here's the thing about matthias: he isn't the honorable, reformed hero some of the fandom seems to see him as.
yes, he was raised by a tight-knit family of comrade soldiers and decides to betray them in the end. of course that took incredible strength. i don't deny that. but we also need to recognize that the drüskelle are not just some rogue cult. they are a core part of the fjerdan government, who is trying to wipe out the grisha because they are seen as dangerous. that's literally just genocide. however indoctrinated someone is, this is something that is evil from every angle, even if the character can't or won't see it.
and look, i love a good redemption arc, but matthias is such a passive actor in his. he falls in love with nina against his will. she changes his attitudes toward grisha because she's beautiful and kind so all grisha can't be bad, right? this a classic example of the trope of separating the "good ones" from the rest, where you cherry-pick specific individuals to point to as exceptions to a group's nature, which is still implied to be evil. you have to do a lot more than fall in love to truly unearth and address the roots of bigotry.
tbh, this is my biggest critique of the books as a whole. i loathe the "love conquers all" trope that pairs together a character from the oppressed group and one from the oppressors, letting the one show the other through the power of love that being bigoted is not nice. it puts all the responsibility on the former to prove their humanity, and gives all the credit to the latter's ability to be persuaded to recognize it. and then it inevitably leads to forgiveness, because the character has "earned" it by changing their views, once again making the victim seem like the villain if they don't absolve the oppressor of their past "mistakes". also, it's incredibly unrealistic for someone to fall in love with a person who actively hates them and considers them sub-human. in real life, people have to work on their bigotry before that happens, not use the relationship as a plot device for character development.
i think the idea of writing a character like matthias is neat. i think portraying someone's struggle to throw off the suffocating, hateful dogma they've been fed all their life is a story we need more of. i think personal growth of this variety should be celebrated, because otherwise people would never change. but i don't think the people, fictional or real, get to do this without facing profound consequences. it is not enough to feel sorry. it is not enough to apologize. it is definitely not enough to fall in love. and i think writing that lets people off the hook like this grossly oversimplifies power and oppression, and ends up being a feel-good way to romanticize people who cause a lot of harm.
a last note: my opinion is 100% influenced by my being bipoc. matthias is a classic aryan supremacist, even if being aryan isn't the thing he's being supremacist about. my gut reaction to that type of character is always going to be mistrust, both because people in real life have given me reason to be mistrustful and because characters like these are often written in a way that makes you sympathize with oppressors. i don't think matthias earns that trust, and i don't see why i owe him my affection as a reader.
17 notes
·
View notes
So, I just know all of Tumblr was wondering, "hey, you remember that really weird ZoLaw fan with the annoyingly overly stylized post? I wonder if she's seen this and if she has any theories or thoughts, an observation or two?"
Well, allow me to set your wandering mind at ease, fictional Tumblr fan. The answer is: No. No, I really don't.
I have like three hundred.
[I also spent time just trying to track down as many translations as possible. Is Tera A Criminal's Daughter or The Daughter Of Thieving Bandits! These are CLEARLY separate things and can ENTIRELY change how her utter nonpresence in Zoro's life shaped him! Though I can take comfort in knowing that, regardless of what kind of crimes her father was committing they were more important than anything his daughter ever did in her entire life.]
And, hey, as might as well jump right into that whole mess.
1. Wait, Zoro's mom is dead? Thank goodness, I was worried Oda forgot one!
(AKA: Stop. Murdering. Moms.)
I'll go first, I don't mind saying when I was wrong. True, in the past I may have suggested that the vast majority of female characters in One Piece come off as ever so slightly, "leaning into sexist tropes with unadulterated joy; it's the misogynistic tropes equivalent of a child running naked through a grocery store. It's right there, everyone sees it, yet people shut up and continue shopping in part because, well, these days you just expect most people to cover that junk! What would you even say? And if you DO speak up and call out the inappropriate, be prepared for blank stares and tantrums; but THEY don't mind! THEY don't think it's wrong! You're just being mean!"
More or less a direct quote.
However, I see now that I rushed to judgement and the reality of the situation is far more nuanced. With that in mind, I was just wondering if someone could help answer some of the questions I have.
Like: Why does Oda believe that it's illegal for (maternal) female characters to survive other character's backstories?
More importantly, why hasn't someone just reached out to explain the misconception!? It can't be that difficult. If nothing else, just have a lawyer or judge or other expert in censorship on hand. Or is the one of those cases where back in highschool his friends made something up and then kept pretending it was real to see if he'd believe you and not only did he fall for it, it took over 20 years before he learned that, what, no that's not illegal. That would be crazy if it were an actual law. Cause you know, after the first 10 years I think yeah you have to just lean into it. Pretend it's a creative decision on your part and definitely not because you were terrified of being sentenced to a slow and humiliating public death.
Just to be clear that's definitely what's up, right? I mean, I'm struggling to think of another reason....able excuse why a story that I really enjoy keeps playing the same old sexist tropes cards again and again to the point of absurdity. It would just help if I had a valid excus- explanation. I almost mistyped the word explanation.
....
....
So I imagine it went like.
"That's the third mangaka they've had to Publically Execute this week!"
"They've started taking this law way more serious lately."
"This one really deserved it though! I heard his main character has a mother in her late forties!"
"That does seem old to have your first child."
"No, he's the middle of three and 22 years old. The story even has flashbacks of defining moments in his childhood and never once did she try to sacrifice herself for him, get murdered by his enemies, or die in meaningless unrelated accidents."
"Damn, that's cold to be there for all the protagonist core moments and not die and help him develop and grow a character? They must have a very antagonistic relationship. Is she actually the villain."
"Not that we know, and when they asked about this being a possible plot twist since - obviously if she's evil no laws are being broken."
"Well, of course, that's the whole reason Statue 2-dash-57 exists; if creators can show they have consistently been building up to a surprise twist then the female character in question can continue to live so long as she continues to be unrepentant and unlikable until the resolution of her arch by the protagonist."
"That's the thing! Under oath not only did man present no evidence to support her identity as a secret villain, he went on the record stating he wanted to depict their relationship as one of a normal modern 20 year old and his mother."
"That can't be true! What publishing company would even print that!?"
"It gets worse. I told you he was a middle child? Well, according to those who've read the actual manga, his younger sister was really sick as a child."
"Oh, well, at least-"
"It was just a fish allergy. She's perfectly fine."
"Sometimes I feel this law is unnecessarily harsh but.... Then you hear stories like that, and you realize that some people really are monsters."
49 notes
·
View notes
Plz explain then the travesty that is love and thunder
A trainwreck directed by an egotistical six-year-old in a leech of a man's body who thinks he's a screenwriter and still plays pretend with his uwu self-insert OC.
.... real talk, though, in short:
The real travesty of Love and Thunder is that Thor is already made of love and thunder, and simultaneously Jane is the love to his thunder, and the MCU, through taika wai-feck-off, decided he can be neither of those things, and have no nice things. Thor is the most tragic character in the ENTIRETY of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and yes, I do think more tragic than Wanda.
He has lost :
his entire home planet
his people
his entire family of four (no hela does not count he was not connected to her and should have been odin's sister)
before which he lost his brother (his platonic soulmate, to boot) a total of 3 times emotionally, two of those physically
he lost his ENTIRE friend group because his half-sister murdered Volstagg, Hogun and Faendral; he never reconnected with Sif
his only good mentor/parental figure (heimdal) was stabbed through the heart in front of him
he lost his dignity, his crown, his birthright (voluntarily and otherwise)
he lost his self-worth, his sense of direction (bc the writers legitimately thought his arc was about stepping down from the crown instead of making it his own and growing into it in his own way, by his own merits, at his own pace and gave it to some literally no-name side character that showed up for one movie and never respected thor in the first place to even earn his title from him smh)
and taika's idea of rectifying any of this .... is to give him some random child he doesn't know, that he doesn't care for, and manipulate him into taking her under his wing not because of the kindness and limitless love of his own heart even after shutting himself down post!endgame, but because jane asked him to as her dying wish — and then say that THAT is his happy ending.
Tell me why Thor, the longest standing of the Big Three, the king of the stars, the hero who is by all respects the embodiment of love, gets no companionship, no friends, no home, no place to belong, when Tony got a hero's send off and Steve got to be with an alt!dimension Peggy.
13 notes
·
View notes