no by all means keep judging cartoon villains solely by if they get redeemed in the end. i know some of us like to talk about other stuff like characterization or entertainment value or nuance as something that makes a good villain. but i think the only thing that actually matters is if the villain ends up on good terms with the protagonist at the end. all the Good TM cartoons with Good TM creators make the villains die a Horrible Death for being Abusers or whatever. and all the Bad TM cartoons with Bad TM creators Forgive Fascists by not making them get publicly executed by the 14 year old protagonist in front of the 8 year old target demographic.
i mean im so glad that more cartoons nowadays are subverting the psyop to support fascists that a few queer artists and queer shows definitely invented in 2017. there are so many popular cartoons doing that. it's almost like there are more properties killing their villains now and in the past than there ever were of properties that didn't do this. and it's almost like whether the villain gets redeemed at the end is more about the context of the story and its themes leading up to a narratively sound decision.
but you know. a few queer shows made by trans ppl were popular and they didn't kill their fascists and even had the gall to make them nuanced while also looking into the harm they did. guess it's trendy to forgive your abusers now because like two cartoons said so. out of like 40 other similarly high profile works that just straight up hit their villains with a bus or smth. by all means. keep heaping praise onto that one show about how they "let their villain just be evil" instead of talking about anything more interesting. that's so subversive, everyone's doing it!
24 notes
·
View notes
People were asking for more book content, so here are my (spoilery!) and complex thoughts on Hell Bent!
...
First of all, I had a lot of fun reading this book. When rating it, I briefly considered giving it only like 3.5 stars. Then I was like: Hey, I had a great time overall, so it deserves 4 stars for sure.
So the first positive is that it was entertaining. The second big positive for me is still Alex's character. To me, she is one of the most interesting MCs I've encountered in a while. I realised that she is somewhat similar to my MC in my current WIP (though I doubt my character was truly inspired by her because I had read Ninth House in 2018 and didn't start planning my novel until June 2022, so I don't think there was much of a direct influence). I was fascinated to find out more about her backstory.
Some moments, just like in Ninth House, were truly heartbreaking, particularly the moment where she thought she had found Hellie again. Also the recurring theme of how it should have been Hellie who made it out and Alex who died. Oof. Loved that.
Moments between Alex and her mum were also really well written and impactful.
But now on to the things I didn't like. For one, the fact that getting to hell took up so many pages only for the reader to find out that Alex could have easily done it on, like, the first page. That was... annoying.
A big disappointment to me were the scenes of getting into and being in hell. Having just reread Ninth House, I was expecting something super emotional here. Also I believe Dawes mentioned they would have to be buried alive? I was intrigued, was looking forward to a terrifying description of what that feels like. And I feel cheated because I don't believe I got that? Then being in hell... I was imagining more emotion, like the characters reliving the absolute worst they have been through? (Though the short stories about the murders were great, especially Tripp's!)
My perhaps biggest issue were the unclear stakes but that's something that almost always annoys me in fantasy. Internal bleeding that almost killed you? Seems pretty serious. But wait, what's that, you can bathe in goat's milk (?) and be instantly better? Convenient. Especially when considering that this cure-all had never been mentioned before??
So yeah, to me it feels like this constant moving of the goal posts or something? The characters badly need X. Oh, wait, no, they can replace it with Y instead. X is deadly! Oh, but not if you have Y, don't worry.
I just hate that. In addition to that: The magic in general felt a bit... ridiculous to me at times? I want to say... childish? Magic potions and so on? I don't know, it's just not for me. Seems a bit silly, if you know what I mean. My biggest gripe here was Tripp at the end. That felt ridiculous and honestly so YA to me? Yeah. Not a fan of that particular twist.
People's emotions (for example Mercy's) weren't always realistic to me. If there was a chance I could die doing ANYTHING I would be right out of there. And I feel like that'd be the natural reaction. I would NOT willingly go to hell for probably anybody. So I personally would have preferred if Turner and Tripp had been coerced into it.
Two minor things: This second book, to me, was missing the murder mystery vibes of the first one. And I don't get why everyone is so obsessed with Darlington. (There, I said it. Sue me.)
And finally: I LOVED the theme of Alex being a survivor and as a result a bit of a shitty person. But I didn't like the fact that it was spelled out like that and repeated so many times. Amazing character trait and amazing theme, but please be more subtle about it.
As you can probably see, fantasy truly isn't my genre (13-year-old me is weeping; it used to be my fave). Alex is a great character and Leigh Bardugo a fantastic writer, though! For me personally, I believe that if these books were simply about Alex trying to make it at Yale given her past - and perhaps becoming involved in some sort of solidly plotted murder mystery - they would be among my absolute faves. But alas... vampires, half-demons and wheelwalkers. ..
9 notes
·
View notes