I think, in a lot of ways, Monika and Sayori are reflections of each other.
Really, I think all of the girls are similar in a lot of their issues (self-esteem, anxiety, etc) and that's something emphasized in a lot of the stories, and a big part of why they all gravitate towards each other and work to create the club as a safe space for all of them, but I think Monika and Sayori in particular are just very much alike.
I think Trust really emphasized this similarity in the reveal of Sayori's poem, Become the Flower.
Prior to shifting focus onto the poem, Monika talks to herself about her real vision for the Literature Club. I think here, Monika points out what Sayori actually meant when she said that Monika was "trying to make the club [she] needs the most, out of anyone", even if she doesn't actually realize that yet. It's pretty clear that when she says that literature is a window to the real self underneath the person who's "forced to always smile and blend in", and is "forced to be perfect", she's really talking about herself.
I think that a lot of Monika's character throughout Trust is expressed more subtly, often in a roundabout way like this. A huge part of the story is centered around Monika's own personal struggles expressing herself, and that trait is pretty well exemplified in this indirect way of talking about her own struggles. I think that the reason why Monika's characterization here is so subtle overall is reflective of this.
And I think it's pretty blatant that this is statement is also meant to be reflective of Sayori, given that we immediately move from this statement onto the poem which reveals to Monika that she's been hiding her own problems. In this way, I think Team Salvato wanted to explicitly point out how similar they really are, and draw your attention to it.
I think that the way that Trust as a story is put together is meant to really emphasize just how similar they are even in their differences; spending a great deal of time focusing on Monika's own problems, to then showcase Sayori as the mirror to them.
I think the two of them make a very interesting pair in that respect, because a big similarity they have is that they very much place others above themselves, so they both end up individually building each other up while they put themselves down. It creates this strange back and forth where they each insist they suck and the other is great, when the reality is that they're both pretty fantastic.
In the statement Monika made to herself about her vision of the club, while it's clear she's talking about herself, she frames it in the context of somebody else getting those benefits out of the Literature Club, rather than herself. Throughout the entirety of Trust, she speaks dismissively of her efforts and her problems alike, while pointing out that Sayori is providing a lot of help. Sayori by contrast spends most of her time hyping her up and points out, explicitly, that Monika doesn't give herself enough credit. She also dismisses her own efforts, pointing out in most things she does, up into the climax, that Monika is a lot better than her at whatever she's doing. And when Sayori's problems are actually revealed, she explicitly says that she doesn't want Monika to worry about her, and that she doesn't want to have this conversation.
I think this all really shows that both of them are averse to tackling their own problems head-on, and I think this comes out of a fear of being vulnerable, since that's directly mentioned several times in Monika's issues openly expressing herself.
I think what makes Monika's particular brand of self-negging quite so disheartening is that she dismisses it out of hand as her being silly and dramatic, and in that way, she doesn't actually address the fundamental problem underlying it, nor does she actually address the statements themselves as incorrect. The amount of time she spends talking down her own problems as something trivial and silly, particularly in comparison to Sayori's problems, are a manifestation of her own desire to avoid the vulnerability of even having these problems, and it's just...heartbreaking. Sayori's denial is its own can of worms, but Monika's ability to so consistently minimize her issues when they are clearly still impacting her is so uniquely troublesome.
I think a big difference between the two of them in that respect is that Monika wears significantly more of her heart on her sleeve, so Sayori finds it a lot easier to directly target Monika's problems than Monika does in the reverse, but their individual habits of avoidance are coming from the same place.
I'm traveling a bit aimlessly in this essay, trying to tie things together nicely as I see them, but there are just a lot of similarities I notice between their actions and the way they think that showcase that they have a lot of the same problems, and a huge theme in Trust is expressing oneself, which both Monika and Sayori struggle to do, in much the same way.
I think a key similarity between the two of them is their tendency to catastrophize over a situation when left alone, mostly revolving around seeing the worst possible scenario for how they could've personally messed up the situation. I'm just rewatching Trust for this little essay, so there are two major moments I see Monika doing this, but I remember Sayori doing this...a few times, actually, throughout the side stories.
I think the spiral Monika goes into after reading Become the Flower is particularly important, as it exemplifies the habit of dismissing her own problems fantastically; in this case, she has an excuse. It's true that Monika's issues with her perfectionism seem silly and trivial in comparison to Sayori's, but that's exactly the thing: She shouldn't be comparing them in the first place! Her problems are real, and they clearly cause her distress, but because Sayori's own issues appear so much more serious than hers, she dismisses them wholesale as her being dramatic and silly. Because Monika's problems seem so small, she doesn't see them for the problems they really are. In the same way, because her own accomplishments and work seem so small, she doesn't see them for the accomplishments they are.
This spiral showcases Monika's biggest problem, the reason why she has such trouble expressing herself, and conversely, the exact same problem Sayori has. She doesn't want to be the center of attention.
Put another way, she doesn't think she deserves to be the center of attention. Her problems are so trivial; her accomplishments menial. Her fear of vulnerability isn't a fear that others will hurt her; it's a fear of being selfish.
Sayori is very similar, in that the reason she actively works to avoid showing any possible sign that anything is wrong is because she doesn't want anyone to worry about her. She doesn't want other people to dedicate time and energy to her.
I think that for both of them, this comes from low self-esteem. Sayori is self-explanatory I think, but I'd say Monika's perfectionism makes it exceptionally difficult for her to really feel accomplished in anything she does, which, coupled with her constant preoccupation with how she appears to other people (I think Monika places very high expectations on herself. I mean, Trust literally starts with her frantically apologizing and saying "I normally don't ever do this!" when Sayori finds her napping) makes it very difficult for her to feel confident in herself.
The fear both Sayori and Monika have in being vulnerable isn't that people will use that vulnerability to hurt them.
It's that people will try to help them.
And I think that's a really big part of why Sayori feels like she can trust Monika with her darkest thoughts, because she understands that they're the same in a lot of ways.
Monika created the club which she needed the most...and it was also the club Sayori needed the most, for the exact same reason.
I think it's kinda easy to overlook a lot of this because of the sheer amount of focus placed onto Sayori and the more explicit issue Monika has (insofar as the plot is concerned), but I think Sayori is exactly what Monika needs just as much as Monika is what Sayori needs.
80 notes
·
View notes
Oh, wait, wait, ok, I can tell tumblr my news now.
I was accepted into the JET Program and will be moving to Japan for one year starting in late summer to teach English. : )
I don't know how many other applicants have ever had either of my specific application 'angles'. I think they were both pretty weird, but also very, very me, and I'm pleasantly surprised that they seemed to have worked, going off both by the acceptance and the very positive and warm reactions I got during the interview I had. These were:
Science/scicomm/museum background + implying mutual interest in and love of like insects and sea life could be an avenue of intercultural connection and exchange
India and Japan have always struck me as weirdly similar in ways nobody seems to discuss, especially in both being simultaneously hurtling into modernity and deeply traditional/conservative in many ways and places
So. Is this a silly idea considering most people in this program are fresh college grads, and people my age are expected to maybe be getting more settled rather than hopping continents? Is this a scary idea, considering I'll have to uproot all my shit and go exist in a foreign country whose language I really don't know beyond miniscule smatterings? I mean, hmm, yes on both counts, but I'm very excited. On count one, I'd only get older in the future and demonstrably *don't* already have a settled life and career here to disrupt (lol), and on count two...guys, I'm so so tired of letting fear and inertia make my life decisions.
Time to pack up and store most of my shit and end my lease and. Yeah. Also I haven't actually been to India in five years and will probably try to visit my relatives there in the coming months since idk if i'd had an opportunity for a prolonged visit in the future during the one year (at least) in jp. I'll also be probably selling, trading, or giving away a lot more of my hobby shit (that was sort of an ongoing project already but since I'll be unable to use most of it for a year plus it's another reason to do so), so uh, if you've ever wished I would sell any of my dolls now might be time to commit BJD Hobby Taboo and ask me lol. And, obviously, I'll be studying more Japanese, because mine is incredibly へたくそ at the moment. So much to do. But I'm really excited. And thank you to all of y'all that have been encouraging to me about anything related to this matter <3
24 notes
·
View notes
One of my least favorite parts of how JRO wrote Optimus is that he wanted so badly to continue his dark and gritty world building making the Autobots problematic, but evidently couldn't reconcile this with Optimus being a Heroic Paragon, so instead he leaned way too hard into "oh Prowl was the one who did this and it was behind Optimus' back" which if anything I think makes Optimus look worse, not better. Because then it's like, okay I know Optimus trusted Prowl a lot as his friend but you CANNOT TELL ME that over the course of 4 million years, Optimus as the leader of the Autobot army who literally would have access to 99.9% of all the records they produce, would never notice or question where some of these odd/inconsistent details were pointing. It just seems really inconsistent with how a real military would actually function, especially regarding Optimus' character, who is incredibly thorough and responsible and wouldn't neglect to keep up with all the details of his army.
Hell, Optimus knows who the Wreckers are and had them on call for tricky operations when he needed them (Stormbringer) so he's literally not at all ignorant of/averse to the use of special wartime units composed of dubious individuals. He's the fucking commander of an entire army, of course he knows that War Is Hell (TM) and no one's hands are clean. That's not even getting into all the stuff he got up to in phase 2/3, I mean everything from the annexation of Earth to OP breaking humans out of prison against Council orders shows that Optimus is no stranger to immoral and/or unlawful means.
It also leads to a lot of annoying fanon where people write Optimus (sometimes unintentionally, sometimes not) as like some sort of ignorant fool who's unaware of the machinations of his own army or has some sort of naiveté of "b-but we can't use bad tactics against the enemy! I would never condone the use of morally gray means in war!" No, IDW Optimus knows perfectly well all of the bullshit he's enacted/condoned for the sake of trying to win the war. Some stuff is definitely out of character for him and was only machinated because of Prowl, but I think this fandom REALLY underestimates Optimus' personal agency/responsibility as the commander of a whole ass army and ESPECIALLY underestimates Optimus' capacity to condone morally gray Bullshit Of War while still being a good person individually as well as, comparatively, the lesser evil compared to Megatron/the Decepticons.
Anyways what I'm saying is JRO may be a good writer but he's really hesitant to make Optimus morally gray and does some asspulls sometimes to justify most of the bad things the Autobots did as "Optimus just didn't know," and since the majority of the IDW1 fandom only reads JRO's stuff they go running with this premise of ignorant/uninformed Optimus when there's evidence elsewhere in canon to show that Optimus is, in fact, very highly aware of the bullshit he's allowed "for the greater good" and the only stuff he was "unaware of" was the stuff he would literally never agree to the ethics of, like bombing innocent neutrals disguised as Decepticons to get them to join the Autobots.
16 notes
·
View notes