#they don't often do 1 to 1 parallels yk

[thefabelmans2022]

i have seen a lot of "rose roy was lobotomised" theories and it's very interesting but at the same time...like is it too easy. like idk obviously there's a connection to rosemary kennedy but to me that makes the lobotomy theory too simple.

#they don't often do 1 to 1 parallels yk #kendall's crash mirrors chappaquiddick but no one would say kendall is the ted kennedy of the family #i personally think she's dead and it was either drowning (the water motif) or suicide #i think she was maybe already a little unstable and then ewan left home and then logan did too and they left rose with uncle noah #and she got worse and she either drowned or she killed herself - maybe both - and logan blames himself for not being there #succession #god i really hope we find out

[mirrorballdazai]

Hey! Can you explain a bit more your comparison between it and st kids? I don't really understand. Have a nice day <3

gladly !!

there are LOTS of parallels between the st and it kids on so many levels, but what i was focusing on in that post was the difference between the two in relation to sex (and other “adult stuff” like cigarettes, but mainly sex) and how that shows different ways to cope with trauma and what the kids symbolize as a whole in the show/movie/book

first off let’s remember that the losers are all 11 years old, if i remember correctly only stanley is 10 in the book. the members of the party are 12 in the first season and obviously they grow up, so at what is right now the end of the show they’re all 14/15.

both groups face struggles like bullying (which is often rooted in racism, homophobia, ableism and other things), abusive or neglectful parents (or in max’s case, siblings), personal fears and obviously there are the supernatural plots, so monsters and whatever pennywise is (i didn’t finish the book yet but i think he’s an alien or a semigod but anyway).

the interesting thing is that even if the it kids are younger they show a knowledge of some, idk how to word it, “adult things”. for example some of them smoke — in the movies i’m pretty sure beverly is the only one who does it both in the og and in the remake. the thing that really stuck with me though is that they all know what sex is or even just have a vague idea of it (for example eddie in the book doesn’t really know what exactly is, but shows that he knows that it’s a thing). they make jokes about it and say/think sexual things in general. it’s also connected to eddie’s visions since in the book he sees a man with syphilis who offers to do yk sexual stuff which is connected to his fear of being ill and stuff.

on the other hand the st kids never show to know what sex is, except for max that talks about “happy screams” in s3, which makes sense because max is supposed to be the one who knows more stuff in the group, the one who lived in a city and all that. el then mentions again these “happy screams”, and when someone (i dont remeber who exactly i’m sorry) asks what happy screams are max interrupts el who was about to answer and says that it doesn’t matter — which could be for many reasons. maybe she is embarrassed or something, but when i first watched it i thought “ah she probably doesn’t want to kind of ruin everyone’s innocence” since she showed stress only after that-person asked what happy screams are, which shows that they don’t know what sex is at least in max’s mind.

the question now is why. there’s this difference between these groups, but why? for mainly two reasons.

1. show different ways to cope with trauma

my theory is that stephen king wanted to show how less innocent kids can be after trauma and abuse. he wanted to show the cruel reality, the one where kids are not that innocent even when they’re very young, especially after bad experiences. those experiences make them want to act like grown ups, talking about sex, joking about it and stuff like they think adults do.

stranger things does the complete opposite: the kids are an ideal. if you think about it even after their traumatic experiences they stay sweet and innocent — because let’s be real, they never act really bad. maybe they’re a bit bitchy or something, maybe they distance themselves from the others, but they never do REALLY bad stuff. i mean they acted like mike was a criminal in s2 because he cheated on a test/essay, or because of the graffiti thing. mike also says “everyone graffitis the bathroom stall”, which is true! they act like he’s a really bad kid for doing something normal kids do on a daily basis! another example that i love is that when will is feeling bad he clings to his childhood even more, whether that be playing d&d or going trick or treating or drawing. those are normal things kids do. when max faces depression and anxiety she stops talking to basically everyone — which kids often do, it can even be selective mutism in some cases. and there are many MANY other examples !! like el and mike’s relationship — whenever they’re stressed they scream about how much they love each other, they cling to each other and their relationship, because it was their first crush, their first love (even if you think they never really loved/had a crush on each other it was their first relationship you know?). being each other’s partner is a part of their childhood they cling onto when they’re scared.

2. because they symbolize different things

the losers are an example of how reality is: even things that are supposed to be pure and innocent can be cruel, “dirty”. they’re the symbol of a society that puts each person to their limit, sometimes making them the worst version themselves.

the party members are an ideal. they represent innocence, the “good” in a world full of bad people, bad ideals, bad decisions. they’re a symbol of hope, because a world that is as ugly as theirs needs hope.

+ i also want to point out that it as a whole has a grey type of morality — the kids do bad and good things and at one point you don’t even know what to think about them. richie is a kid that deals with this feeling of alienation from his friends (canon in book and in the movies, but for different reasons), he’s overall a sweet guy, but also makes offensive comments — sometimes these comments are even racist, or fatphobic, or ableist. henry is a character you’re supposed to hate from the first to the last moment, but you’re sometimes even supposed to emphasize with him because at the end of the day he’s been abused his whole live. while in stranger things the characters are inherently good or bad. a black and white kind of morality.

#i hope this was worded well #im sorry if i made any typos or mistakes of any kind im too lazy to reread everything #byler #byler tumblr #stranger things #it book #it movie #gay monster show #gay clown book #gay clown movie #stranger things analysis #byler analysis #kinda #it analysis

[khaleesiofalicante]

Things that broke me- (cause I love lists and you love lists so)

1. “I was raised by you two. Love is the only thing that makes sense to me”

2. Tell me you wouldn’t do it for Bapak? I wouldn’t- (I think even if he wanted, Alec would never make that choice because he has too much responsibility and he’s not the kind of person who’d leave his people dying and save himself yk)

3. Malec telling their kids about constellations while cuddling- REVIVED MY COLD DEAD HEART

4. Magnus kissing Rafael’s nose in that flashback- I’m love them

5. ALEC LIGHTWOOD HOLDING HIS KIDS IM SOBBING THIS BEAUTIFUL MAN HAS MY WHOLE FUCKING HEART (someone fix his pls lol)

6. “I love you more than anything in the world- also me” @ Magnus Bane

7. “You’re sounding like the cohort”- OOOOOFFF

7. Anjali talking about Magnus lol

8. Honestly, max has been acting very maturely. there were def other less drastic ways for character development other than killing his bf but end goal right?

9.Rafael trying to send Alec a voicemail but failing to do so

10.Rafael kissing Alec’s hands

11. RAFAEL’S THROWBACK TO ‘I’m love you’ from TLIL- DANI I CANNOT.

12. Malec being Malec after literally the most devastating night of their lives (less devastating than the morning but more on that later)

This parallel

David? Is that my David?

Rafael? Rafael?

LISTS!! I LOVE YOUUU.

Thoughts on Max (based on some other asks too!)

His character and/or moral development is a decision I made consciously for a couple of reasons.

1. Other than malec, I do feel David was (unintentionally and indirectly) a reinforcer in Max's immaturity.

He did call Max out of course. But he was also the person who reinforced the idea "I love you no matter what". I think the idea that David would forgive him for anything and love him despite being an asshole may have further influenced Max to be a bit of a shit.

I also think Max might have felt the need to be the Slytherin to David's Hufflepuff - if that makes any sense. It's about the dynamics, you know? It's very common in relationships. Sometimes you tend to adjust your personality based on your partner's personality - which often leads to you forgetting who you actually are.

But now that David is gone, I think Max has more space to think about who he is.

2. I also didn't want Max to be the cliche of "my loved one died so now I get to be an asshole to everyone around me cause I am sad". While Dark!Max would awesome, I don't think it necessarily needs to be prompted by losing a loved one. I feel sometimes trauma can be a tool to make oneself better and to be come more introspective. It's something I tried to use with Max's character. I think it's going well so far.

Also I love, love, love, love how to identify the parallels and callbacks and patterns.

It means the world to me <3

#love yaaaa byeeeeee #lbaf