but if "911, what's your fantasy?" is buck spending the episode picturing how him and eddie would be as a couple (after potentially a almost kiss, after the reveal of the PoSiBiLLitiES) and the future they might have, pondering what may change if they take that step, or what if it doesn't change at all, then what does that mean yk???? does he believe in himself enough to believe he deserves it? that he is not gonna wreck it? be too much, too loud, too selfish? can he live with himself if he is the one to drive eddie away?
intwining his life with the diaz boys together with his fantasy and dream of a family, of stability, of that Special Connection - of what he's always wanted - with the realization that maybe, MAYBE, that dream is what they have had All Along.
This thing that they've Made. That they have Built.
WHAT THEN
14 notes
·
View notes
I actually would consider Lysithea as Houses! Claude's other best friend rather than Lorenz just like I wouldn't say Ferdinand is Edelgard's other best friend(I'd say it's Dorothea tbh). Lorenz inherently splits on Claude in most Houses! timelines unlike Lysithea & Claude's A support with Lysithea is Claude expressing that Lysithea is very uniquely dear to him whereas with Lorenz it's more about mutual respect. There's stronger feelings at least from Claude to Lysithea versus Claude to Lorenz. What do you think
I think that each character in the Deer in uniquely close to Claude in their own way. I don't think best friend is the best way to have described Lorenz's relationship to Claude, but it's hard to come up with another descriptor that describes their closeness without putting rank into play.
I mentioned it before, but when Claude faces down Dimitri in Three Hopes he takes Hilda and Lorenz to do so, which to me indicates that Claude relies upon him greatly. Each house has sort of a "right and left hand man" kind of deal with the retainer and a rival? Hubert and Ferdinand and Dedue and Felix, being what comes to mind for me. It's different for Claude, purposefully, because Hilda is a retainer in name only and again more of a friend (not to say that Dedue and Hubert are not their Lord's friend, they very much are, but that for them "retainer" is an actual role with duties while Hilda's just prevents recruitment in all routes) and Lorenz's rivalry with Claude ends up with them being equals.
When you say "split" I assume you mean endings and not recruitment? I think that Lorenz and Claude build up that respect partially because of the mutual fondness they develop for each other during Three Houses. Their A support shows off the high opinion they have of each other; the way Lorenz is able to be critical in good faith and fondness while Claude is able to be trusting and open. The whole conflict between them initially was Claude appearing out of nowhere to take the reigns of the Alliance, and the A support shows just how far they've come--that while Lorenz would not hesitate to step up to the plate, he refuses to let Claude disappear or die on him so that they can shape the future together.
Even though their A support ends up with them physically separate from each other, the fact that they're both strong leaders meeting on equal grounds to shape the future they both want.
I think the relationship between Claude and Lorenz and Claude and Lysithea is very different, and thus hard to compare. On the surface, it seems similar; they both have fond antagonism and worry in their supports, but politics and dreams of the future really define Claude and Lorenz's support chain in a way it doesn't for him and Lysithea.
Actually, I think the most interesting thing about that support chain is the fact that Claude never tries to sus out Lysithea's secrets. At least three other support chains with Lysithea involve heavy discussion of her two crests (Lindhardt comes to mind, as well as Edelgard), but Claude, who's entire support chain with Marianne centers around her secrets (and eventually apologizing by revealing one of his own), isn't particularly interested in what she's hiding.
(Although, and not to tangent--Marianne's secret and Claude's own are much more similar in that if they get out they would both fear for harm coming to their person's. Although Marianne's makes her feel like a monster and Claude's does not even though other people might want him to be.)
I think Claude and Lysithea do have a very close relationship! I think Lystithea is uniquely dear to him, but I think all the Deer are. Lysithea definitely holds a special place in his heart (and in my soul I think any child of his with a Fodlan name would probably be named after her), but I don't think there's much to get comparing her relationship with him to Lorenz? Even putting their support chains aside.
Lysithea is a character who very much believes she is going to die young, and is desperately trying to wrap up her affairs before she does so. Despite this, it doesn't really have a baring on her relationship with Claude aside from the fact that it's her unseen motivation to work herself so hard.
I will say, their A support ending is adorable and super romantic. I think Claude abandoning his post for her says a lot about their relationship--he's not entrusting his dream to her, but rather taking it out of his own hands in order to ensure that she will be apart of the future he envisions. Insane. I love love.
All of Claude's paired endings involve him working with the person he loves to achieve his dream. While some are comparable (while I don't ship them, I think Hilda working hard to be good at diplomacy so that she could help Claude improve relations between Almyra and Fodlan is absolutely adorable) in their intensity, I think Lorenz and Lysithea's actually really are not. Because, really, while Claude is trusting an unknown family member to his throne in Almyra when he abdicates to be with Lysithea, who is he trusting Fodlan to but Byleth and Lorenz (and all their other friends of course).
Again, as I've said before, it's hard to compare some of the relationships (particularly romantic ones) in three houses purely based on the fact that a big feature of this game is that every character needs to be able to end up with Byleth or another one of their friends
It's really hard to discern where exactly the relationships between Lysithea and Claude and Lorenz and Claude differ in closeness, but I think I've come to this conclusion:
Lorenz is Claude's other "best friend" in the Deer, not because he's closer to Lorenz then anyone else, but because Lorenz is the one meant to fill the rival role of left-hand man, in the way Ferdinand does for Edelgard.
I agree with you, Lysithea and Claude are very close in a way that differs from their relationships with other people. I just don't think that Lysthiea fills the narrative role that Lorenz does.
(I do think Claude names a kid of his after her, if you don't chose their ending.)
2 notes
·
View notes
i don't talk about this all that often, but it's damn miserable having to live with a special needs kid who isn't getting the necessary means of support knowing damn well that you can't do anything about it. it's frustrating, it's hard, it's messing up the entire family, and you have to suck it up if you want to do anything in life
i mean, i was forced to be a third parent since i was like ten, and i don't mind it as much as some people in my place would, but i can't replace that kid's deadbeat father or neurotic mother.
how many times have i bent over backwards trying to help or introduce new hobbies only to get left midway through without even an acknowledgement that we did something fun and meaningful together? it pains me because i do love spending time with kids but i have to constantly flipflop between being a cool older brother that i want to be and an authority figure that i have to be when push comes to shove (which is almost daily at this point). and god, i don't even want to think about how often i'm forced to mediate between family members screaming and hurling insults at each other
this has no great grandiose point. there is likely an ideal world in which my father stops beeing an asshole, my youngest sibling receives the necessary professional help, my mother stops trying to compete for having the world's biggest martyr complex and my sister stops wailing about being neglected to me every single day, but this isn't that kind of a world. i'm probably an asshole for thinking like this, but frankly, everyone in the house is always taking everything too personally, and always reacting too emotionally, and it's only getting worse with years
1 note
·
View note
not totally sure what this says (idk exactly what it's implying), but if it says what I think it says, I'm gonna be 100% real with you- if I don't like something I'm not doing ANYTHING I will leave it behind and never look back responses take up too much energy even to decide if my keysmash looks weird
and I'm gonna be 100% real with you in return, likes mean absolutely nothing to an author on tumblr. does it mean you read it and liked it? does it just mean you read it and don't want to read it again should you come across it later? does it mean you're saving it for later? fuck if I know. with all due respect I really can't help but laugh when you say it "takes too much energy" to keysmash?? if it really is such an exhausting ordeal you can also just leave a heart emoji and i guarantee any writer's day will be made. I really do not mean to sound haughty when I say this but we have been over this already time and time again and it's straight up not fun for content creators to post anything on this website, because we don't connect with anybody. by all means, continue liking pieces instead of engaging with them in a way that matters - you are the sole master of your tumblr experience and I could never be the boss of you. just don't be surprised when your favorite artists pack up and leave.
6 notes
·
View notes
While I'm writing things that I've been intending to write for a while... one of the things that I think that a lot of people who haven't been involved in like... banking or corporate shenaniganry miss about why our economy is its current flavor of total fuckery is the concept of "fiduciary duty to shareholders."
"Why does every corporation pursue endless growth?" Fiduciary duty to shareholders.
"Why do corporations treat workers the way they do?" Fiduciary duty to shareholders.
"Why do corporations make such bass-ackwards decisions about what's 'good for' the company?" Fiduciary duty to shareholders.
The legal purpose of a corporation with shareholders -- its only true purpose -- is the generation of revenue/returns for shareholders. Period. That's it. Anything else it does is secondary to that. Sustainability of business, treatment of workers, sustainability and quality of product, those things are functionally and legally second to generating revenue for shareholders. Again, period, end of story. There is no other function of a corporation, and all of its extensive legal privileges exist to allow it to do that.
"But Spider," you might say, "that sounds like corporations only exist in current business in order to extract as much money and value as possible from the people actually doing the work and transfer it up to the people who aren't actually doing the work!"
Yes. You are correct. Thank you for coming with me to that realization. You are incredibly smart and also attractive.
You might also say, "but Spider, is this a legal obligation? Could those running a company be held legally responsible for failing their obligations if they prioritize sustainability or quality of product or care of workers above returns for shareholders?"
Yes! They absolutely can! Isn't that terrifying? Also you look great today, you're terribly clever for thinking about these things. The board and officers of a corporation can be held legally responsible to varying degrees for failing to maximize shareholder value.
And that, my friends, is why corporations do things that don't seem to make any fucking sense, and why 'continuous growth' is valued above literally anything else: because it fucking has to be.
If you're thinking that this doesn't sound like a sustainable economic model, you're not alone. People who are much smarter than both of us, and probably nearly as attractive, have written a proposal for how to change corporate law in order to create a more sensible and sustainable economy. This is one of several proposals, and while I don't agree with all of this stuff, I think that reading it will really help people as a springboard to understanding exactly why our economy is as fucked up as it is, and why just saying 'well then don't pursue eternal growth' isn't going to work -- because right now it legally can't. We'd need to change -- and we can change -- the laws around corporate governance.
This concept of 'shareholder primacy' and the fiduciary duty to shareholders is one I had to learn when I was getting my securities licenses, and every time I see people confusedly asking why corporations try to grow grow grow in a way that only makes sense if you're a tumor, I sigh and think, 'yeah, fiduciary duty to shareholders.'
(And this is why Emet and I have refused to seek investors for NK -- we might become beholden to make decisions which maximize investor return, and that would get in the way of being able to fully support our people and our values and say the things we started this company to say.)
Anyway, you should read up on these concepts if you're not familiar. It's pretty eye-opening.
18K notes
·
View notes