had to do this. it’s hard, it hurts, but it helps you consume things healthier. i’ve had to do this growing recently, and i’m better off for it.

regarding the specific manner of dean’s death - that’s really not what my post was about and i’m not gonna address it here. i’ve talked about it elsewhere and so have others, and @lovetincture‘s original post spelled it out beautifully, in how human it was. i have feelings on how and why i loved dean’s death, and why it was the absolute opposite of what Chuck’s ending was and what he wanted (no blaze of glory), but i’ll leave those for another time.

They cast aside all the relationships they’ve built. [...] They lost/walked away from the life and home they built in the bunker. Dean got a season 1 death. Sam got a season 1 life.

I feel that there is a very huge difference between regression and progression when it comes to cyclical storytelling. And that difference seems to be missing from the ongoing discussions i’ve seen about this in fandom.

Coming full circle to season 1 does not at all mean that the development is ‘undone’ or that the story has regressed or that anything has been lost or destroyed. It can mean that, if the storyteller doesn’t know what the hell they’re doing, but in this case i don’t (personally) feel it’s a fair critique.

Dean’s death might parallel his s1 not-quite death from Faith, but the s15 result of that death is night and day. Dean is no longer alone. Dean does not go up to a lonely heaven filled with bittersweet memories, where even his canonical soulmate and him have wide gulfs between the memories they fill their shared heaven with. Dean dies a hunter, but he dies a hunter who literally saved earth and changed heaven and gets to spend eternity with his brother, side-by-side and together without all the pain and miscommunication, and he gets to see his family and loved ones too. he died having literally made the world so much better.

even without that though?

his story comes full circle, but dean’s character development isn’t about his death, it’s about the fact that in the first several seasons dean could hardly admit he cared without acting like his teeth were being pulled. he was too afraid of abandonment to ask for someone to be by his side. he was too afraid of rejection to let anyone in. and in the end? he asks sam to stay. he tells him that he loves him. he pours his heart out and says all the things that 15 years ago were stoppered in his throat, words trying and failing to claw their way free but his hurt and fears were too deep.

dean is free.

the point of dean’s story coming full circle to season 1 parallels was specifically to highlight this incredible development, not to undermine it. he is different. he is free. 

god it makes me tear up just thinking about how happy i am for him despite how gutted i was by that scene??

(i could write a similar analysis for sam, about how he left for stanford to escape his life and how his finale life montage bits were the opposite of that, but honestly this post is long enough already).

Destiel is loosely a part of that promise in the sense that Castiel is a part of that promise. The symbol of free will

You make a super interesting argument about Cas being a symbol of free will. I don’t have much to say about it, because I’m gonna mull it over, because I think it’s kinda cool and I’ve never thought about it.

That’s - all i’ve got. thanks again for engaging. i’m happy to continue the convo if you have questions or want to reblog/reply 

(though my followers might hate me omg, i’ve been spamming long spn meta posts for weeks now, it’s just been so confronting to see the ongoing fan reaction on twitter and how divided it is...)

#spn meta #supernatural #supernatural meta #spn #fandom discussions #uhhh what do y'all want me to tag this #it's not wank? #it's an open discussion which i like a lot #hmmm #discourse #i'll just go with that #destiel #kind of #this won't show up in the ship tag because that's not in the first 5 tags so i'm safe i hope #don't wanna be a dick and put this in the ship tag #long post #long post for ts #sorry if there are typos it is almost midnight and i am sleepy