#not that this necessarily happens but for those who don't want to see any theories too | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

sugar-grigri · 2 months

Text

Have you seen Fami's right ear ? Because I haven't.

The game of interpretation in reverse, or focusing on what seems to be avoided by the chapter, not shown, works! and even if it doesn't work, it's still fun and leads to wild theories, which I love to imagine. And this post is no exception to that rule.

We had chapter 155 where we interpreted backwards to find answers to Denji and Nayuta's existential crises.

We also interpreted backwards to better understand the inconsistencies in Yoshida's behavior and the implications for chapter 156.

In my opinion, chapter 157 is no exception to this rule. Focusing on what the author refuses to show in order to find the answers fits in well with a mangaka fascinated by cinema.

Not convinced? Chapter 156 ended on Asa's legs, like a superhero ready to take on the big bad alone. The next chapter directly contradicts what it had already demonstrated. But why? Because you shouldn't trust either the author or the way the characters present themselves to you. That's what this whole chapter is about.

What matters to you may not necessarily matter to the characters. Our focus on the first page would be on Asa's missing arm. Yet she brushes it aside, as if she were dismissing our concerns with a wave of the hand: what's important to her, strangely enough, is wearing her uniform!

Which raises another question... have you seen much of Asa without her uniform? Yes, we've seen her without it, but more often than not, it's her fetish outfit for readers.

I could tell you that, once again, this is to emphasize the fact that we don't have the same temporality on the characters, and that Fujimoto insists more and more on what he refuses to show, but I'll be accused of over-interpreting, so let's carry on.

Fami's statement that appearing to be a high-school student is the best cover for me immediately brings to mind a specific public hunter, who also appears always dressed in his uniform! But people will tell me that I'm being too defensive of this character, so.... Let's continue even further

Asa manages to turn the guns on those who were going to shoot them, all by imagining that she had been able to redeem them.

It's precisely because she's disconnected from reality that she's able to create the illusion that her power works

And I repeat: disconnecting from the events we see in Chainsaw Man helps us too.

Asa is able to create weapons without even needing to touch them, i.e. to touch the concrete, the agent who watches over them is right to recognize her but wrong in believing she's there to help the church members in the basement, when in fact she's there for Chainsaw Man. It's normal for him to think that!

Because that's how she was presented on TV!

Which shows what? That you can't trust everything you see

Just before, we had a focus on Asa's legs, particularly through her walking, the fact that she's almost running

Let's interpret this in reverse again. Did you see Fami's hands? Yes, we see them, but never up close and never open.

What was important was obscured by the fact that, at the end, it was noted that she did have something in her hands, but the chapter focused on Asa's legs, even though she had slipped.

Pay no attention to what was emphasized to guess what happens next

In the title, I'm talking about Fami's right ear, because she is abnormally shown on the same side throughout the chapter.

Because it's hiding an earpiece? I'd have liked to, but I don't think so. As someone pointed out in the previous post: you can still see her ear on page 2.

The point is not to think that Fami is tilting her head to hide something in her ear, but why is she shown so much the same way?

The fact that she's bent over reminded me of chapter 140, when Denji visits the CSM church for the first time. At the end of that chapter, Barem presents an ultimatum: which side is heavier? Chainsaw Man represented by that cable on Denji's torso or his peaceful life with his family?

The chapter 140 is called "Scales", evoking the weighing of these two choices, and Fami, who is supposed to represent the church, is already tipped over.

Why? Because the choice has already been made

Denji chose to be Chainsaw Man, but when he realized it, he was faced with the fire in which he lost his cat and dogs.

When he transformed, he found himself endangering his little sister Nayuta

The scales tipped in Chainsaw Man's favor, to the detriment of his family.

The way Fami was always presented on the same side was to make it clear which way his head was tilting : to the left.

Okay, but how do you explain Fami's head being tilted the other way in other earlier chapters? It's normal, Denji's choice is very recent! He hesitated until now!

All this makes even more sense with her Chainsaw Man earrings, which represent cables.

And then you'll tell me "it would work if she had a cable earring on the same ear, but it's safe on both ears so it doesn't work", yes it does, trust us, we'll carry on.

When does Asa fall in part 2? Often when death is near, almost like a bad omen announcing it. She falls crushing Bucky, she falls with Yuko who later dies prematurely, she almost falls when her mother sacrifices herself...

So death is near.

And two things can explain it :

Fami is bent over to symbolize the fact that Chainsaw Man has been chosen over his peaceful life.

The chapter again emphasizes that Asa can save Chainsaw Man by attacking Chainsaw Man, because Chainsaw Man prevents Denji from having access to his peaceful life, hence the fact that Fami is bent over.

But let's think about it another way: in chapter 155, Denji emphasized the fact that he didn't know what a family was, having committed patricide, how could he possibly understand this notion?

Denji killed his father, his brother, his sister died for him...

So Chainsaw Man has always put his family at risk, which seems logical given everything we've said.

But remember that in this same chapter, we found an answer: Chainsaw Man is an empty shell filled with the people he loves, his family, and his aim is to protect them.

When Denji says he wants to be Chainsaw Man, it's to protect his family, who fill him as an empty shell.

When Fami says we must kill Chainsaw Man to save him, she's right.

Maybe not because there are 2 Chainsaw Man, since Pochita and Denji are inseparable.

But because to protect what has filled Chainsaw Man's heart, you have to kill the source of his misfortune, himself.

And that's why it all works, even if Fami's two earrings are cables, because even killing Chainsaw Man, the empty shell, saves what filled it - his family.

That's why Asa falls, because the end and Denji's sacrifice are close at hand.

But second interpretation.

Remember, when Asa falls, it means that death is near. So.................. who's next to her?

Obviously, this is pure theory, but I find it amusing.

Why does Fami only show one side? Because she didn't present herself well.

If Fami has insisted on anything from the start, it's that we call it Fami, not Famine. Why is that? Because she renamed herself just as quickly as Yoru did, choosing a name that hid her true identity.

Remember how Yoshida told her she was terrible at choosing names, to which Fami retorted that she didn't care if anyone found out who she was?

Is that really the case? Wasn't it to reinforce the fact that she was supposedly the devil of famine?

The first time Fami appears, in Asa's school, she introduces herself as the war devil's big sister (= true), which she does again at the aquarium, introducing herself as the famine demon (= false), called Fami (= true).

But as we've seen, you can lie about a devil's name, just as Fami did with the fire demon, presenting him as the devil of justice.

So what's to stop her from lying about the fear she represents too?

I know it sounds crazy, but what happened when the devil of eternity appeared? People were hungry!

And the first time Fami didn't intervene, the more time passed, the more the hunger grew, the stronger the demon seemed to become.

What's to stop the devil of eternity being the devil of famine?

You : "it's a tactic for Fami to use the power of the demon of eternity to starve them out". Yes it's true! But my theory about the wrong choice of devil names is possible too. The trick is not to say that what's been presented to us doesn't work, but to try and question it.

The famine devil falsely called the devil of eternity could be defeated by Denji twice: in part 1, because he had overcome the famine by becoming a public hunter

In part 2, because he fed Asa!

If Fami has insisted on anything from the start, it's that we call her Fami, not Famine. Why is that? Because she renamed herself just as quickly as Yoru did, choosing a name that hid her true identity : the Death Devil.

So, since the answers lie in what we can't see, what's stopping Fami from tripping Asa?

Which explains Asa's shocked face.

But above all, it implies that his fall was not an unintentional one, as it always is when death is near, but that it was caused by death.

So if we line up the interpretations: death doesn't want mankind to disappear.

How do I know this?

Because she said so! She loves pizzas.

Death wants to kill Chainsaw Man to remain the sole end of beings. To stop it, all you have to do is eat her.

#csm 157 #chainsaw man #csm #csm part 2 #csm spoilers #denji #asa #asa mitaka #yoru #famine devil #fami #nayuta #yoshida hirofumi #We're moving away from pure analysis I'm trying to theorize because I think it's fun!

174 notes · View notes

specialagentartemis · 6 months

Text

We talk a lot about reading comprehension and misinformation on this website, but learning how to slow down, assess sources, and fact-check is a skill. A skill a lot of us have not been called on to demonstrate since high school, but a skill that's vitally important in the modern world.

I'm in graduate school for the social sciences (anthropology) - critically assessing sources is part of the skillset we are taught. I've had people ask on my post about historical misinformation, "How can I only reblog things that are true? How can I tell?" And it's a good and important question!

A couple core questions to ask, about history, science, or current events, are:

Who is saying this?

Where are you seeing this information? Is it a legal scholar, a historian with a PhD, a museum curator, an on-the-ground activist, a rando twitter poster, a Mormon conspiracy theorist? For scholarly questions, look for people with PhDs and published articles; for questions of current events, look for what people who are actually there are saying and showing.

Who agrees with them?

Can you find articles from other sources corroborating this, or is it just one guy who is saying this? Conversely, do you see anyone disagreeing and correcting this information? Who?

Does this person have an ideological bias that might cause them to discount conflicting information?

Everyone has biases, of course, but some are obvious. A lot of revisionist American history is put out by Mormon groups to try to prove the literal truth of the Book of Mormon; ditto for history that seeks to prove various things in the Bible. It may be easy for us to laugh at that, but a lot of tumblr revisionist history involves inventing gay historical figures out of flimsy sources because we want it to be true. Is there a reason that the person making this claim might want this to be true? This doesn't necessarily make it false, but it does mean you have to require more robust claims.

What sources do they cite?

Do they cite well-documented research or well-provenienced archaeology? Do they have photographs of what they're claiming happened? Or do their claims rely on nameless, dateless, "I can't show you my sources yet" or "I swear I heard about a guy..." Do they cite any sources or is it "just trust me bro"? Are those sources that they do cite reliable, or are they circular? Do the sources they cite actually say what this person is claiming they say? Are they cutting out half of a quote, or ignoring conflicting evidence presented in the same source?

Is this conspiracy theory thinking?

Is this making claims that an individual or a group is secretly hiding information from the general public? Is it blaming one individual or group for widespread societal problems? Is it claiming that the only reason this isn't common knowledge is because Somebody is suppressing it? Is it claiming that the solution to a complicated political problem is actually simple and everybody knows it but people just don't want to do it for nefarious reasons? That's conspiracy thinking, and it's almost never as clean or easy as the claimant wants you to believe.

Just because someone is saying something confidently doesn't necessarily make it true, but also, just because you don't like something doesn't necessarily make it false. Ask these questions when you see a claim that makes you feel angry - or makes you feel righteous. Look for journalists, scientists, historians, legal scholars, who present their credentials and their sources. Look for multiple independently verified news reports or scientific articles. Determining The One Truth about things is not always easy and sometimes not possible, but asking these questions helps you assess what you're reading critically and evaluate claims.

#history #science #misinformation #current events #saw a post about how people should stop criticizing lack of reading comprehension or falling for misinformation #and should present advice or help instead #which is fair. so here I am #falling for someone saying something wrong confidently is not a moral failing #but it is in all our best interests to try to cut through the bs

165 notes · View notes

statementlou · 5 months

Text

So I see folks pointing out that Louis' circle A tattoo is more likely an aesthetic choice than an announcement of a political commitment to anarchism, and saying basically that that maybe makes him a bit of a poser and I mean- I GUESS. But I don't like to look at things that way and I don't think it's useful. As I see it the subversive sexiness of the symbols of resistance have ALWAYS been gateways for people who are drawn to the struggle in vague ways and that's GOOD. Aligning yourself with those values is good no matter the reason, in my book, especially given the wretched options available out there, but also the journey doesn't necessarily stop there. Gatekeeping queerness victimizes people who are just trying things out and starting to discover that it may run deeper than just trying on a new look who should instead be welcomed and helped along their path, and I fail to see how gatekeeping political affiliations is any different (plus how counterproductive to actual movement building is that?)

ANYWAY. What I really want to say about Louis is that while I KNOW that Louis is probably not secretly a theory reading anti-state communalist anarchist, I think that actually Louis' optimism and idealism (and his unwavering commitment to allying himself with the working class and embracing those roots) are a perfect fit for the philosophy and always have been. I know that anarchism is mostly understood as being about throwing molotov cocktails and fighting the state (and the allure of its symbols are that they signify this, a terrific aesthetic for him to choose to sign on with in my book), but that's honestly largely cartoonish stereotyping that comes directly from anti-anarchist state propaganda. That resistance is necessary in this hellscape of oppression we live in and is super important, but in its heart anarchism is only about the state in that the state and capitalism currently stands in the way of its goals. The whole point of anarchism is that it's NOT about the state! It's about being able to imagine something better than a state, it's about how we live and about how we SHOULD live, it's about HOPE and picturing something utopian and something free of the ways capitalism pits us against one another! What could be more Louis than that?

"I need you and you need me and I love that" is as beautiful a way of talking about the cornerstone of anarchism that is mutual aid as any long winded essay I've read (even if what he meant was contextually different), and I think when he talks again and again about how special the space fans have made around him is he is expressing an intuitive understanding of the importance of autonomous zones, places and moments outside of the shitty life imposed on us by the system (also a huge part of anarchist thought). Maybe I'm just being an optimist but I think that Louis DOES understand that caring for people and wanting self-determination and freedom for all and allying himself with the working class involves a certain amount of resistance to and positioning yourself in opposition to the state. Thinking the symbols of smashing that state are cool isn't meaningless; it's a CHOICE. There are other cool symbols out there and I just happen to think that feeling a resonance with certain ones is something in and of itself, even if at this moment he does not choose to start a fight with the media about it all.

#long version of this part maybe later… (orrr maybe here and now oops lol):#I believe we are all born natural anarchists with a desire to live in mutually supportive ways and in freedom #it only gets beaten out of people by the trauma of the system and being forced to struggle to survive #Louis shares with many privileged people a certain immaturity of not understanding those struggles #but I think that 'immaturity' can include- in smart and good people- not having lost sight of that utopianism #because they are able to conceptualize it because they live the way we all should be able to #free of so many of the survival struggles #(I think that in some areas maturity is code for 'beaten down to a good capitalist')#anyway and that's why autonomous zones are important:#because you HAVE to have the experience of freedom sometimes to be able to move towards it #you have to experience wins to be able to keep fighting #it's the candy crush theory of organizing lol like: people will simply give up and lose hope if everything is struggle and despair #and nothing is hope and success #you don't have to win the whole fight to get glimpses but you have to have moments #anyway a song I love that is about that is Saturday Night by the Coup it's a BOP go check her out she feels like winning #boots is a commie but that's okay he Gets It :P #anyway #anarchism #blah blah blah #I love being a louis apologist I should add that to my header what can I say: I love him #also look how many WORDS I can churn out when there's no show😂gotta fil the time somehow #send me questions I beg you we've got a long couple months ahead #comrade louis

104 notes · View notes

accirax · 3 months

Text

New Evidence Regarding DRDT's Chapter 2 Killer?

Hello again, everybody! As I continue on my journey of rewatching DRDT via stream, I continue to pick up on more and different things than I noticed the first time. The subject of this theory post is the letter, signed by Eden (even if it wasn't necessarily written by her), that she, Rose, and Whit put together before the second Class Trial began-- I want to take another look at it.

(CW for Despair Time spoilers through 2-10 and mentions of suicide as described in Arturo's secret)

This note is a highly important piece of evidence, and I would expect that anyone invested in trying to solve the case is pretty familiar with its contents. However, I want to highlight exactly what the killer had to know in order to put this note together.

There is someone in the cast who has a motive secret that someone was "responsible for the death of [his/her] sister."

Eden was the recipient of this person's secret.

Eden didn't mean to tell this person, but it slipped out.

This person threatened to do something to Eden.

Arei promised to be Eden's friend.

Like I said, shouldn't be too much of a shock to any of you. However, what I really want to draw attention to is the first bullet point: someone is responsible for the death of his or her sister.

Why am I drawing attention to it? Because the last time Eden or Arturo says anything even close to a family member dying is here... (11:31)

...before Arei arrives. (12:44)

(The last time anyone actually says "sister" is Eden at 11:13.)

But, why is the time of Arei's arrival such an important distinction?

The thing is, most killer theories I've seen for anyone other than Eden or Arturo account for the killer being able to write this note by listening in to the conversation through the door. What I'm trying to say is that there's a contradiction there that I, at least, didn't notice until just now:

If the killer, listening in through the door had to know that the secret Eden received was about Arturo being responsible for the death of his sister, they had to be listening in before Arei arrived, because that is the only time in which Arturo's secret is discussed in enough detail to mention a family member dying. However, when Arei arrived, she had to walk right past and through the door.

This is what the door to the outside of the Infirmary looks like. There is no way in hell that Arei wouldn't have been able to see anyone who was walking by or listening in while she was doing the exact same.

So, what would this mean? Well, it would mean that only Arturo, Eden, and possibly Arei (depending on when she got into earshot of the door) knew enough about Arturo's motive secret before the murder to include all of those details in the note.

Or, at least, that's the boldest version of the claim. However, there are some counterarguments.

The first is that other people could have known if Arturo, Eden, or possibly Arei told somebody else about what happened and mentioned the detail about Arturo's secret. However, I don't believe that any of the three of them would have done that.

Arturo very clearly did not want his secret to get out, and seemingly didn't even want to believe that the death was his fault in the first place. Threatening Eden and making an enemy of Arei also make him look really bad. Both factors combined make it very unlikely that Arturo would want to tell anyone that this happened.

Eden also didn't want to tell anyone about what happened because she was afraid of Arturo finding out, as is clear in the Class Trial. Additionally, if she did want to tell someone so that they could help protect her from Arturo, it probably would have just been Arei. Thus, the information wouldn't have spread any farther than just Arei again.

Arei is definitely the iffiest option, but I still find it hard to believe that she would have told anyone about this occurrence. Firstly, it's already debatable whether Arei heard the specifics of Arturo's secret in the first place. Secondly, Arei probably would have had respect for her new friend and not wanted to share this traumatic event and put Eden in danger. I guess it's possible that Arei could have tried to tell someone about what happened to try to rally a larger movement against Arturo, and then that single person turned around and decided to kill Arei (thus leaving no innocent person who would want to bring up that Arei talked to them in the Class Trial). But, that's... a bit of a stretch. Plus, even if Arei did that, why include the specific details of what Arturo's secret was about?

The second option is that the killer could have planted some kind of bug or other listening device into the Infirmary so that they could overhear the conversation from afar. However, given that we have been given literally no advanced warning that a device like this can even be obtained within the set, much less that anyone actually used one in that location, I'm tossing this objection out, too.

And no, I don't think J's remote could have accomplished something like that, either. Not without an actual listening device already in the room.

The final possibility that I've thought of is that someone could have overheard the conversation from somewhere other than the doorway, which holds a lot more weight. Let's take a look at what's around the Infirmary.

Based on the map, I think the only places that are possibly close enough to the door of the Infirmary are the doors of the Cafeteria or Bathroom (Wash Closet; WC). Recall that, given the private nature of the conversation and that Arei is shown pushing the doors open in the CG, the doors were probably closed. Thus, anyone listening in would have needed to hear the conversation from behind at least one set of closed doors.

Let's start by quickly ruling out the Bathroom. I'm operating on the assumption that, if you can hear something going on in the Infirmary from where you are, people in the Infirmary could hear what's going on in that location, too. If people could hear what's going on in the Bathroom all the way from the Infirmary... Well, that's some pretty shitty architectural design, pun intended.

The Cafeteria is a viable location, though. In fact, we've already confirmed that you can overhear a conversation going on in the Cafeteria from the Infirmary.

So, using the same logic I described earlier, if Teruko could hear something in the Cafeteria from the Infirmary, it stands to reason that you could hear something in the Infirmary from the Cafeteria.

However, this argument still has its issues as well. The thing that Teruko (and Xander) overhear in this scene is, funnily enough, Arei arguing with Eden over not being invited to bake with her. It is described in multiple lines as a very loud event.

While I don't deny that a panicked Eden, a shaken Arturo, and an infuriated Arei could have been quite loud, all of those things, once again, happened after the last time that Eden or Arturo said anything about a dead family member. It's impossible to tell for sure given that the prior part of the conversation isn't fully voice acted, but it's implied that everything Eden says about Arturo's secret is in a regular, or possibly even hushed, tone of voice. If someone only started listening in after things got loud, they would not have heard about Arturo's secret in detail.

Additionally, there are the logistics of who would be sitting in the Cafeteria. Given that nobody else has stepped forward and shared that they overheard this conversation as well (even under potential penalty of death), it seems reasonable to assume that no innocent student overheard what happened in the Infirmary. Therefore, conversely, if any student(s) did overhear the conversation, they were probably involved in the murder somehow. I'm sure you could argue some fringe cases, but this is the general rule.

Unfortunately for this argument, though, the majority of scenes in the Cafeteria have many people present in them, whether due to partaking in a meal or a fight. Overall, that makes it unlikely that someone would be in the Cafeteria by themselves or with only one or two other people. That's not always the case, though, so we can't rule out only a few people being in the Cafeteria!

Can we try to further pin down the time period when this confrontation occurs to try to figure out who could or could not have been in the Cafeteria?

Eden tells us that this confrontation happened on "the day Nico tried to kill Ace" and "the day that Arei and [Eden] had a falling out," which, by my notes, is Day 6. Arturo never challenges this notion, and it also lines up with Eden being afraid that someone is following her on the night of Day 6, so I think that this is true. The canonical events that Teruko takes part in during Day 6 are:

Teruko plays with cacti and gets caught by Eden

J and Arturo, Nico and Ace, and Arei and MonoTV fight

Charles' secret is revealed

Eden tries to host a clock decorating event

Arei has her breakdown and David comforts her

Teruko confronts Rose about her secret

Nico threatens to kill Ace

Nico's secret is revealed and Hu and David comfort them

J drags Teruko into a closet to get away from Arturo

Teruko runs into Eden in the Dress Up Room

Ace is nearly murdered and tries to confront Nico afterward

The events highlighted in green are the only ones of the day that none of Arturo, Eden, or Arei are in. Given that all of them were present for the confrontation, it could not have happened simulataneously with any of the other events.

If the confrontation occurred while Teruko discussed Rose's secret with her (and Nico was there), the killer could really be anyone other than Teruko, Rose, or Nico. Anyone who we didn't have eyes on theoretically could have been in the Cafeteria at that time.

If the confrontation took place while Nico was threatening to kill Ace, however, I doubt that anyone would have been able to listen in on the Infirmary conversation over that cacophony. Therefore, for the sake of someone listening in, that option should also be eliminated. If it took place while Hu and David were comforting Nico, things would look bad for Levi and Rose, as they were both still in the Cafeteria after Teruko left. I know what I said about multiple students in the Cafeteria probably all needing to be collaborators in the murder, but if it was Levi and an asleep Rose, perhaps Levi could have gotten away with eavesdropping by himself?

Despite all of that, though, I think that Arturo's relatively calm and normal (for him) demeanor during the closet scene would speak to the notion that he hadn't just heard that Eden knew about his sister's suicide. Therefore, I believe that the confrontation likely occurred between Teruko's two trips to the Dress Up Room, when she "spent the rest of the day in her room resting." That would line up both with Arturo's claim that he was just "in the middle of something with Julia" (Teruko saw them together just beforehand), give Arei more time to cool down and reflect after her big afternoon, and put the time of the confrontation very close to when Eden is worried about someone following her. (Although, it does give Arturo less time to have "been following" her, assuming that comment was about him.)

That would also give pretty much anyone the chance to have been in the Cafeteria, because Teruko wasn't with anyone at that time. However, it may have been during a pretty dinner-y time, which decreases the odds that anyone would have been in the Cafeteria alone or nearly-alone.

If all that wasn't enough, here's one final wrinkle: whoever witnessed all of this happening would have overheard Arturo threatening Eden and decided not to get involved themselves. It's not a total nail in the coffin, given that I would assume most theories in which the killer overheard the conversation require them to have not attempted to help Eden for one reason or another. But, it is something to consider. Personally, I have a particularly hard time believing that J, #1 Arturo Hater, and Levi, adventurer on the quest of being a good person in the same vein as Eden, wouldn't have tried to stop what was going on if they'd heard.

So, in summary, if the person who wrote the note is not Arturo, Eden, Arei, or someone working very closely with them, they have to be someone who was in the Cafeteria probably alone at the time of the confrontation (assuming Eden's words were even loud enough to be overheard from across the hallway through probably closed metal doors), who decided not to step in to save Eden.

What does that mean? Well, I think that it means that it's very likely that Arturo or Eden is the killer, because having all of those dubiously possible clauses happen to fire off all at once seems implausible to me. But, I already thought that Eden was the killer, so it may just be confirmation bias. Otherwise, since we can't pin down the exact time of the confrontation, I don't think it actually helps us to fully eliminate anyone from the running-- other than, arguably, Teruko. I do urge everyone who thinks that someone other than Eden or Arturo is the culprit to consider this data when coming up with their theories, though.

However, I will end this on the note that all of this deductive reasoning is... incredibly nitpicky. At the end of the day, the crew behind DRDT is very small, and I would understand if the exact details of where and when what parts of Arturo's secret were said or what exactly the Infirmary door looked like were things that they didn't take into account when planning out the murder.

I've seen some critics say about recent YouTube indie animation shows that the long hiatuses between episodes give the shows an unfair disadvantage. That's because the long gaps allow fans to scrutinize every detail of the worldbuilding and characterization and find their holes for far longer than a network television show would between episodes. While DRDT is not exactly one of these indie animation pilots, it is a YouTube show created by a small team of independent creators. I can only imagine that they may be facing the same thing with having to take a break mid-trial. If that's the case, and what I've presented here contradicts what actually happened in Chapter 2, know that I don’t hold it against DRDTdev at all, and don’t think you should, either. I would apologize for pointing out this “mistake,” if you can even call something this minor that.

However, I also think that all of this might be possible, perhaps even on a coincidental/subconscious level, because Eden or Arturo is the killer, and DRDTdev didn't think too much about the logistics of how someone else would overhear the conversation. So for now, I'm considering all of this logic as reasonable theorywork.

If you have any rebuttals though, whether about a specific character or the premise in general, I'd love to hear them! Or, if I missed some detail in the story in general that blows this theory to smithereens entirely, I wouldn't love to hear that, but it would probably be good if I did.

Otherwise, thank you for reading, and have a lovely rest of your day! :D

#danganronpa despair time #drdt #drdt spoilers #eden tobisa #arturo giles #arei nageishi #fanganronpa #sorry for going back to drdtposting when it's supposed to be milgo time i was simply watching the stream and had this epiphany #and needed to write it out #can't remember if i've said this on blog before but how it often works with me is that i have no ideas then i am struck with an idea #and then i CANNOT do anything else until i've written the idea out #i think i might've said that on the archetypes post? well it's still true so #every day i come up with eden propaganda. sorry queen #my theories #cw suicide mention

60 notes · View notes

itsclydebitches · 2 months

Note

Have you seen the posts going around saying shit like "If a mutual likes Hazbin Hotel I will block them"?? It's genuinely upsetting me tbh, not just the idea that people don't like the show, but that they despise it so much they can't even stand the thought of someone they know liking the show. It reminds me of the Steven Universe hate train only worse. They also say shit like "the show is just someone saying swear words and expecting you to laugh", and if for a second we put aside the fact that that is blatantly not true, what's wrong with that? I'm allowed to like something that's a bit trash, right? I've already seen two different people I follow reblog posts to that effect (and worse, someone saying all a character boils down to is "i love being sexually abused <3" and i don't know how they ever came to that conclusion) and it's driving me mad. And somehow I just know that they don't actually give a shit about any "controversies" surrounding vivziepop, that's just a convenient excuse for most of them. I don't even care if Vivzie is a bad person, that's none of my business. just live and let live, you know?

Sorry for ranting, you're literally the only blog i follow who posts Hazbin fan content

Rant away, friend! Luckily for me I haven't come across any of those posts yet. Plenty of discourse surrounding whether fans are allowed to make romantic and/or sexual content for Alastor, the expected shipping wars, and - as you say - vague references to Vivzie controversies (which I'm too new a fan to even be aware of yet)... but nothing that's a complete rejection of the show itself. That's probably because I've only engaged with blogs posting a lot of Hazbin content though.

I'm a big fan of old school Internet rules which includes an emphasis on cultivating your own online space. You know, the thing tumblr is explicitly designed for. So in theory I applaud anyone blocking users/tags for a show they're not a fan of. Performatively posting about it more as a way to guilt others for liking Hazbin at all... not so much. If you want to block something just block it. If you're mutuals with someone you both presumably like each others' content. Not all of it necessarily, but enough to have followed in the first place, and often being mutuals for long enough leads to friendship because you're both getting interacting with one another a lot. All of which isn't to say that people don't unfollow mutuals, or that you can't drop a mutual because they've started posting something you dislike. Obviously both situations do happen, but it feels like an extreme enough response that these posters probably aren't actually doing this very often. Most people will wait the mutual out until their interest gets hooked on something new, or block the Hazbin tag and keep the friend, or just block without making a big announcement about it. So posts like that feel more like a way to show off how much you dislike the show and guilt others for their enjoyment which yeah, can be upsetting to see. Especially when, as you say, it costs nothing to just let people like things.

Which might sound hypocritical on my part given my RWBY interests, but I think there's a big difference between critically examining a show while supporting others who genuinely love it, and simplistically blasting it. I COMPLETELY get why Hazbin wouldn't be to everyone's tastes and, like with the SU example, anything that gets popular enough is going to develop its haters (especially cartoons trying to tackle non-childish subjects. That's always going to be a fandom landmine). But if you're going to make claims about a show, at least watch it to ensure you can back up your stance? And if your takeaway is still, "This is the worst fucking thing I've ever watched"... cool. Go forth and write about that on your own, personal blog. But no one should be surprised when they're also blocked for bragging about how many Hazbin fans they've blocked.

#Hazbin Hotel

23 notes · View notes

gingergofastboatsmojito · 3 months

Text

THE BEAR S3 Predictions

Just a mental note I'm putting out here to be able to revisit it when the time comes to check its level of accuracy. I have the feeling that S3 is going to be the season of the reconciliations.

The relationship between Richie and Carmy is completely broken after the walk-in incident and Richie walks from The Bear. He happens to get some kinda job offer and accepts it just to prove Carmy wrong. They will later spend a good portion of S3 trying to repair their bond. By the end of S3 (hopefully sooner) there should be a reconciliation of some sort between them and Richie should go back to The Bear.

Nat gives birth to her new "cub" and this brings the family together. There is a reconciliation with Donna, which in some capacity benefits not only the siblings but the entire team, the restaurant as a whole. Not exactly sure how this will play out, but Donna will quit being this negative and toxic influence on everyone. Maybe she gets clean because she takes this baby as a new chance to start over and be a better grandmother than the mother she was. IDK...

Marcus' mother dies and this juxtaposition of new beginnings, births, endings, death, etc is going to be a theme throughout the whole season, that is why I actually think this funeral will be the opener.

There will be some kinda flashback episode, like 7 Fishes or a montage of some memory that has a huge impact on one or more characters. I have my $ put on the Sundays, Mr. Adamu and lil Syd would spend at Mr. Beef's. I strongly disagree with the weak argument that just because the Berzattos are catholic, their restaurant didn't open on Sundays. The gastronomic industry cares very little about those traditions especially if the place is struggling. I bet they were open every Sunday part-time, just for lunch, to get all the demand of those who went to church just because business-wise it makes total sense.

Carmen will apologize to Claire. Not sure what she's gonna make of that apology, whether she's gonna accept it or not, I hope she doesn't. I'm pretty sure there will be no reconciliation here. I don't necessarily oppose Carmy having a romantic partner and as much as I ship SydCarmy like nobody's business, I'm 100% sure they are not gonna happen any time soon. Maybe and this is a HUGE maybe, they could be the perfect cliffhanger for S4. But that would be a stretch. Not that Store & Calo couldn't pull it off, but still. So, basically, I am all for a new love interest being presented to Carmen just to see how he responds to it. After Claire he should go back to his old lone-wolf ways, I need to test that behavioral theory though, so I need a new female character to do it.

Last, but certainly not least, Miss Adamu needs her man and I'm not talking about Bear. I want to know more about Sydney's past and see her letting her hair down, putting her records on, and all that jazz. So, maybe an old flame can re-appear in her life and they can try to "reconcile". This reconciliation shouldn't work either because she's now devoted to making The Bear work and is basically a workaholic and both, Carmy & her get into this synch of type As on Speed and Red Bull, non-stop working machines, well-oiled now that they had already learned from their mistakes and The Bear succeeds but Sydney's relationship with her guy from the past fails, again. The guy feels like a 3rd wheel and lets her know that she's not in a relationship with him but with her job. Sydney understands the subtext, and this break-up is actually a wake-up call for her. She starts seeing what we all shippers are already seeing. It's not just about work for her. Yes, The Bears are too absorbing and demanding, both, the restaurant and the chef, but she doesn't mind. She loves it. Love is the operative word here. This realization should hit her hard by the end of the season.

The background of all the things I just mentioned above will be the BOH, fast-paced, chaotic, and working like a Swiss clock, just like Carmy likes it.

Am I missing something? Probably. Can't wait to find out.

Bonus tracks: I am pretty sure the wedding will either be Teff's or Fak's.

And lastly: When Sydcarmy happens, it will "officially" start with something small and inane like Syd accidentally finding out Carm has been drawing portraits of her all along... CHECK THIS OUT, I think Storer & Calo have something like this in mind or along these lines, and it should come along in S3, minus the sex part.

#the bear hulu #the bear fx #carmy x sydney #syd x carmen #carmen berzatto #syd adamu #sydney adamu #GINGERPOVS

27 notes · View notes

gracegrove · 10 months

Text

Whether you're talking about a fictional character (Billy) or an actual person...

How can you say, "I don't think his abusive, racist, misogynistic behavior would have improved with time--because he didn't see it as a problem. You have to want to change."

How did you know he didn't want to change? Why are you so damn certain he's incapable of change? He's literally only 18 and has the rest of his entire life to change. You think he's honestly gonna sit there and be like, "nah this is fine. I'm set. I like everything just the way it is." And never once contemplate or attempt a change.

Every person attempts change on some level. Not everyone makes big ground shaking changes. Not everyone gets to a point that is satisfactory to others. That's not the point.

When you are around real people and/or work with real people and use this language guess what happens? It makes them feel incapable. It feels undermining. It helps solidify and corner them into a box they may not want to necessarily stay or be in.

I've worked with clients with records. Clients who've said outright sexist and bigoted things in front of me and at times directed towards me. But I continued to work with them. Guess why? Because if I were to leave in that instance, I'd only be proving a point. A single point. That again there's this giant narrative of "no one believes in you", "you clearly don't want help", "you're irredeemable", etc.

You don't kick someone when they're already down and then say, "gosh well, you don't even wanna get back up do you? You have to really want it?" Why should they want it or try harder when they're expecting more people like you to kick them right back to the floor again. Google "labeling theory", it might be helpful.

There's an therapeutic approach called Motivational Interviewing, and its main tenant is that change is facilitated by and comes from the client alone. It helps a client who is already well aware of people around them telling them to change, or societal expectations, or maybe more simply they have considered personally making changes themselves whether it's something like smoking cessation, substance use /harm reduction, emotional management, or wanting to make other behavioral changes but they haven't because they're not sure what such a change would mean or look like in their lives. So they sit on the fence. They become ambivalent.

The only job the therapist has in this is to help the client lay all this out. To discuss it and weigh each side. To examine what making changes or no changes would mean. Ultimately the goal is to help the client reach a state of active change. So that the client can begin new parts of their life and continue moving forward. But if someone isn't ready, then they're not and that's also ok.

If you immediately shut down on a fictional character because their story wasn't insightful enough for you to glean any empathy that they were capable of change, how do you or will you tolerate the overall change process that real people have? Because it's an arduous one. It takes time, it doesn't sprout up overnight. And half of it is because those people themselves were repeatedly told that they couldn't change either.

So stop contributing to the ambivalence or the stagnancy and start contributing to the change.

#the soapbox #dont tell people that you don't think they can do things #dont be a naysayer you walnuts

77 notes · View notes

daily-linkclick · 9 months

Note

What is the theory abt lg being from an alternate timeline? I’ve been seeing a lot of ppl talk about it and idrk where it comes from, and what are your thoughts??(have a nice day!!)

this ask magically appeared in my inbox just today but apparently it was sent weeks ago, holy shit! thank you for waiting op LMFAO

anyways, it's a theory that's been around before season 2, iirc! mostly because we had little to nothing lore wise around their powers, and its just fun thinking about while we waited for anything canon. there were a few things that did hint at lu guang being from an alternative timeline, being that we don't know his age and backstory, and his weird hair color (not a lot of people sporting full white hair, or any unnatural hair color in link click, at least)

those aspects don't necessarily point to him being from an alternate timeline, but they also could be hints towards it! but there's new content that makes this theory potentially canon! it's from this music video played during Bilibili World. it features an alternate mv for vortex, which is interesting because we see lu guang falling first:

youtube

in it, there are several shots with cheng xiaoshi wearing completely different outfits, some injured and one seemingly dead? Plus a frame that shows four cxs's merging into one. maybe it's just ooo pretty visuals, but there's a looot of imagery that implies different timelines (shard fractals, reflections, mirror images, etc)

There's also this shot, with lu guang wearing an alternate fit we've never seen - and he's wearing more black in this one?? his s1 fit also featured a dark shirt and pants but his flannel color was more dominant. this leads me to believe that this is lu guang but less experienced (another timeline).

maybe all of this is just non-canon for marketing, they did market lu guang as dead for all of pre-s2 lol, but i like to believe this is them teasing lu guang's past! even if he's the main character, he's someone who's past we know the least of. i'd argue we find out more about side characters than we do about him actually - which makes me (and a lot of other people) think he's from an alternate timeline!

that's the gist; i'll put my own thoughts under a read more so this post won't be insanely long

my own thoughts on the theory is that i think lu guang is from multiple alternate timelines. the frame with multiple cheng xiaoshis, and the one where four merge into one makes me believe lu guang met cheng xiaoshi in his timeline, but cxs either died or had a miserable life. he kept going into different timelines in an attempt to save him / be in a timeline where cheng xiaoshi is actually safe and happy, and finally got to the timeline we see in the show.

though that part requires him having more than just the power to look into what happens in a photo. but there's been proof of lu guang hiding what he knows / has with cheng xiaoshi (re: him hiding the fact emma died, and him hiding the photo that liu tianchen gave him). he's also an incredibly private person. if he hides from his closest friend, who's to say he isn't hiding something from the audience either?

we also don't know how they got their powers. if lu guang originally had the power to dive back into pictures, then it would make sense on how he's able to go to different timelines. also, studio lan clearly emphasizes the fact that the pair are two halves of a whole, and the show is more interesting because of that dynamic.

as an extra: lu guang's doting nature makes a lot of sense too, he just doesn't want to see cheng xiaoshi miserable again! it's a pretty known fact that cheng xiaoshi didn't have any friends (besides qiao ling) before lu guang, and his life insantly got better when they finally were a trio (interesting that it was mainly because of a mysterious person that popped out of nowhere). here's a fun twitter thread by t3mp0s about the trio's dynamic

lastly, i just think it'd be fun if at one point cheng xiaoshi slowly discovers what lu guang did in his past for him. and how hypocritical lu guang would sound after saying "past or future, leave them be" if he never applied that to cheng xiaoshi! either way i still want to see a cxs saving lg arc man... they keep teasing it EVEN IN THE MV

that's it!! i know link click's best quality is the trio going through other people's stories, but i think they're preparing us for the biggest one: lu guang's.

#link click #link click spoilers #dlc asks #i draw cheng xiaoshi a lot but listen i love thinking about lu guang more . he is so mysterious #HOPE THIS WAS UNDERSTANDABLE LOL #i didnt say anything abt the two as a ship in this post bc im someone who could do with or without it #but my god studio lan is not helping their case when they say 'yeah theyre two halves of a whole character'#i love doomed gays #lmk if there was anything i cld say more honestly i wrote this in a haze #because its my favorite theory #lu guang

103 notes · View notes

bettsfic · 11 months

Note

betts do you have advice on finding your way to narratively satisfying endings? i struggle to end stories in ways that don’t feel abrupt or dropping the ball plotwise in some way

i have bad news for you: almost no one is good at writing endings. i would say less than 10% of what i read has a decent ending. and around 1% has a good one. i'm looking at my bookshelf right now and the only one i can see with a great ending is lord of the rings. the rest of them either have bizarre endings (the english patient), actively terrible endings (white oleander), and endings i didn't even get to because the story lost all structure and conflict at the halfway mark (a lot of them). in fact bad endings have disenchanted me so thoroughly that this year i've only read nonfiction.

that doesn't mean you shouldn't aim for a satisfying ending, but that you're not alone in struggling with them, and you shouldn't feel too much pressure to nail the landing. there are some stories where the ending isn't as important as the beginning.

the reason, i think, that so many endings suck is because the personal stakes of the characters are weak. i don't necessarily prescribe to the obligation of character motivations, but i do think what often repels me as a reader is that the characters don't really care about anything, and therefore neither do i. if your character wants something, then you have a naturally occurring ending: they get what they want, they don't get what they want, or (my favorite) they get what they want and there are consequences.

another reason i think endings fail is that a lot of stories i read are missing a third act or a final escalation. they reach the first climax and resolve, rather than reaching the first climax, addressing the aftermath, and escalating to an even higher climax. not all stories are set up this way, but a lot of them can be improved if the writer asked themselves, "and then what happens?"

that said, here's the theory as i see it:

because narrative is innate to human nature, there are natural instincts we have to types of endings, namely happy and sad. comedy and tragedy. it's a binary, yes, and i generally avoid those, but for me anyway it's often the first question i ask myself when i start plotting a story: will this have a happy ending or a sad one? do i want to invoke emotional satisfaction or cathartic sadness? if neither, do i want to aim for something complicated or bittersweet?

i try not to obligate myself to any particular direction, but in having a rough idea of the answer, i can at least begin forming a conflict. the big difference between a happy ending and a sad one is whether or not you're asking your audience to root for the success of the characters' plight. for example, let's say your story involves around the development of a romantic relationship. if it seems like the characters, after completing the obstacles of the story, have a chance to have a healthy, happy relationship, then your audience will be eager for them to get together. but if you write it in such a way that your audience thinks, "oh no they're awful for each other," then your audience will be waiting for the breaking point*. either way, you're establishing the anticipation of your audience. if it's a little of both, then your ending is going to be somewhere in the middle, which is fine. the point is, your characters' motivations are being addressed. that's all an ending really is.

*there are genres where the delight is wanting two characters who are toxic to each other to stay together, like darkfic. but i think that's a different conversation, because that's a specific lens through which to read.

okay, now that the big picture stuff is out of the way, here are some general tips/ways i help writers figure out their endings:

process of elimination. write down all the ways it doesn't end. then write down all the ways it could end. then narrow that list into one that works.

extreme stakes. what is the greatest possible ending? does the character die? does the universe end? these probably won't be the right ending, but they'll at least help you aim high.

start with the ending. personally my best work has always come from stories where i know the ending before the beginning, and therefore everything that happens in the story is actively driving toward that ending. and by "know the ending" i mean i have the final image in my head. (most of the time this doesn't end up actually being the ending, but i like having something to work toward.)

harmonize your conflicts. the resolution of all conflict is its opposite: harmony. that doesn't mean a story necessarily has to end that way, but it's at least a good question to ask yourself. how do your characters return to a state of peace?

stack your conflicts. the more threads you open, the more that needs to be tied up at the end, the longer and more satisfying your denouement.

take your time. my favorite endings are ones that slowly slide down the falling action because the stakes reach such intense heights earlier on. a lot of people seem to believe that rising action is more important, building tension and whatnot, but i also think it's good to interrogate that, and try to see your work in the opposite light. what happens if your protagonist gets what they want asap, with no trouble at all? how do they handle success? success is a complicated thing: the good always comes with some bad. what does that look like? (this is the reason lord of the rings has such a great ending. it really honors the characters and the story.)

let your characters do what they want. if you build strong enough characters, their choices will eventually lead you to an ending. give them agency to fuck up and force them deal with it.

work toward an illuminating moment. an illuminating moment is a reveal at the end of the story that casts all the rest of it in a different light, so that when you reread with the illuminated context, the story becomes something new. doing that involves working in a mystery of some kind. shorter stories tend to rely on the illuminating moment, where longer ones rely on the reader knowing what's going on in order to be invested for the long haul.

outside input. have a friend read it and ask what they care about most and what they're expecting to happen. maybe you want to address those expectations or maybe you want to subvert them, but either way it'll help you see more clearly what you're tasking your reader to care about.

steal from shakespeare. everything i learned about how to end my stories i learned from shakespeare. that doesn't mean his endings are how all stories should end, but that i admire them and those are the sorts of endings i want for my own work. it might help to reread/rewatch your favorite things and pay particular attention to how they end.

what do you want? if you're emotionally invested in your own story, how do you want it to end? what would make you most satisfied with your own work? often what drives me forward in my own writing is wanting my characters to be happy but starting them in a place where happiness isn't even a real concept for them, and so they have to go through the process of addressing the things that have happened to them and fight for themselves and what they want.

my big caveat here is that a "good" ending is subjective. people think Lost had a good ending but i'm still angry i spent five years of my life waiting for a payoff that didn't come. in workshops i almost always hear the advice, "you don't want your ending to be *too* neat." bitch yes i do. i want it to be a neat, tidy bow, every single thing accounted for, every thread woven back in.

but that's me. your taste is different and your readers' taste is going to be different. you're never going to satisfy everyone, so it's best to honor your own aesthetic and hope your reader understands where you've come from.

#writing advice #endings #structure #conflict

88 notes · View notes

sleepingcup · 4 months

Text

Secret Trade for a Novel

Game: Reverse 1999 Character: Horropedia x Reader Genre: Fluff Requested by/Gifted to: @one0p1nk

Artwork by me @sleepy-meep

Summary: You have been looking for your books for quite a while, I wonder if someone got it for confiscation or...

"This novel is amazing! The horror aesthetics and the description of pure horror was so real, no one can tell which one is real or not!"

"After reading it...imagining it.... The more I think about the details feel so real..."

"I do find the books pleasingly interesting, and all... Tho... why the author or these novels remain...anonymous?"

"I would say the author did that to make things more interesting!"

"Tho...aren't those types novels prohibited in the foundation?"

"No, not necessarily. It is only prohibited during work hours but they did not say you can read them after work. Hey, have you find any ideas who that author could be?"

"...Hmm I do have a tiny guess...but...”

Words cannot describe how panicking you feel mentally.

People does see you as a hard working unit in the St. Pavlov Foundation, but almost no one knows that you are secretly a horror novelist in secret every time a mission gets you bored. Sure you don't write constantly but you do think of ideas for you upcoming novel drafts.

But recently when you tried to arrive back to your office, you swore that you kept your novels safe.

"?!"

You looked around and still no sign of your drafts, which worries you even further and yet…

“Did someone… break into my office?”

"Eh not really. Tho I do have to admit that your horror novel collections are VERY rare to find! This is a rare sight to see! Hey! Hey! Do you happen to know the author of this book?"

Tho I think you should feel relieved when your crush Horropedia happens to appear on your office room, it is about time you might want to get used to him doing that as a habit of his. But the book he was holding is one thing that made you panic a bit.

"W-well not really."

"Oh? But this book was so good! This horror themed novel was a masterpiece! Oh! Let us not forget the perfect details of this insane word building! I do love the details of this book! It would have been better if it's movie scripted in better quality-Oh! I forgo I was asking you about the author of this book!"

Horropedia then looks at you, "So I had one theory, since you know what we are both best friends and all~ I need to know something."

All of a sudden Horropedia leans closer to you, his face was near you.

"Are you the author of this book I had a good time reading?"

"!!!"

You were surprised when he ask you this question, you know that he is smart but he does have his dumb moments. And yet you are a bit shy that you HID this talent of your away from him.

"U-um..."

"Am I right? Am I right?"

"..."

Your eyes feel like spiraling out of control, he was close to you and yet you feel like sweating bullets.

Feeling defeated.... "Yes...I wrote that book."

"YES! So I was ri-wait...."

Then all of a sudden Horropedia goes closer to you suddenly feeling the rush of excitement.

"Does that mean...The other books that I read that has that unknown author...was you right?"

"Y-yeah...?"

"And your word building was yours right?"

"..."

"And your signature is..."

"Yeap... I wrote it."

Then you show Horropedia the real proof that you are typing horror novels, the word building you poured in on typing, and and quickly reads the computer file you have been typing. He soon stares at you in silence before you know it.

And for a quick second he lifts you in his arms and spin around with you, he was holding you closer to him and he was extremely excited, you can feel his head nuzzling to yours.

"MY BEST FRIEND IS THE BEST! I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT I HAD MEET A BEAUTIFUL CRUSH AS YOU! Please... let me kiss you!"

"?!"

"!!!"

All of a sudden Horropedia gently place you down and looked away, stunned at his sudden actions. When you got a bit closer to him, he was a blushing mess. His eyes gaze at the floor embarrassed, "Did I... I did just say that.... I-I mean..."

"Joshua..."

"!!!"

He turns to look at you , a blushing mess before you paused for a second before you walk closer to him. He was a stammering mess and soon averts his eyes away.

"I..I..."

"...Please... look at me."

He looks at you and soon, stares at you with pleading eyes.

"You did saw and entered my office without me knowing."

"Y-Yeah I did... sorry..."

"But..."

"?"

"Since you read my novels, what will you give me?"

Horropedia felt a bit guilty when you ask him that question, "You said "Let me kiss you..."... right?" You said as he froze knowing that he is ready for the worse... and yet...

"Please.... kiss me?"

Horropedia looked in shocked before, gently holding your hand before leaning closer to your face. "Are you sure... I can kiss you?" He said as you nodded at his question, pulling him closer to you.

Feeling his lips feels like heaven.

It felt like time has stopped, and when you pull away to look at his reaction...

Horropedia was a blushing mess.

"(y-y/n)..."

"A fair trade I say huh Horropedia~?"

"..."

He was speechless before he gives you another kiss, "I....love you so much..." That is all the words he says.

The rest felt so romantic.

#reverse 1999 #reverse 1999 x reader #horropedia #horropedia x reader

36 notes · View notes

markantonys · 7 months

Text

wait, since they namedropped graendal this season, what if SHE'S the forsaken in caemlyn controlling morgase during s3???? (apologies if this has already been suggested, but i don't think i've seen it.) now, namedropping a character doesn't necessarily mean we will see them in the very next season, buuuuut of the other 4 s2 namedrops, 2 (moghedien & gawyn) will 100% be in s3. (cadsuane & taim, eh, i won't hold my breath on them appearing in s3 but it's not impossible.)

i don't know, i just find it Very Interesting that they chose to specifically name graendal, when they didn't have to include the Forsaken Listing line at all or could've rewritten it any number of ways to not name graendal. for a little while my theory has been that, for practicality reasons, they might want to avoid naming specific forsaken until they're at a place where they feel confident they will have time to include that forsaken in the show, since they have to always be in a position to be able to wrap the story up in fewer seasons than planned. so in keeping with that, maybe it's not unreasonable to imagine we may be seeing graendal (and in a prominent role, as i doubt they'd cast a forsaken just to show up to 1 forsaken zoom call scene and then pray the actor can return for more in a few years) sooner than we think?

now, let's think about whether graendal replacing rahvin in that story role would work.

short-term: yes, 100%. she has a similar personality type/modus operandi of loving luxury and preferring to Compel people from the shadows, so i can easily see her setting herself up comfortably in a palace and making a queen her puppet. it also perfectly positions her to murder asmodean in caemlyn. look, i respect stories leaving questions unsolved, but i feel like the show would rather just show Us Viewers who killed him so we can move on, instead of making it a deliberate Unsolved Murder and distracting us into wasting all our time speculating about it & not focusing on other things that are actually important to the story.

as for long term, i'm still mulling over whether it would work. off the top of my head i've got a few scenarios:

A) graendal is balefired by rand in caemlyn just like rahvin is, from which fight rand learns that balefire can permanently kill forsaken.

downside: her future activities in the books would be cut or given to someone else

B) graendal escapes rand in caemlyn and proceeds to carry out her future book activities. rand learns that balefire can permanently kill forsaken from his fight with sammael instead.

downside: that's my emotional support "rand goes crazy with grief over aviendha's and mat's deaths while protecting elayne's home" avimatrandlayne moment, your honor!

also, mat might need to stay with rand longer than he should in order to be present for the sammael fight for Dying And Living Again purposes (so to me, this is actually an upside djfkg but i RELUCTANTLY acknowledge it miiiight be tricky to get mat over to his seanchan storyline if he's with rand this late into the series - tho ofc they could always shuffle stuff around to make the sammael fight happen pre-ebou dar or even pre-dumai's wells)

C) a scenario i don't think is likely but is fun to imagine nonetheless: ELAYNE is the one who ousts graendal from caemlyn, whether killing her permanently or only temporarily, and whether when elayne first arrives in caemlyn (so taking over rand's story beat) or at the end of her succession and/or black ajah hunting arcs (so adding graendal into one or both of those arcs).

downside: it would stray pretty far from book storylines with, perhaps, no real gain

but, upside: elayne would get a Forsaken Archrival of her very own!

all in all, maybe they really aren't planning to introduce graendal until much later & in her book storyline and i'm totally overthinking the namedrop, but graendal in caemlyn is interesting to ponder!

#wot #wot on prime #the wheel of time #wot book spoilers #graendal

31 notes · View notes

normal-thoughts-official · 7 months

Text

Putting all my CoP II theories out there before we find out who the killer is tomorrow: a post

So I'm gonna start this by saying that I don't have a definitive theory I'm putting all my money on, this is more a collection of thoughts/leads/evidence as someone who's replayed every chapter as many times as it took to see what happened when you picked each option, and who's really invested in this

First things first: I'm not operating on the assumption that Juliana's killer is necessarily the same one who killed Nadja and Sebastyan, because we have no definitive proof of that and the more I think about it the more I think it makes more sense for them to be different people. I'm also including my theories on the whole Trystan trial thing, which they really should have looked into more deeply from the start to begin with, but anyway

1. Involved Siblings

At this point, I think it's pretty obvious that the only eligible suspects for either of the murders are Lydea, Vasili, Astrid, and the twins. The first three lied about their alibis, and the twins don't have one to begin with. All of them except for Lydea we know for a fact were in the palace by the time of Nadja's murder, and we have no idea where Lydea was. All of them, obviously, had access to the secret passage and the Thorne daggers; Astrid even has a convenient excuse for not having hers (she said she lost it in Tajikistan), but even if it isn't her, it is possible that she didn't lose her dagger but instead had it stolen by one of the other siblings, and doesn't know about it. In that case, I find it worth noting that Lydea is the only one who went out of her way to show that she still has her own dagger, and Vasili wouldn't have been expected to have one anyway; if he's the killer, using it might even be a good move to point the evidence away from him

Finally, we know for a fact that the first three were aware of the location of the cameras in the opera house, and, while we don't know for a fact that the twins do as well, we do know that Emika is perfectly capable of getting inside the surveillance system and get that information should they want to. Last but not least, those are the siblings we always have a chance of watching/asking about, which I think is worth noting. Finally, none of them save for the twins has been the object of a thorough investigation. Also, in the case of Juliana's murder, I think it's safe to say anyone younger than them would have been too young to have dated Juliana OR overpowered her so easily; Marguerite was a minor, and, while we're not sure Patryk was a minor, he was definitely built like a twig at the time, considering that he still is. Plus, by the time Juliana was a teenager, they were both definitely children

With that being said, I think it's safe to rule out the twins in general as well; Kaspar can't have been Nadja's murderer because we know that the murderer escaped through the secret passage, but Kaspar walked straight out of the room holding a bloody garrote like an idiot. He's also generally not smart enough to pull any of this off. And Emika does have an alibi, since we know that they were replying to randos on Twitter by the time of Nadja's murder. Not being Nadja's murderer rules out being Sebastyan's because those were definitely committed by the same person, and they have no motive to kill any of the people involved. I could maybe see Emika killing Juliana if Kaspar was the ex, because they are that insane (the incident with Astrid's ex shows that), but everything so far points to the killer and the ex being the same person. Also, if Kaspar had been Juliana's ex, Emika would never have given Trystan and MC the information about the letters, because it'd give them even more reason to suspect the two of them

That leaves Vasili, Lydea, and Astrid as elligible suspects. I'd like to point out, as a final comment, that Astrid and Vasili both knew that Juliana and Trystan were going to be on the boat the night she was murdered, and that they would be alone, something the killer would obviously have to know in order to kill Juliana. We don't know whether or not Lydea had that information but I don't think it'd have been too hard for her to get that info from the other two, especially considering that Vasili didn't even really want to cover for Trystan anyway and him and Lydea had a good relationship

2. Other possibilities

Other than the siblings, I see two other possibilities for people who could be involved: one of the monarchs, or a 10th sibling who's the illegitimate heir and going on a rampage about it, Veil of Secrets style

3. Juliana's murder

I think it's safe to rule out one of the monarchs being Juliana's ex, because what the fuck, and if the 10th sibling theory is real then Juliana wouldn't have known that whoever she was dating was a Thorne, since she didn't know who the illegitimate child was. That means Juliana's murderer was definitely one of the Three Elligible Siblings. Technically it could still be Sebastyan, but considering his "you've broken my heart every day of my life" line I think evidence points to him having pined desperately for her and not being requited

(Plus, killing her would have been a stupid move for the Act for Heir Equity since he needed her for public support, and the "he killed her out of anger for turning her back on the Act" theory doesn't really hold much water considering he was the one who wanted them to take a break. The e-mail Juliana sent him talking about Trystan also proves that he wasn't the ex, since it was just a few weeks after her angry letter to whoever it was that she hated so much; if the letter had been addressed to Sebastyan, why would she be trading happy e-mails with him gushing about her new love? We know for a fact that they were still on good terms by the time she was writing her ex angry letters; it wouldn't make sense for it to have been him

I see no reason whatsoever why Sebastyan couldn't have just stolen the locket from whoever the ex was because he is creepy about the women he likes [see: the sexy pictures of his ex in his goddamn office]. That would even give them extra motive to kill him, because if Sebastyan took the locket from them, it means he knew who the ex was)

So, we're back to where we begun: Lydea, Astrid, or Vasili. Here's the case for each of them being the ex:

Lydea: frankly, I can't see Lydea being the ex. The image of a jealous possessive person killing someone out of spite, stalking someone, and etc. does not fit her profile at all. Lydea keeps her temper in check no matter what and clearly has a pretty strong sense of honor and duty; and we know that that has been the case since she was a child. The only evidence in favor of Lydea I can think of is that the murderer was wearing the Drakovian Police cloak, but that's just a generic grey cloak anyway; and the fact that she recognized Juliana's locket so quickly, which strikes me as a bit odd for someone who didn't even know her that well, but it isn't exactly hard to believe that she recognized it simply because she's observant and saw Juliana a lot ever since they were kids. She is also too smart to have done such a shit job of burning her letters to her. All in all, she sounds like the least likely candidate

Vasili: the case for Vasili is a bit more substantial, but barely. It's pretty clear that Vasili has a lot more resentment towards Trystan than he lets on, and about his position in the family in general, which is why I think so many people are so deadset on BlameVasili2023. So I could see him being the kind of person who's a creepy bitter stalker without most people expecting it. But Juliana described her ex as being charming, and Vasili barely has any real presence; he seems more neutral than "charming" to me. He also just doesn't sound and act at all like the person we saw in that murder flashback. That means that we have two options here: either Vasili is secretly way more theatrical and sadistic than he lets on, and he's a master manipulator about it, in which case I think he would be able to keep his temper in check long enough to realize that killing Juliana would pretty much ruin any chance of getting the Act to pass; or he isn't all that calculating and good at holding back his temper, in which case I think we would have seen more signs of this incredibly possessive person

It's not impossible, however, especially considering that he knew where Trystan and Juliana would be, and had reasons to be particularly frustrated at her, not only for choosing Trystan but also for leaving Marguerite during her show. It would have been a pretty powerful combination: seeing Juliana with his own sibling, who is also the heir to a throne he will never get, and who is also leaving your little sister that you really care about in a moment that is important to her. Not to mention that she had taken a step back on getting the Act passed. The fact that Trystan is Marguerite's favorite despite all that is just rubbing salt to the wound, too. All in all, pretty decent motive, and we know his temper runs deeper than he lets on, even if he doesn't exactly fit Juliana's killer's profile. Considering his closeness to Bas, it also stands to reason that Bas would know about his relationship with Juliana through him, and resent him less for it than Trystan because he likes Vasili, at least. Vasili is also the only one I can think of that would make sense to say "but I finally found a way we can have everything we always wanted" to Juliana; if the plan had been to get rid of Trystan and get the Act to pass, that would make Vasili the heir, which I assume is something they fantasized about back when they were together. But killing Juliana got in the way of getting the Act to pass, and if Vasili was willing to kill to get it passed, why would he have sat on his ass and done nothing for 8 whole years after that, when the Act was tabled?

Astrid: I think Astrid is definitely the likeliest candidate out of the three. She fits the profile for the killer really well: seeming charming and nice at first (we know how good at manipulating she is, and she can seduce pretty much whoever she wants and definitely has a lot of friends), but really passionate and quick to anger. Trystan even said that the only thing Astrid likes more than falling in love is being angry, and she can definitely hold a grudge and seems vengeful. Juliana's murder was also very personal in general, not to mention theatrical; the bird whistle, the dramatic convo, the super personal murder method (blunt force trauma is pretty passionate, and we know they strangled her, too, which is pretty much the most intimate murder method there is), the relative sloppiness of it. This wasn't the perfect airtight murder plan Lydea would have come up with; so many things could have gone wrong, starting with Trystan waking up from all the drama. And it seems a bit too intense and not calculated enough for Vasili. But Astrid "tantrum" Thorne would definitely have murdered someone exactly how Juliana's murderer did. Plus, she also knew where Trystan and Juliana would be. The only point against her would be that it would have been a little less likely for Bas to know about their relationship, but she could have heard about it from Juliana herself, since they were friends. And I can't really see why she would choose that specific day to kill her, as opposed to any other time, but it could be related to the fact that Juliana was looking into the illegitimate heir. I also think it's worth noting that Astrid was the only one out of the three that had sent letters to Juliana when Trystan and MC went through the stack. Which sounded odd to me, since it was never mentioned that they were particularly close

4. Trystan's trial

I have no doubt in my mind that the one who sent the evidence to the Georgescus, bought off Trystan's lawyer, got the original audio of the "confession" edited, and etc etc etc was Queen Viktoria. We know it had to have been one of the monarchs, since in the book 1 bonus scene we see a Drakovian agent talking to a "Your Majesty" about framing Trystan. And Maksim has no motive whatsoever to want to get rid of Trystan, but boy, does Viktoria

Motive #1: we know for a fact that Queen Viktoria is the de factum leader of Drakovia. Maksim is barely there, and he was only even implied to have participated in official State matters on Trystan's first day back as heir. The whole rest of the time, it was Queen Viktoria and Queen Viktoria only who was calling the shots. She was even the one to preside Trystan's trial and announce Sebastyan's death despite the fact that he's not even her son. And we know from Eveline that Viktoria wanted to be Queen, which is why their arrangement works to begin with. So, Viktoria wants power. She wants to remain in control of the crown, which she will have to relinquish soon once Maksim turns 65. With Lydea as the heir, even if Viktoria handn't been the ruler by name she would definitely be the ruler in practice, because Lydea follows her every order without questioning. Lydea was her favorite, she was disciplined, she was obedient, she was a perfect fit. Trystan, in contrast, had always been a wild card and never seen eye to eye with Viktoria. And no matter what the official Thorne narrative about Trystan is, we know for a fact that Trystan cares. They do have a strong sense of responsibility - to Drakovia, to the people they love, to what they think is right, to people they barely know who got murdered and deserve justice. And we know their politics are progressive; they have talked about misogyny and social inequality and all the laws in Drakovia that they wanted to change, and I have no doubt that they care enough to go through with this. Trystan, as an heir, is Viktoria's worst nightmare, because they're disobedient and have the will and sense of responsibility to see through getting all the reforms Viktoria doesn't want to pass. There is nothing Viktoria wants more than to get rid of them and make sure Lydea inherits the throne instead

Motive #2: She has an illegitimate child. Duh. And we know from that bonus scene conversation that the main reason they wanted to get rid of Trystan is that they knew too much. I can't see anything important enough for Trystan to be able to discover other than Viktoria's illegitimate child. Considering how it is probably close to Juliana's murder, and Trystan was starting to revisit what happened then, it stands to reason that they would be worried about Trystan discovering who she was. Hence the need to neutralize them before Maksim had to relinquish the throne. Which can only mean one thing:

5. The illegitimate child

It has to be Lydea. It would make no sense otherwise

Viktoria has nearly no stakes in making sure no one knows Astrid is illegitimate. Who cares? Illegitimate children are already accepted in Drakovia, and Astrid is the third in line, so, barring Lydea's sudden death, she wouldn't even inherit the throne. And there's no way Viktoria would want her to. Astrid might be the only possible heir that would give Viktoria more grief than Trystan, because she has all the same qualities of being unpredictable and hard to control, without Trystan's sense of responsibility, which makes her harder to manipulate. Plus, she has ties to the mafia, which makes that particular power struggle much harder. If Astrid was the illegitimate child, I think Viktoria would probably shout it from the rooftops to make sure she never lives the nightmare of having Astrid inherit the throne, not go out of her way to make sure Trystan wouldn't be able to hypothetically look into it and find out about it

If it's Lydea, though? Viktoria is fucked. Lydea wouldn't be able to take the throne, which would leave either Trystan or Astrid. Unless the Act for Heir Equity passes, but if it does, Vasili will take the throne, not Lydea. And Vasili has no loyalty whatsoever to Viktoria; he's not even her son. Way I see it, Viktoria's most important interest at the moment is making sure Lydea inherits the throne; that means making sure no one finds out she's illegitimate and that the Act for Heir Equity doesn't pass. That's the only thing that gives her the motive to want to get rid of Trystan, and, possibly, to want to murder Nadja and Sebastyan

6. The current killer

If I'm right about Lydea being the illegitimate child, then what makes the most sense is for the killer to be under Viktoria's orders

I don't think Lydea would kill to make sure no one found out she was the illegitimate child; she doesn't even want the throne. And no one else has any stakes on making sure people don't find out about that. The existence of the illegitimate child has to be important, plot-wise. If it was simply about the Act, there would be no reason for that particular plotline. Plus, as pointed out relentlessly this week's chapter, the Act wasn't going to pass anyway. Whoever the killer is, stopping the Act alone can't be their only motive. But if this is about protecting the secret of the illegitimate heir? Then killing everyone connected to the Act, who also just so happen to have the means to find out about the illegitimate person, is killing two birds with one stone. Plus, Viktoria hates Sebastyan. She even calls him a "stain on the family" if you choose to tell her that she's grieving him. Were it not for the fact that we know from the flashback that Juliana was murdered by her ex, I'd even say that she probably killed all of them: Juliana to get rid of the Act for good, frame Trystan, get rid of a possible future queen with progressive politics, and stop her from looking further into the illegitimate child; Nadja and Sebastyan to make sure the following attempts to get the Act passed (and subsequent looking into the royal line like Juliana did) won't take off

Now. I find it unlikely that Viktoria would kill Nadja and Sebastyan herself, even if she is strong enough for it. If anything, because she can outsource that work, so why wouldn't she? And I don't think she'd want to risk being any closer to any of this than she needs to. Also, I don't think Sebastyan would turn his back to her. Which means she would need to get someone else to do it

I'd love for it to be Lydea, because that'd make a fantastic twist. The killer is the most obvious one, but for the complete opposite reasons than you'd think. It'd also explain Lydea wanting to hide the body, the identation from her ring on Sebastyan's neck (although, really, girl, take the stupid thing off), the remorseful act of placing Sebastyan in a more dignified pose, why Lydea lied about her alibi (twice), why Sebastyan would have turned his back to the killer, the strength and finesse the killer obviously possesses. With Nadja's murder, there was the sloppy attempt to frame Trystan, but there could be an easy explanation for that, which is that she didn't expect Kaspar to fucking show up to steal Trystan's shit. That'd mean she'd have to leave the scene before finishing the job of faking the stab wounds, leaving a sloppier job than usual

Buuut... That doesn't quite fit. For starters, if Viktoria had gotten Lydea to do the kills, why would she take Lydea off the investigation? It'd make much more sense to make her the investigator and lie about it. Plus, Lydea seemed genuinely surprised to see Sebastyan dead, and she seems genuinely invested in finding out who killed him. And if she had killed him under Viktoria's orders in order to protect the secret that she was the illegitimate heir, why would she tell Trystan and MC about the illegitimate child at all?

Even if Viktoria didn't tell her about that (which I don't think she would, because Lydea seems the type to immediately abdicate if she had known her claim wasn't legitimate), that would mean that Lydea really was in Sebastyan's house at the time of the murder, otherwise she wouldn't have gotten that information to begin with. And if Viktoria herself told her about it, why the hell would she want Lydea to share that information? And there is absolutely no way Lydea would have shared it without Viktoria's consent. National security matter and all that shit

So here's my favorite theory as to who she outsourced the job to: Colette

Colette was trailing Sebastyan, so she knew exactly when Sebastyan would be alone and MC and Trystan were conveniently out of the way. Easy enough then to leave the scene later and go after them tearfully telling them that she lost sight of him. In fact, trailing him gives her a wonderful excuse for any evidence they could find against her, since she had a perfectly valid reason to have been following him. We already know that her main allegiance is to the crown; that means Viktoria. And she, apparently, fucking guards the security cameras in the palace alone, so she was probably at the palace, and that'd explain how she didn't see shit about the murder in the surveillance feed. And, of course, Colette has the same training Lydea does, which means she's just as capable of getting the job done cleanly

She's not a Thorne (unless there really is a 10th sibling and it happens to be her), but she wouldn't have to be if she were under Viktoria's orders. Viktoria is too practical to give a shit about giving Colette a Thorne dagger if it were for the greater good or whatever. And let's be real, of course Viktoria knows about the stupid secret passage and its codes. If anything because Trystan probably used to hide in there to avoid their tutors and Lydea would absolutely snitch their room's code if Viktoria asked

But my favorite part of it is that Colette would probably also have her own ulterior motives: namely, getting rid of Lydea

Trystan's return meant that Lydea was no longer heir, which in turn meant that she could take the Captain of the Royal Guard title again. I'm not sure if she was Captain while Trystan was gone, but even if she was, when she took the throne that spot would be vacant again. And considering how closely to the palace Colette works, and how much Lydea trusts her, I think it's likely that Colette would take that spot once Lydea took the throne

It is in both Viktoria's and Colette's best interests that Lydea takes the throne, for different reasons, which means that them working together would have made a lot of sense. And the fact that their motives are different could explain some of the inconsistencies, such as the ring indentation. There's no way whoever the killer is is stupid enough to fucking leave this massive chunky ring on when going out to murder someone, especially considering they'd have put latex gloves on and getting those around a ring that big would be a fucking nightmare. Are these bitches uncapable of taking off a ring? Come on. Please don't insult my intelligence here. But Colette could have put that on with the specific intent to frame Lydea - who wears the ring on her left hand - if she believed that it would be easier to just let her take the fall for the murders than to try and get her to take the throne again. It'd also explain her going behind Lydea's back to give us info. I can also buy Colette rearranging Sebastyan's body out of respect - he was a member of the royal family, after all

The Thorne dagger could be to put us on a wild goose chase after one of the siblings and point us away from Colette/Viktoria. And Juliana's murder would probably be unrelated, which I actually believe it is, because the M.O is completely different. Juliana's murder was obviously a crime of passion (pardon the pun), even if a planned one, while the others were clearly strategic murders. If it's the same person who committed them, then they did it for different reasons

If Viktoria is behind the murders, it'd also explain her handing over the investigation to MC and not Lydea. I have to assume she thought we weren't as competent as Lydea, especially if we were working with Trystan, whom the entire family consistently underestimates. Getting Lydea away from the investigation might have been her way of making sure no one found out. Which obviously backfired, so she needed to change gears, especially if she knew how close MC and Trystan were to uncovering the truth behind Juliana

It's not airtight, but it'd make for an interesting story in my opinion. My main issue with this theory is that, if Viktoria wanted to get rid of Trystan ASAP, why would she have Nadja be murderer on a day when she knew for a fact Trystan had an alibi? Sure, the alibi was herself, which is convenient, but Maksim was also there, and Maksim likes Trystan. They did separate from them a few (minutes?) before the murder, so maybe she was planning to use that window to frame Trystan and wasn't expecting them to have been with MC when they found the body, ruining the "Trystan did it" theory. It could be that she's been scrambling after that, waiting for a good opportunity to get rid of Trystan (again), and she kept MC around because, since they became an unwanted witness, she needed to keep an eye on them, and there's no better way to do that than making sure they report to her

But there are other theories that I think could be interesting/make sense:

ASTRID

Astrid's been my main suspect for most of the book now, both because of the Juliana reasons mentioned ago and because she seems to always be conveniently there to derail the investigation whenever it goes a certain reason. She was the one who pointed us towards Sebastyan; she was the one who was around when we were talking to Olivia; she was the one trying to deflect and/or start drama among her other siblings whenever we were around trying to interrogate them. But now I have a few issues with my own theory:

1- Astrid doesn't give enough of a shit about Sebastyan to rearrange his body

2- Astrid is way too passionate to make such clean murders, especially Sebastyan's; I also don't think Nadja or Bas were close enough to her to be completely caught off guard by her attack the way the scene implied them to be. And if I'm right about Astrid having murdered Juliana, the differences in M.O would point to her not having murdered Nadja and Bas

3- I can't see a convincing motive

Say Astrid is the illegitimate child. I really don't see why she would be willing to kill to keep that information a secret. Maybe if she actually wanted the throne, but let's be serious: why the fuck would she? As is, Astrid has her perfect life. She has all the privilege with none of the responsibilities, and she can more or less do whatever she wants. She's not even interested in having a short talk with her entire family, nevermind spend most of her days in boring as fuck meetings with foreign dignataries having to make a bunch of decisions and fight her mom over it. Astrid doesn't want the throne, she wants to be at brunch in Barcelona with the girlies

My best guess for this one would be that she wanted to keep her status as a legitimate heir; that could track. Status is everything in Astrid's world, and even if becoming illegitimate would still mean she had the same money and privilege, it would kind of be a scandal that would damage her reputation. Maybe she killed Juliana for passion reasons and then found out about her own illegitimacy because of her, then she killed Nadja and Sebastyan to keep that secret when it looked like they would be poking into that information. It does make sense, and accounts for just about everything we've seen in her behavior

I have three issues with this theory: the first is that it's the most boring answer. The second is that I still don't think she is strong or clean enough to commit these murders, or to rearrange Sebastyan's body. The third is that, if Astrid is illegitimate, then I have no fucking clue why anyone in the family would have wanted to summon Trystan so close to Lydea's coronation

Astrid wasn't the one to get the evidence out there, because this was clearly ordered by one of the monarchs, unless Choices forgot that you don't use "your majesty" to refer to princes and princesses. If they did... Then fine, I guess, maybe she could have wanted to make sure Trystan wouldn't go poking around and find out about her, but I don't really see why she would bother with doing that considering that Trystan wasn't even in Drakovia to begin with. If all she wanted was to keep her illegitimacy a secret, then she already had everything sorted out; bringing Trystan back and reopening that whole wound sounds counterproductive

Unless I'm wrong and Astrid does want the throne, for reasons that I really cannot fathom. Then it could be that they called her "your majesty" because this is all part of a huge conspiracy to get her to the throne. I'm still not sure why she would summon Trystan back, but it does sort of explain the inconsistencies in both Nadja's and Sebastyan's murders. Because she could also be trying to frame Lydea. If she did, she could get rid of Trystan (out of psychological pressure, if nothing else) and Lydea if Lydea took the blame for the murders. It would explain the ring indentation on Sebastyan's neck and even the body rearranging if her plan was to point the investigation towards people who actually liked Sebastyan. She doesn't even have to have committed the murders herself, she could have hired someone and given them instructions. But Astrid hasn't really been gunning to turn the investigation towards Lydea; the one she kept pushing into our path was Sebastyan. Also, again, it's just sort of boring

And if it was really Queen Viktoria who tried to frame Trystan in the trial, which I really think is the most logical explanation, then I don't see why she would go through such lengths to protect Astrid's legitimate status. If it's Lydea, then yeah, she'd want to make sure nothing could get in the way of her coronation. But I can't see her going that far to hide Astrid's secret. Again: who cares? She's not even a viable option for the throne currently, and it's not like having bastard children is a massive scandal in Drakovia

If Astrid isn't the illegitimate child and it's Lydea instead... Then I see no motive whatsoever for her to murder Sebastyan and Nadja. Unless, of course, she does want the throne and thought it'd be a good opportunity to frame Lydea and get rid of Trystan. In that case, Juliana's murder, Trystan's summoning, and the subsequent murders are actually kind of unrelated. Which makes sense because there is so many levels of 5D chess going on here. Goddamn it, that works. Fine

But it could be simply that she killed Juliana, has nothing to do with the current murders, but has been hovering around the investigation to make sure we don't find out about Juliana. That would explain why she keeps trying to make us look into Sebastyan; if we believe that he was the ex, then her secret is safe. I think I kind of prefer that one, but I guess it could go either way

VASILI

The main points in favor of BlameVasili2023 are:

Both the ring and the dagger point to a legitimate Thorne being the culprit, and are really dumb moves, so they could have been Vasili's attempt to make sure he wouldn't be a main suspect

He has the most obvious reason to rearrange Sebastyan's body

He definitely seems strong enough to have committed the murders, and clean enough without being as perfect as Lydea to have been pretty good but still leave some clues

This one is lame, but in this week's chapter, if you choose to watch the twins or Astrid, you get +Detective if you guess at the reasons that imply they didn't do it; but if you choose to watch Vasili, you get +Detective if you wonder what could have made him hurt Sebastyan. I'd like to think Choices isn't shortsighted enough to leave such an obvious clue, but they did spoil the story twice in the chapter summaries, so

There is obviously more to him than meets the eye, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if he had some big dark secret. I do think he hates Trystan, or at least resents them deeply. Enough to want them away from the throne, even if he doesn't inherit it; at least Lydea is someone he respects

The main points against Vasili are:

WHAT THE FUCK IS THE MOTIVE

I could maybe see him killing Sebastyan to do that whole weird "vote for the Act to honor my little brother uwu" shit, but it sounds like a bit of an extreme move when getting rid of Markarov would have worked just as well without killing his own little brother. And if killing Sebastyan sounds like a stretch, then I really see no reason whatsoever for killing Nadja. If Vasili wants the throne, then Nadja working on the Act again was his best bet of getting that to happen; and he could have gotten rid of Trystan after that. It would have been more efficient than killing her, actually. Unless he already had his own plans to get the throne once Lydea became queen, and Trystan being back put those in jeopardy, so he impulsively killed her in an attempt to frame Trystan again. But Sebastyan's murder didn't point to Trystan being the culprit in any way; Vasili would have known by now that Trystan would have been with MC the whole time, thus having an alibi

Unless, of course, Vasili is Juliana's ex, and he killed Sebastyan to protect that secret. Or even to protect that he killed Nadja. But I struggle to see why Sebastyan would snitch on Vasili when he worshipped the ground Vasili walked on to begin with. Maybe it could be that Sebastyan couldn't actually forgive him for killing the woman he loved, or that he had a problem with killing Nadja to get their own goals; but Sebastyan isn't really above playing dirty, as we damn well know. And if it's about Juliana, why wait until now to say something?

Best possibility I can think of right now is that Sebastyan only found out recently that Vasili was Juliana's ex, which was when he discovered the locket in Vasili's things somehow. It would explain why he had it with him without being the ex himself. And if Sebastyan really loved Juliana as much as he was implied to, then that might just be the thing that would get him to turn on Vasili. So Vasili could have killed Juliana out of anger and spite, Nadja to try to get rid of Trystan, and Sebastyan to protect his secret after the aforementioned murders. It would explain the remorse, because he did love Sebastyan, and why he would feel like he had no other reason. And the queen summoning Trystan would be unrelated to that; it just forced his hand in the Nadja murder because he wanted to get rid of Trystan ASAP. It was even Vasili's idea to get Marguerite to have her fashion show, so he could have planned to kill him there all along

God damn it, that's actually kind of airtight. Fuck. I'm gonna be so mad if Vasili did it. I've been saying that I didn't see it for weeks and now suddenly he sounds like a prime suspect. God fucking damn it, fuck

I will however say that I still don't think Vasili fits the profile for Juliana's murder, and if he isn't Juliana's murderer, then he has no reason to kill Sebastyan. Even if Vasili killed Nadja for unrelated reasons, I don't think Sebastyan liked her enough to snitch on him; we already know Sebastyan isn't above a little political murder. So I guess I'm still filing that theory as not the most likely

LYDEA

Best guess for Lydea that isn't that she was under Viktoria's orders is that she does want the throne and lied about it. Not impossible, but I have believed that Lydea never wanted the throne from the start; it's pretty obvious that being Captain is what she enjoys. If she is the illegitimate child, then she could be killing to protect that secret. But then why would she tell MC and Trystan that there was one? As a last ditch attempt to turn them on Astrid, maybe, but that'd be really sloppy. Especially since she didn't have to tell them that the killer was female. She could have pointed them to any one of the siblings she wanted, so why Astrid, whom they never really considered?

Or it could be that it was never about the throne, but to protect Juliana's secret. Anyone looking into the Act would be looking into Juliana's death, and that might point them towards her. But again, I think Lydea is the least likely to be Juliana's ex. If she is, then this whole thing was made on impulse, in a sloppy way (using the Thorne dagger and keeping the ring on, really?) and without much care of the consequences, which is out of character for Lydea. Unless she has a way more impulsive and passionate streak than she lets on, which was what Juliana meant in that letter when she said that they wouldn't expect her to be so creepy and possessive. But it's kind of difficult to hide that you're that impulsive, and I just struggle to buy it for Lydea. Not impossible, though, and character consistency isn't Choices' strongest suit, so I guess that theory is on the run as well

THE 10TH SIBLING

This theory is more crack than anything, not to mention it's basically just Veil of Secrets 2.0, but I don't think one could accuse Choices of being incredibly original. If there is a 10th sibling, my favorite bet is that it's the queen's royal advisor. I could see how being put in that position, ignored by all the other siblings, in a position of subservience, etc etc, would make someone bitter enough to go on a killing rampage. Die hate cry. But if it is the 10th sibling, I think that Choices is gonna pull a "the motive is something we could not have possibly guessed at until the exact moment it is revealed to us out of nowhere" yet again, and I really hope they don't do that, because it's lazy and annoying and disappointing. I can't really see any coherent motive for the 10th sibling right now, since there are many holes in that theory:

Why would she get in the way of the Act for Heir Equity, which would basically put her in equal footing with the others?

Why now, and why these particular victims in this particular way?

Why did Viktoria hide the existence of her when the entire country knows Maksim has three entire illegitimate children? Unless she is older than Trystan (which the advisor seems to be. Also, she has no last name, just saying) and it would be particularly problematic for the firstborn to be a bastard, but sounds kind of like a stretch

There is no clear reason why that would in any way tie with Juliana's murder, which would be pretty disappointing and lazy of them

My best guess: the 10th sibling/royal advisor has been planning to take the throne this whole time, and getting Trystan back was the first step to that plan. She was the one who brought him back, and her lackey called her "your majesty" because they are part of a conspiracy to get her the throne. The plan was always to bring Juliana's murder back to light so they would find out there was an illegitimate child who would inherit the throne. And maybe that could rekindle the interest in the Act for Heir Equity, which had been well and truly dead at that point. But if that's the case, I don't see how killing Nadja and Sebastyan would in any way contribute to that. I could, however, see why she would show remorse over killing Sebastyan; he was, after all, the one closest to her position as a fellow bastard who wanted to change things. All in all, this is the theory that would require us to miss the most pieces of the puzzle, and would mean a lot of the information we got on the other siblings is just pointless. Which, let's be honest, is consistent with how they played Book 1, but I want to believe that this mystery is more interesting than that and the Thorne's involvement is more substantial

In conclusion

I need psychological intervention and the next chapters cannot come out fast enough

If you've read it this far, thank you! If you want to discuss theories, feel free to reblog, reply, or shoot an ask or DM

#playchoices #crimes of passion #crimes of passion 2 #cop2 spoilers #choices cop #meta #i guess????#idk this is just a really long rambling i doubt anyone will have the interest and patience to read it #but by god i needed to get it out of my system #also if any of my theories is correct i want the bragging rights even if i obviously don't have a definitive theory #i really hope the finale doesn't disappoint #because there are SO MANY interesting possibilities as of right now #cop2 has the potential to be really fucking good or to have the most disappointing finale in choices history so fingers crossed

30 notes · View notes