#this specific aspect of her character means a lot to me

[stagefoureddiediaz]

Hello, I don't get the "couch theory is a deeply buried fandom thing" going on ? I rewatched the beginning of season 6 just yesterday and it's a completely canon theory that Buck exposes to Eddie then to Bobby in those exact words, so I'm confused at the freak out ?

Hey Nonnie

Sooooooo Couch theory actually goes back to pre season 6 times and there is a difference between couch theory and couch meta - I shall attempt to explain!

So there have been jokes bouncing around fandom since fairly early on about Buck and couches - partly because they've always been a low key thing on the show (Buck and Eddie helping Maddie move her couch, Buck sleeping on Maddies/Chims couches when he moved out of Abbys, his comment about sleeping on the couch after the truck bombing etc) but some time mid way through s4 (I think - someone can correct me if I'm wrong) it was mentioned that Buck rarely interacts with anyone on a couch except Eddie and Chris - especially as time has gone on. it didn't really go anywhere aside from being a fun observation. It picked up a bit when we had Buck sleeping on the Diaz couch after the shooting - but it really was a fandom thing that we had a bit of fun with - and it becae a staple of fanfic.

Fast forward to season 5 and suddenly Bucks couch became a real thing - especially when Taylor moved into Bucks loft - I made an off hand comment at some point (I can't find the post) about how Taylors couch being blue and brought in by the two guys was a metaphor for Eddie during the shooting - how Eddie was always the thing between them in their relationship, not Lucy. Anyway things spiralled from there and there were many conversations happening about the couch being used as a metaphor for Buck's relationships etc - most of this was during the hiatus between seasons 5 and 6.

Then when season 6 started and Buck hadn't gotten a new couch, and he acknowledged why he hadn't got a new couch - the very thing we had been discussing over hiatus - and Oliver and Kristen Reidel mentioned it in an interview as well.

So now we're in a situation where the character has attached his own meaning to his couch, while we in fandom have out own thing going on with the couch of it all, essentially creating two different theories. Well a theory and a metaphor. I have recently reblogged a lot of hte couch theory posts should anyone want to read them for the full theory and exploration of the subject, but what it essentially boil down to is the following;

Couch theory is the fandom theory about Buck and his relationship with couches and encompasses the fact that its far more tied to the Diaz boys - such as the fact that post coma, Buck can only find the peace to sleep on the Diaz couch and not on his own - the one his mother had brought him. the theory posts explore the fact that we see Buck on the Diaz couch far more than anyone elses couch (in fact irc, other than his own couch, we rarely see Buck actually on a couch - chairs or armchairs yes but rarely couches - in other peoples houses!)

Then there is the couch metaphor - which is the symbolism Buck himself placed on his couch - it is the part of the theory that has crossed over as the character has become self aware of this specific aspect of the couch of it all - it is him recognising that he hasn't actually been the one to chose his couch - that his girlfriends have chosen them for him - and within that that he didn't have much agency in choosing the relationships either (this is not to say he didn't want to be in those relationships or that he was forced into them, it is him acknowledging that he has essentially been chased/ pursued and then gone along blindly, rather than the other way round, or an equal pursue/ pursued situation.) so like his needing to choose a new couch, he is going to take his time choosing his next partner.

Now we have a situation where Buck was seemingly going to pick out a new couch with Natalia at the end of s6 - which should, by implication of the weight Buck placed on the choosing of a new couch, mean that Natalia was the one - that Buck himself felt he had agency in his choice of relationship - and that he could stop placing so much weight on the couch and its symbolism.

Only we're in season 7 now, Buck didn't last very long with Natalia (a few weeks at most as the season is meant to more or lest pick up where s6 left off) and we haven't seen (properly) the new couch in the loft. In Bucks head he may no longer be placing any importance on the metaphor of the couch, however, the shows reluctance to give us little more than a glimpse through the stairs of a couch existing in the space, despite the fact we've had a couple of scenes in the loft now, is suggestive that there might in fact be more to the couch theory still to play out. Thats not the part the character is aware of (the metaphor) its the part he is un aware of - the part the audience is aware of - the theory that shows the Diaz boys as being central to the couch and Bucks search for happiness.

So couch theory lives on (it never died) and we wait to see how things play out with Buck getting (already having) a new couch, the fact that he already has one and where things head in relation to the diaz boys and Eddies couch - because Chris is the only one who has sat on it so far this season!

I hope this helps clear things up a little Nonnie but feel free to come back with more questions if you have them.

#kym answers things #nonnie asks #couch theory #couch meta #its all about character awareness and them placing their own meaning on to something versus fan thoery #evan buckley #911 abc

[aquickstart]

i need to talk to you guys about the colors of the Cattons (Felix specifically) and Oliver. the clothes they are wearing are telling the story of Oliver taking over and leaving his mark throughout the whole movie, with Oliver's failures and successes and a final triumph. holy shit. get in. this is long and ends in ancient greek culture trivia. let;s talk please.

disclaimer: am starting from Oliver's arrival at Saltburn. before that the outfits are also very intentional, but it's a lot more complicated and it has been discussed before. the world distorts once we are at Saltburn and the story gets truly gothic there, and every detail—including color!—is enhanced in meaning. also, special thanks to @kivlaro for doing this with me, the thoughts on this specifically and the Saltburn craze on the whole. pics and detailed analysis under the cut!

let's start from the beginning. here is Oliver at the door. simple, blue shirt.

the shirt is sort of its own character. logically it makes sense as Oliver's suitcase is small and he spends the whole summer there, of course he'll rewear stuff a bunch. but it is blue.

in contrast to Felix, in yellow. yellow is one of Felix's colors (he is the sun, which i've talked about here btw, so this makes sense).

same to Pamela, in blue. first time we see her, she is next to Elspeth, wearing the color that is Oliver's, taking the place that he takes right away, in this very scene. the only other time she is physically present on screen is at dinner, in black and white, and black and white are a blank slate. she is stripped of color and gone very fast.

a bit of crucial data for later: Oliver, in blue, and Felix in pink. pink is very important on Felix. this is their first morning together. they are separate and opposite, solid, contained.

where it starts to get good is the morning after the vampire strike.

Venetia is a Felix extension, just as everyone in the house is to Oliver. i will eventually rant about Saltburn as a whole entity and Cattons as aspects of one self, and Oliver as psychosis, but not here. so, yes, Venetia is a pink riot, a euphoria of self-containment because Oliver gave her a piece of something she felt she lacked to feel whole (validation, attention, care), not a piece of blue, of himself. Oliver is expectedly solid blue. Felix is incredibly interesting and something i didn't pay much attention to at first: predominantly blue, incredibly upset at Oliver for ditching him, with a tile of bright red (on the left! close to heart! over-reaching here but like still!), which still tracks. i mean, really, if i had so much foreign color bleed into me and then abandoned, i'd be pissed, too. nice little touch is sir James' beloved hydrangeas, behind Felix, also pink, very pink, always pink; i don't think i've seen them blue in the movie, although the sort exists.

Farleigh. sweet baby Farleigh i love you. I'm not dead-set on my interpretation of this specifically but i think multiple things are happening with Oliver and Farleigh here. like Rent, which is their song, blue is their color of outsiders and the triers to fit in. Farleigh points out the favoritism and preference of Oliver to him and his mother here, so it may also be appropriation of color to draw attention to Farleigh as almost (but never quite) Oliver. it may also be as simple as that Farleigh, as much as he denies and resists, still retains Oliver's influence, which bleeds into him very slowly.

a nice little moment of Felix wearing blue swim shorts with just tiny specks of a pink pattern. Oliver's shorts also have a bit of pink, but less than Felix's. Oliver is pretty good at remaining unaffected and uninfluenced overall.

and we're getting to where it all clicked and started for me. the Quick family house, the failed reconciliation, and the immediate aftermath. oh it's so good.

on the drive there, Oliver is blue, Felix has a pink polo shirt with a solid blue pullover over it. this is the most blue Felix has ever been (this is the most blue he will ever be!), this is trust. however shaky and toxic it is, Felix loves Oliver and accepts him into his world. as a side note, Oliver's parents are also very blue, mom more so than dad. nice!

and then it crashes. immediately after, it's the evening of the same day, but Felix is not wearing the blue pullover anymore. this is very, very important. this is rejection. it's the end for Oliver in Felix's world and with his trust. Felix, again, in solid pink, Oliver in solid blue. Felix successfully rips him out with the roots and everything. ouch.

daddy. sorry. is that highlighter? sweat? fuck. let me- daddy. SORRY

no i actually have a point about this.

the clothes are replaced by the lights, but we roll with it. Oliver basks in the blue-green light, while Felix is on the other side, in pink and purple and red. sure, blue shines through, and Oliver also walks through the slashes of pink, but it is mostly pretty separate, Oliver watching Felix's pink in his own blue from a distance.

the morning after palette is deep. the wine color that is so prominent in these scenes is fascinating to me. if i were to over-reach again i'd say it's the Oliver in Felix's attributes and in his place that requires the robe to be so dark, not usual definite pink, because deep blue has leaked into the color itself, mixed with it, made itself integral to the shade. but it's also just a nice color, and it is pink in its core. the flowers (with sir James in the background) i think are also this specific shade for the same reason. you look at what remains of Felix everywhere here, and it is his color.

and finally oh the lunch scene. the last supper. the judgement day. the who's afraid of virginia woolf madness.

i think we've established what's up with Oliver, but i also think it's important that he is his own color at lunch but in Felix's pink/wine right before and after. lunch is where he attacks, whereas before and after is where he grieves and enjoys. Farleigh is almost completely blue save for a strip of the same deep pink, and he is soon cast out, and Venetia is striped, blue and pink/salmon, affected deeply by Oliver yet still clinging on to the Catton pink with grief, probably, but also love for Felix.

and after all this, Oliver leaves himself.

no, like, actually, literally himself. sure, he'd got a taste of the Cattons and the pink, but he is a monolith, a solid blue when he leaves Saltburn. he has not been affected by the house, he has taken what he wanted but stayed true and whole. what a power move, honestly.

but it's an even bigger deal that 16 years later, Elspeth runs into Oliver wearing all white and a blue scarf. oh, she's not let this go, alright; it was a long time ago, "but not to me," she says. What Oliver has been up to in that time is a great question, without a doubt he's been keeping tabs on the remaining family as much as he could; but Elspeth has never moved on, either. She has held on to Oliver's blue and the pink is not important at all now. Oliver, of course, is invariably, unwaveringly blue. welcome back to his show.

and welcome back to his triumph.

the only color (except for, again, white and black) we see him wear in the flashback about Saltburn inheritance is the all-too familiar deep pink. wine. bright pink mixed with deep blue.

now i will take a liberty and step back, over-reach, over-interpret and go insane. here's a fun bit on ancient greek culture trivia for you.

this is an interesting and complicated historiographical and linguistic debate that i will not even attempt to relay here, but the essence of it is this: for us, the sea is conventionally deep blue. historically, one of the most prominent civilizations considered "deep wine" to be the descriptor for it (not necessarily the color but the property. highly rec to look this up it's so fascinating). what it gives me here is that Oliver has changed color, but not his self. he has integrated, mixed, but persisted, completely winning over, triumphing. long live the king!

in conclusion, i would just like to propose "colors" by halsey as the next cattonquick anthem. thank you for your attention, please let me know your thoughts. yours, yes, you. cheers. god. peace out

#saltburn #cattonquick #quickstart #oliver quick #farleigh start #felix catton #venetia catton #mine #saltburn journaling

[ofswordsandpens]

Okay compiling my most critical opinions on the pjo show so far (episodes 1 & 2)

The Gods' Conflict, Foreshadowing, & Big Three Kids

The show has seemingly dropped a lot of the foreshadowing and threat regarding the gods impending war over the theft of the lightning bolt. In the book, Percy remarks about how the weather's been inexplicably weird and extreme. When he gets to camp everyone is on pins and needles about something and they don't want to talk about it but its still very present. By the time he's claimed as a son of Poseidon and everyone's like "oh fuck" and then Chiron finally explains to Percy that the gods think he's the lightning thief, everything clicks into place for the reader. It all makes sense why everything seems so wrong... because things are wrong. Meanwhile in the show, that doesn't carry through as much, so the reveal of the conflict between the gods and why that's a big deal falls flat in comparison imo.

They dropped/stalled the foreshadowing of the fates and the cutting of the string. They could very well include this in future episodes, and probably will, but I think the timing of it - Percy seeing this before he even knew he was a demigod - again carries some hefty significance and helped set the foreboding tone of things being wrong even from the beginning.

They did drop Zeus's attack on Percy in the minotaur battle completely, which does disappoint me. In the book, its lightning that blasts the car off the road. In the show, Sally seemingly loses control of the car. That change is pretty significant, because it's again losing the power of RR's foreshadowing in the book. The attack on Percy outside the camp borders was a duel attack from Zeus and Hades.

Finally, I don't like the changes they made to Percy's claiming scene, namely, the reaction from the rest of CHB. Percy being a son of Poseidon is a huge deal. When Percy's claimed, the attitude is very much begrudging reverence paired with genuine fear of what it means and what he represents. In the book, Percy is claimed. People gasp. Everyone kneels. Annabeth says, "This is really not good." In the show, Percy is claimed. People... stand there? Annabeth smiles - she's going to get her quest. The only person who has the most outright negative reaction is Luke. I won't go so far to say this is out of character for Annabeth, but it is focusing on an entirely different aspect of her character in the moment, and what the audience gets from Percy's claiming scene here, the tone, is now different from the book. Basically, the reverence and fear don't really carry across to the show, which I think is important.

The phrase "forbidden child" slaps tho.

2. Gabe's Characterization, Sally's Characterization, & Why the Changes do Make a Difference

I'm going to say this with great care: The show has absolutely depicted an abusive relationship between Sally and Gabe. The show has shown Sally to be a strong woman who would do anything for her child. The show has shown Gabe to be a controlling, toxic man.

What they have depicted in the show does not read like the characters and dynamic in the books.

Book Gabe is a violent, menacing drunk. He is so disgusting and vile that monsters avoid him. This is overwhelmingly apparent from the second Percy gets home in the book, even before he is aware of the physical abuse Sally has been facing. Percy has already been dealing with physical abuse from him, amongst other things (edit to be more specific: this is including verbal, emotional, & financial abuse). I've already spoke to it here, in-depth, so I'll try to keep it short but all of this has not been translated accurately to the screen. (Is this to say that a person must be overtly abusive to be abusive? No. But does this character on-screen feel like Smelly Gabe? No.) These things have shaped Percy (and Sally) in very specific ways. As others have mentioned: Percy cannot stand alcohol. He meets Dionysus and is reminded of his step-father. He gets to Tartarus and the air reminds him of Gabe.... The character on screen, while abusive, does not share this presence at all, and that makes a difference.

Edit: To emphasize once more, I am not saying that the show has not depicted a realistic portrayal of abuse. It has (verbal, emotional, & financial so far). It has also distinctly changed the tone and Gabe's presence from the book, to the extent that it no longer feels like the same character and that does have a rippling effect on the dynamics he shares with both Sally and Percy.

3. The Lack of Annabeth

Annabeth in the show is just like... really not as present as she is in the book so far, and I'm just kinda like, why lol?

Annabeth in the books is already way more involved in Percy's life. She was in the infirmary feeding Percy ambrosia after the attack (ulterior quest motives lol), she's the one who lead Percy around camp and re-explained godly parentage to him - and its a moment where she's very sincere with him, and even trying to help him! Instead these moments are given to Chiron and Luke, which I do get the merit of, but still, these were her moments!

Annabeth in the books had already surmised that the gods were fighting, something was stolen, and the something bad was going to happen, all before Percy had even been claimed. And she shared that with him! Again, the loss of foreshadowing and little bonding moments has me :(

I'm a little worried how they're going to deal with her crush on Luke because its pretty central to her character in the books! It helps Luke to manipulate her and also keeps her from admitting he's done something wrong. Also, it was very sweet and funny reading her get flustered - It drove home the point that she was just a kid with a crush that she didn't know how to handle. But in the show Luke spoke to her and I was expecting there to be some sort of reaction to it and there just... wasn't? (This is not something I'm laying at Leah's feet btw! Only the writers/directors!) We're only two episodes in tho so maybe we'll see it some more moving forward.

4. The Minotaur Battle

Again, I've already spoken about this in depth here but !!

The lack of Zeus's lightning strike, them all coming to a standstill and just chatting instead of running for their lives, Grover being awake and just sort of off to the side watching the fight, Sally being like "Promise Me Grover Swear it"... it all just doesn't ring right to me

I wanted more panic, more terror, more urgency. Higher stakes. I wanted Grover unconscious, I wanted to see Percy drag him into camp, and I wanted to see more of Percy's grief alongside his rage. Like the book did.

The pacing in the show here, and just overall, is weird

5. Other Stuff

Mrs. Dodds fight kind of fell flat too. It was honestly too sudden and Percy killing her in the show seemed even more accidental than in the book lol. Like, accidental impalement vs intentional swing of the sword.

They really had show Grover throw Percy to the wolves and not just gaslight him, but low-key have a part in getting him expelled? Not sure how I feel about it tbh.

More New York. I wish we had gotten the part of Percy taking the bus home with Grover included cause like? Him ditching Grover was funny, but it would have been the perfect opportunity to show Percy traveling through New York and establish it has his home. Shots of him looking at the city, walking the streets, interacting with people near his building.. yeah.

More Montauk too tbh. Like more shots of him and Sally on the beach rather than just the cabin.

Nectar and Ambrosia! Unless I missed it, which I might have, why have we still not gotten an onscreen depiction of it yet lmao.

#I'll add more tags/thoughts to this later lmao but! #pjo adaptation #pjo #percy jackson #pjo show crit #had to expand more on Gabe cause im already getting comments like: /you know there's more abuse than physical right?/ #yes #I never said there wasnt #I never said that was the only form of abuse percy and sally faced #I said both show Gabe and book Gabe are abusive #but its played differently #tone wise #presence wise #and that matters

[skyeblue8]

Ɗᥙҽ 𝜏σ ᙏყ Ɲҽɯ⨍σᥙɳԃ Ƒιχα𝜏ισɳ... ♚

⋆⋆⃟⊱✪⃝⃞⃝⊰⋆⃟⋆ ⋆⋆⃟⊱✪⃝⃞⃝⊰ ⋆⃟⋆⋆⋆⃟⊱✪⃝⃞⃝⊰ ⋆⋆⃟⊱✪⃝⃞⃝⊰⋆⃟⋆

Specifically with the Gluttonous Sin of Beelzebub being my favorite Sin of the group (not necessarily in Helluva Boss, but just in general), I wanted to make a ranking list of my favorite Queen Bee redesigns and their creators for really no other reason than I just feel like it. Now, this is all personal opinions and should not be taken to heart by any means, it's just for fun:

#1. "Beelzebub & Bibi" by @gravcore

♡ In terms of an actual redesign of the original, I love how this artist made "Bibi" because, for one thing, they made sense of the originals hair by giving her a ponytail since way too many characters have a mohawk style (Loona included); two, I cannot explain just how much I adore the clothes they gave her. The top is actually insect based and gorgeous, and not some recolor version of Loona's outfit; and third, they made canon Bee her own character rather than a royal because nothing about the OG read "Ancient Sin" to anybody.

♡ Now, in terms of the actual Beelzebub, here, she's legitimately stunning. Rather than a redesign, I can tell this was the original long before the Queen Bee episode came out, and I love how it reads both "70's party girl" and "regal ruler" all in one. That, and the actual bug design aspect and the color scheme. Above all else, I love how they incorporated the lava stomach in her design, too.

#2. "Beelzebub" by @s3tok41b4

♡ This design can best be described as a literal re-imagine of the canon Beelzebub as it shares almost all her similarities with the actual bug aspect to it that it desperately needed. It's legitimately simplistic but still appealing to the eye, futher showing us that Viv was perfectly capable of making something so simple, but actively chose to make it more confusing than it had to be.

#3. "Beelzebub" by @ruinxl0ve

♡ Similar to the first two, this shares both a regal and party girl bug aesthetic with the added bonus of actually being beautifully emotive despite not even having a mouth. I feel this beautifully differentiates the design from the original while also making it recognizable and I feel that it kinda feeds into the original concept that Queen Bee could literally "feel the vibe", hinting to her being an empath in some manner.

#4. "The Three Bees" by @onehelluvatime

♡ Long story short, these are three individual versions of the Queen Bee and her new placing within the Hellaverse outside of the canon one. For more in-depth explanation of these interpretations, it's best to check the blog yourself. Truly, I love these designs not only because of the visual redesigns themselves, but also the well-crafted and creative explanations and backgrounds regarding these characters. I especially like the idea that the hellhounds within society are half-undead with skull-like appendages and facial aspects.

#5. "Spontaneous Beelzebub" by @redd-byrd

♡ I know it's essentially the same as the canon design, but with the small tweaks that were made to this one (the giant "Bee Butt", the added black lines, the actual bug-like wings, the blue-thin eyes), all of them give a more clear indication (at least to me) that this Bee is more higher up than her fellow hellhounds, meaning she looks a lot more like a hybrid thus making her more grand. It's nice how they added these small details for improvement while still essentially leaving the design like its original.

⋆⋆⃟⊱✪⃝⃞⃝⊰⋆⃟⋆ ⋆⋆⃟⊱✪⃝⃞⃝⊰ ⋆⃟⋆⋆⋆⃟⊱✪⃝⃞⃝⊰ ⋆⋆⃟⊱✪⃝⃞⃝⊰⋆⃟⋆

Anyway, thanks for listening to my Ted Talk. Have a nice day!

#helluva boss critical #vivziepop critical #helluva boss criticism #helluva boss #helluva boss critique #hazbin hotel critical #helluva critical #hazbin hotel #hazbin hotel critique #vivziepop criticism #personal opinion #pls dont hate me #pls dont be offended #credit to artist #credit to artists #helluva boss redesign #beelzebub #queen beelzebub #queen bee

[spirantization]

I'm surprised at the hate that Sokka's character arc from NATLA is receiving. To me, Sokka's development and characterization was one of the strongest adaptations the series made.

In the original ATLA, Sokka's character arc revolves around him unlearning his own misogyny. He makes pointedly sexist comments throughout the early episodes like "Leave it to a girl to screw things up!", "There's no way a bunch of girls took us down!", etc.

Sokka's comments have a strong narrative purpose: they give a platform for women in the show (Katara & Suki mostly) to refute his attitude. Katara emphasizes traditional "women's work" (cleaning, cooking, sewing, etc), which forces Sokka to confront its inherent value. Suki is able to prove to him that women can fight too and he learns to respect female warriors. It's a great character arc and it's well-executed.

It's also characterization that is in direct response to the culture and feminism of the 90s and early 00s. The representation of women in the media at that time was...oof. It was not great. One-dimensional love interests whose only purpose is being saved by the male protagonist, mostly. Female protagonists were not as common, and certainly not ones who were depicted as being able to fight, and certainly not in cartoons. Female protagonists in animation were almost exclusively princesses.

ATLA was progressive in this regard. Katara was a complex female character in a time when there were not a lot of them, in media in general but especially in animation and kid's shows. (I grew up in the 90s; there were no characters like Katara in animation on screen for me.) ATLA incorporated the zeitgeist directly into the story, which is why we have Sokka learning to overcome his sexism in his interactions with Strong Female Characters.

If you go back and watch the original cartoon now, Sokka's sexism feels a bit dated. It's a very 90s, Girl Power, "girls can fight too" style of social commentary. It doesn't match with the media landscape of today. We've got 20 years of media with female superheroes behind us. If your message is "girls can fight too!" the response for the most part is going to be "yes, we know that. And?"

So imagine you're adapting the original ATLA for a live-action remake. You want to keep Sokka's character arc intact, but you want to update it for the 2020s. So what do you do? You look at the conversations that are happening today.

The 90s were about "girls can do everything boys can do", but the 20s are over that. The conversation is more about gender: gender expression, gender roles, gender dynamics. What does is mean to be a woman? What does it mean to be a man?

Sokka's character arc in NATLA is focused on this question: What does it mean to be a man? At the beginning of the series, it's his identity as a warrior that defines him. He needs to be the warrior, the protector, the leader. He's constantly trying to reaffirm this part of his identity, and it's completely tied up in his perception of his value as a man. Instead of his interactions with Suki being about "how could girls possibly be warriors", it shifts to Sokka saying "I'm ALSO a warrior" and trying to justify that to Suki (and mostly himself).

His arc over the series is about him accepting other aspects of himself and relearning how to define his masculinity. He can still have value as man without being the greatest warrior. He can still have value as a man by using his skills as an engineer. He can still have value as a man by offering compassion and kindness to others, like the little girl with the doll & Yue in her final moments. Instead of rigidly defining himself by a specific set of gender roles & expectations, he learns how to define himself through his own strengths and qualities.

I know there are a lot of people who are upset at this change to Sokka's characterization, and the most common thing I see is that it results in changes to Katara's character and her anger in response to Sokka's comments. I think there are valid criticisms to be made about how the show handled the adaptation of Katara's character, but I won't go there with this. In terms of Sokka and his characterization, it was well-done and thematically consistent with the original. It's not an exact port, and it never needed to be. It's still a feminist arc that centres on unlearning harmful misogynistic worldviews, but the focus has shifted from external (roles of women) to internal (his role as a man). And his journey is one that people would benefit from seeing represented.

#atla #avatar the last airbender #natla #netflix avatar #atla meta #there are many criticisms to make about the adaptation but this just isn't one of them

[ratrrriot]

How do you feel when people call Amy a stalker?

People can call her what they want, however…

Do i think it's fair to call Amy a stalker?

In some of the games? Yes, and even in some of the ones she wasn't a stalker per-se, she still showed possessive and obsessive tendencies. So i get where it comes from...

Generally? No. Her character originally wasn't supposed to be a harasser and she sure isn't one in the present. the franchise has been clearly trying to do better for her these past few years.

I think Amy's changing characterization is an interesting topic of discussion, so even though i technically already answered your question i'll take this chance and proceed to talk about my fave for way longer than i need to :).

Note: This is just my take on Amy and the way i understand her ENGLISH PORTRAYAL. I won't be talking about her japanese one which would deserve its own analysis.

Sorry for any writing mistakes in advance (english is hard) and feel free to correct me if i'm factually wrong about something (i wrote this thing mostly from memory so i imagine i must be.)

Amy has changed A LOT troughout the games and has been in the hands of many different writers across Sonic media ,so when talking about her is important to be specific about what game,series or comic we are talking about (and language),and while i know that some of you might not agree and i respect that, i think that -looking at the subtleties- Amy has had at least 6 different portrayals through the course of the games. That being said,i believe the idea that she is a stalker comes especifically from the characterization they started giving her around 2003

Originally,Amy was envisioned as a sweet 12-year-old kid who had a huge unreciprocated crush on her idol and a passion for fortune-reading ,but who wasn't exactly much of a heroine herself. In the classic era,her place in the narrative was just to serve as a damsel in distress and a cute,funny detail. Ofc,in comics and animated shorts for games like Origins, we have gotten more content of classic Amy being fully independent and capable of defending herself (even more with the upcoming playable mode for her in Origins Plus), but i think we can all see how such aspects of her character weren’t included at the time she was created (only exception being Sonic Fighters)

Especifically in the adventure era (AKA the birth of modern Amy) they gave Amy her iconic strong,compassionate,romantic personality and an interest/love for adventure (and her sassy attitude ofc). She's outspoken,stubborn,brave and honest. I also want to point out that in this first portrayal ,her love for Sonic feels more like innocent childish idolization than an obsession and that her character doesn't revolve exclusively around it (she will stand in his way if she doesn't think what he does is right). Tbh i think she's incredibly funny,cool and lovable,

They slowly started planting the seeds for her character to stop being a "damsel in distress" by making her playable and defeat ZERO all on her own at the end of SA1,then also being playable in Sonic advance and helping Sonic get out of prison in SA2 (and tagging along for the rest of the adventure). In all these games,her character revolves around empathy,optimism and kindness. The way she protects the flicky since the moment she finds it,how she defends Gamma from Sonic and the iconic moment in SA2 where she convinces Shadow to help save earth are all great examples.

THEN, in Heroes , they decided to try something new with her taking her confidence and sassy attitude to a whole other level. Giving her the chance to be a fully-fleshed hero who didn't need rescuing anymore. She became independent and the leader of her own team of friends who she wanted to help. I love this Amy cause she feels really strong,determined and empowered without losing her peppiness,silliness,positivity and kindness. Her flaws are also especially endearing to me: How much of a wild kid she is,How even if she means well, she relies way too much in brute force, How she has trouble getting out of her own head, etc. She really feels just as confident and energic as Sonic,but just like him,you can tell she has a huge heart.

HOWEVER, as much as i love how they made her strength and bravery shine in this game, Heroes was the game that gave birth to the idea that Amy is willing to chase and even fight Sonic just to insist that they should marry (in SA2 she did follow him to the prison but it was only to help him and tag along in the adventure).

Ofc this was supposed to be comedic and to be seen as childish,harmless behavior- I say this because the rest of the characters,including Sonic himself,don't seem to take it seriously- but what was supposed to be seen as an endearing flaw at the time, would rapidly mute into what's probably Amy's worst portrayal ,as the writers turned it into harassment for the next mainline games (Ignoring Shadow the hedgehog where she is the same as in heroes and only has a brief appearance.)

Before i go into Battle,i just want to say that the definition of stalker according to google is “a person who harasses or persecutes someone with unwanted and obsessive attention.” A definition that definitely did not apply to her before Heroes,but that i can't deny that does apply to Amy for the next few games:

In Battle, Amy is suddenly written as aggresive and self-centered. All her compassion and empathy from the adventure era is gone, intimidating people (even Cream) and demanding information from them from the get-go. Of course she does a few good things throughout the game too,like take care of Emerl and such,but she still mainly uses him for her benefit (calories counter and emerald radar). Right off the bat,at the start of her storyline she insists on searching for Sonic even when she herself assumes he is hiding from her -which implies she knows what she's doing is worth hiding for- and tries to justify her behavior by saying that Sonic actually loves her and that he is being “ just shy “ or that “ he got cold feet”- while others characters react in a way that implies that's obviously not the case and that her behavior is worrysome..

I think it's important to mention that before Battle, we hadn’t gotten a single line of dialogue that implied that Amy tought that her behavior could be hurtful for Sonic, nor did she ever threaten anyone at all unless it was self defense. She knew he didn’t reciprocate her feelings and was actively trying to make him fall for her anyways,sure, but we gotta remember that while the canon ages might have been scrapped recently, at the time Modern Amy was created they were still very much canon and you can tell they had them in mind when writing these characters. Amy was supposed to be 12 ,so it makes sense that she didn't understand why Sonic wouldn’t accept her affection. She idolized him and misinterpreted the fact that he always was protecting her as possible romantic interest,but never actually imposed anything on him. The worst thing she ever did to him was wanting to hug him without consent,and again, the games implied that she clearly didn't realize such a thing wasn't ok. Sonic also didn't seem to want to hurt her feelings so while he did run away and expressed being annoyed by her he never explicitly told her to stop. I actually think that if he had sat her down and made it clear to her that what she was doing was truly bothering him, The Amy from the adventure era would have stopped, but i doubt he cared enough to do that honestly (after all ,in his recap screens it is implied that what truly bothers him about Amy being near him is not her crush,but that he thinks shes exposed to danger.)

BUT in Battle and for the next three games,Amy doesn’t seem to be written as a 12-year-old who mistakes admiration for love anymore. This is where the writers started to portray her as someone who is clearly still young and definitely childish but not innocent. Her whole character revolves around harassing Sonic and using her strength to intimidate others, and don't get me wrong,I like that Amy gets angry easily!! i like that she isn't afraid of a fight,that she complains a lot, and that she isn't peaceful. After all,those are important parts of who she is. But Battle!Amy is on a whole other level: she gets mad at her friends just because they don't agree with everything she does or says. It's not about having a strong personality anymore,she's just generally aggressive. For the next few games she and Sonic can't have one normal conversation that isn't Amy imposing her own wishes over him and him trying to get away from her, so it's hard to believe she wouldn't realize that what's she's doing is wrong nor accidental as we were supposed to before. This time It just feels like she is deciding to ignore the signs.

This continued in advance 3 ,where she literally threatens him with her hammer just cause he shows signs of not being interested in spending time with her when they meet, Then in rush she becomes possesive and jealous the second he mentions Blaze and also seems to treathen him with the hammer in the credits scene because he is running from her hug.

They changed the direction of her characterization again after Rush. The best way i can describe the Amy that is present in Riders,06,etc is one that has two very polarized sides to her personality. On one side,she is a peppy,sweet,over enthusiastic and romantic girl, on the other she is a pretty intimidating one with an obsession with Sonic and very fiery temper. However,contrary to her last portrayal,she is more polite and actually asks Sonic if she can come with him various times,doesn't harass him and doesn't threaten people simply cause they don't agree with her anymore, but she still doesn't seem to have any sense of boundaries,still follows Sonic without permission sometimes and still clearly has no consideration for his personal space. Another thing about this Amy is how her flirting is really intense, and even if she isn't as aggressive as the Amy from Battle,if someone messes a bit with her she doesn't hesitate to resort to intimidation or take her hammer out.

She still gets violent towards Sonic sometimes,but what's different from her last characterization is that instead of doing so merely because he doesn't show romantic interest in her ,its mostly because he doesn't follow on his promises (end of Black Knight) or shows up to save her “properly” (Referring to 1- that scene in Riders where he blows eggman -who had caught Amy- away with wind and she chases him with her hammer because “how could he not think that would hit her too “ and 2- the one in Zero Gravity where he arrives late to save her and she playfully throws him a few fists saying that “it took him long enough!”). I don't think she's necesarily right to do that but i don't consider it to be problematic either, since by that point the games had strongly implied that there was a non-spoken agreement between the two that he'll always show up to save her and the whole thing feels more playful than anything else. Mostly because Sonic seems to be fine with her being around again, as he never really denies her acussations or runs away when she gets mad,and even tries to explain himself to her.

So yeah,this Amy is one of the more famous -and infamous- ones,as her negative and positive qualities are more balanced than the one from Battle. However,i personally don't like her much as there's almost no focus on the empathetic/compassionate side of her character that was so prominent in the adventure era and ,even if i wouldn’t call this version of her a Stalker , she's still is way too obsessive and possesive for my liking. The writing for her character is still pretty much completely based on being attracted to Sonic, to the point that In 06 she tells Silver that, if she had to, she'd “choose Sonic over the world".

In Sonic Chronicles , Amy gets a lot of dialogue. She gets jealous in a scene but its not as bad as in Rush and she tries to make Sonic jealous by inventing a fake boyfriend (terrible trope) but her levels of aggressiveness are up to the player's treatment of her. I am ,however , mentioning this game because of a scene in specific near the final section in which Amy is scared they might die and aks Sonic if she can have a moment with him. She then tries to have a serious conversation and politely asks if he cares about her or if he likes her at all. if the player chooses to make Sonic say he does care for her she is legitimately surprised and thankful. Idk what happens If he rejects her cause i haven't been able to find any recordings of that and i never owned this game,but i'll assume that her reaction won't be too bad considering she is asking in the first place(?) feel free to tell me if you know…

This portrayal of Amy is still present in Unleashed (2008) ,in which Amy is there to cheer/support Sonic on throughout the game and to serve as an important indicator that Sonic is quite self conscious of his looks when he's a werehog. She is generally very sweet towards him in this game (especially when she shows no rejection towards his werehog form,which is a detail i adore), even if she does get annoyed when he doesn't pay as much attention to her as he does to Chip or reciprocate her feelings.

A good example is how, before the last temple ,she asks him if he'd like to go on a date with her after everything is over. If you choose the positive dialogue option she is ,again, positively surprised and thankful. If you make him say no she complains about how he's being mean, but doesn't insist on it and just accepts it.

In Free Riders (2010) ,Amy just generally acts extremely out out of character (like,she doesn't even fit into Battle's portrayal). It really feels like someone who didn't know anything about the character wrote her, so for the sake of the pink hedgie let's ignore it and go back to talking about portrayal 4.

I already mentioned her brief apparition in Black Night and there's nothing worth mentioning about her in Generations so i'll skip them.

This portrayal ended in Lost World (2013),In which they toned down Amy as a character in general,leaving out all of her flaws and iconic traits out. She feels plain and her strong personality,confidence,sass,energy,etc all seem to be completely gone. She's just sweet and that's it . For some reason there's a scene where she literally tries to confess to Sonic and is cut off before she can finish,which is very funny considering it had never been treated as a secret before??? it really goes to show how hard they were trying to pull some kind of reboot on her. Fortunately,this characterization was only a two-game-thing (She is just as plain in Forces (2015)) so i'll put it in the same bag as the Free riders one and we'll leave it at that.

After Lost world came Boom (2014) ,and then we got the most recent change of Amy's personality,which we all know has had a mixed reception from the fandom. Originally people thought that this Amy would stay just in the Boom universe ,but this personality has been showing up in the mainline games for a while now,like in Team Sonic Racing (2019) and Frontiers (2021).

This Amy feels older than any of the ones that came before her. She kept the sass,the love for romanticism,the positive attitude,the confidence and the strenght but her bad temper and over enthusiasm are gone,as she is generally more calm,less energetic and not childish at all. Most importantly,this Amy is extremely emotionally intelligent,as the rest of characters seem to look for her help and advice constantly ( to the point that she has been given the "therapist friend" title by the fandom and is even referred as "the nice one" by Eggman himself ). Another interesting thing about this Amy is that she doesn't flirt with Sonic anymore,In fact, she barely expresses her liking for him (She does so a bit more in Japanese chz the characterization varies) and Sonic seems completely comfortable with this version of her around.

A lot of people say that this version of her is out of character and I completely understand where that comes from, but i must disagree because this characterization of Amy is the first one since the adventure era that focuses on her compassion/empathy rather than on her crush on Sonic, which combined with her intelligence,makes her not out of character,just the most emotionally mature Amy to date instead. I actually think that if the og modern Amy had grown up,this is the kind of personality she would’ve developed while becoming an adult (although she isn't supposed to be one). A good argument to defend this point would be that one Egg-memo you can buy through the fishing minigame in Frontiers where Eggman talks about how Amy has "come a long way" and how it took her some time "to find herself" and get out of Sonic's shadow.

Only problem i have with this Amy is that i wish she was more flawed and bubbly,mostly cause she can come off as very plain from time to time and way too mature. She is a bit too perfect for my taste. I'd like her to mess up more,to not always be so smart,to be more impulsive,a little bit more clumsy,fiery and wild,just so she could have some more of the charm of the original,y'know?

Before i talk about her more recent Videogame portrayal (TMoSTH) i want talk about IDW Amy:

in IDW, all of Amy's flaws and positive traits from past games are balanced pretty well: she is flawed and relatable and can mess up a bit sometimes because of her impulsivity,but she's emotionally and strategically inteligent, optimistic and incredibly kind. She is a great fighter and leader,but also a wonderful friend who offers emotional support. She has a strong personality, lots of sass and can be very aggressive and intimidating towards her enemies, but not any less of an empathetic and compassionate person because of that. Her strength and confidence are pillars for her character instead of nonsensical anger,but she still shows self doubt and fear from time to time. She is energic, idealistic and still a romantic,but not obsessive nor possesive. peppy but emotionally intelligent. She still loves Sonic, but her feelings for him feel authentic rather than childish idealization,and given that she now respects his space,she's written to be happy just with fighting by his side and jokingly flirt from time to time. (their bond also seems stronger,but that's a topic for another day.)

I believe this portrayal of her is one of the best we've gotten in the sense that she represents a good mix of most things that has made her positively memorable since the beginning and lacks every problematic aspect of her character that was added post her creation. And because of this good mix of characteristics, IDW Amy is constantly praised by the fandom. But something i hear a lot is people saying how they love IDW Amy and despise "Main Amy" -by which i'll assume they refer to videogame Amy just in general- and that way of summarizing all of Amy's game portrayals feels very odd to me, especially because IDW Amy is a culmination of every single good aspect that has been added to this character combined with most of what she was meant to be at the start. In other words,IDW Amy couldn't exist if it wasn't for all the game Amys before her.

It's true that in IDW we haven't seen her character be as impulsive and outspoken as in the Adventure era or Heroes, and i miss that as much as every other Amy fan. But I do think that ,because so much assertiveness wouldn’t coexist very well with things like careful thought, the reason for that change must be that IDW is writing an more mature version of the character and It’s hard for them to keep such aspects of her personality intact without her being seen as childish by the audience now that they are paired up with big responsabilities (ex: the restoration) Especially since that super impulsive nature of hers probably came naturally at the time because she was supposed to be a 12-year old and wether we like it or not, it was implied by the narrative that it was one of the main reasons she got caught by eggman both in SA1 and SA2. Aka,IDW Amy isn't allowed to make as many mistakes as the og.

After all ,Amy used to be written to be mostly seen as a comedic character and as an "extra addition" to the main team rather than as an important,needed member of it. ( even in Heroes,where she had formed her own team,she was still trying to catch up to Sonic and his team because she had been excluded of it.) If she made a mistake and got caught by eggman because of her stubborness,the writers would just make Sonix fix things. In IDW she doesn't just feel older,but she has also gotten to have important roles in the fight against Eggman and people rely on her with their lives,so it doesn't surprise me that the writers try to make her be more conscious and careful when it comes to her actions now that she has more responsibilities and can't allow herself to make as many mistakes as she did back when she was written to be more immature and impulsive because of that extreme assertiveness.

Now,I personally believe that Amy in TMoSTH is the same as in IDW, just that she feels more like her OG self in TMOSTH because ,for the most part ,Bday Girl is on that train literally to just have fun and do as she pleases. She doesn't have any weight on her shoulders nor expectations,she is free of responsabilities all the way until the climax of the game and the game itself is very comedy-centric for the most part, so the writers pobably felt like they could set that impulsive,assertive side of her loose again, and i loved it!

In this game her character doesn't revolve around Sonic and she messes up a lot (The way she was so ashamed of how she broke her hammer when she tried to escape the closet with brute force that she lied, how she didn't realize Sonic was actually hurt because she was too excited about the game, how she was overconfident and impulsively tried to solve the case and completely failed ,how she and vector started beating a wall violently after realizing the train was alive,etc),but her positive qualities shine throughout the game as well ( How she took the time to organize a party that she'd think everyone would have fun at,How she is so thankful that everyone showed up and doesn't mind that Shad and Sonic didn't bring gifts, how she makes sweets remarks about others and cute jokes in distressing situations,how she has faith in Shadow's goodwill, The way she delivers the final blow at the end and says that despite everything,she loved the party because it was an adventure,etc ). Throughout the game,Sonic and the rest treat her in a way that really goes to show what a good friend and a lovely person she is ,and she expresses great appreciation for everyone's presence in her life.

It's honestly an amazing coincidence that this game takes place on her bday considering that it's the one that made this portrayal of her "game canon". As a fan of her, i celebrate it and hope we get more of it in the near future.

So yeah, i didn't talk about Sonic X Amy,Archie Amy nor all the comics,series and games that came out between the big videogame titles. There is much more about how Amy has been written that could be said, but i think i did a pretty decent summary of the most important changes her character has gone through the years mainline game-wise,at least good enough to defend my point that she wasn't a stalker originally and she definitely isn't one now. As i mentioned before,i agree that she was portrayed as possesive and obsessive for a long period of time and as an actual harasser for a shorter one , and that we should definitely recognize it and be critical of such things being portrayed as “quirky” and “funny” aspects when they are in reality, hurtful. BUT summarizing her whole character by calling her a stalker and an obsessive fangirl is defining her based on the worst examples of her characterization and ignoring her good ones completely.

Feel free to disagree with my character analysis,my opinions and the way i categorize her portrayals,but i strongly believe that Amy rose isn't meant to be a harasser,an obsessive fangirl or personal space invader.

My girl deserves better.

#also don't get me wrong i love battle #is just that Amy is really hard to like in that game #props to her for carrying weights for half of it tho we stan a strong pink rat #if you actually read this whole thing props to you #also thanks anon for giving me an excuse to talk about amy #amy rose #sonic spoilers #character analysis

[theveesbf]

Hazbin Hotel X Star Butterfly!Reader (part 1 - Charlie)

︴Notes - Hello everyone! This isn't a request but I got this idea and I needed to write it... Also, I was thinking of maybe a oneshot or series with it but idk because I would be so slow to update it lmao. Anyways yeah I hope you guys enjoy it! <3 if you guys want it to be a one shot, pls tell me!!

︴Content - Headcannons of the hazbin hotel characters with a reader who is like Star Butterfly.

︴Summary - Reader was in Mewni and just got their wand, but they didn't have a lot of control, so their parents decided to send them to the afterlife to be more responsible.

Charlie was really surprised when she saw a human in Hell. That made her get really worried about you, like, what the heck were you doing here??

She obviously went to help and took you the hotel, introducing you to everyone in there.

Charlie and you quickly became close, I mean, just look at you two, you were really similar in so many aspects!

She also noticed you had a wand. And at first she thought it was something only for the looks. You're a human, there's no way you have powers.

But you were really excited to show it off so Charlie happily agreed on seeing you use it.

And she was so shocked when she saw you destroy a random building with one of the spells.

Charlie made a lot of questions to you, and then you remembered that you had forgotten to properly introduce yourself, that's when you told her your name.

"I'm a Magical Princess from another dimension!"

The way Charlie's eyes lightened up when she heard you were a Magical princess. She's a Princess you too!!

I don't why, but that probably made her very happy.

Charlie wanted to know more about where you came from and how was your life there. She was also really curious about the heart on your cheeks.

You then explained that Mewni was a really magical place with real magical powers!!

And for the hearts, it was probably because you touched the wand and also for genetics.

You and Charlie spent all day just talking about Mewni and this stuff.

After some time, you remembered that you didn't have a place to sleep, but Charlie said you could stay at the Hotel!!

And you obviously said yes, being excited to meet the others and also to just have a place to be.

Eventually you met Vaggie that somehow you never saw before??

Vaggie was definetly more reserved and less talkative, but you didn't really care.

You didn't leave her alone until someone else showed up.

One thing that you were a bit scared about was everyone's height. You were around 5-6 foot tall (trying to be less specific with it😭) but everyone else was at least 6 foot.

With the exception of Niffty of course.

But yeah, it was still something to considerate.

Also, lots of people had powers. But not powers like yours, who usually needed spells or wands or whatever.

No, just pure demonic power. Definetly something to be careful with...

Charlie also told you to never, ever, make a deal with any demon. No matter how good it might seem at first.

You still had your dimensional scissors, but you didn't show them to anyone yet.

#hazbin hotel x reader #hazbin hotel #hazbin x reader #hazbin #charlie x reader #charlie morningstar #alastor x reader #rosie x reader #angel dust x reader #husk x reader #vaggie x reader #lute x reader #adam x reader #the vees x reader #velvette x reader #valentino x reader #vox x reader #emily x reader #svtfoe #star butterfly #lucifer x reader

[transmutationisms]

Hi Caden don’t know if you listen to Ethel Cain but was wondering what u think abt her subverting the Americana aesthetic since I think she’s often compared to Lana, at least online. I do think she’s doing something different & to me more compelling than Lana, but I don’t really know how to articulate it.

yep i like ethel cain. i agree she and lana are doing very different things. like, i said before that lana uses american nationalism because she's playing off the fact that it makes/has an erotic appeal, and she places herself as the object of desire in that paradigm—tell me i'm your national anthem, etc. my read on ethel is that she's interested in the rural americana 'trad' aesthetic from a very different angle, where she's trying to connect the homestead and american rural social structures to the perpetuation of violence. there's some overlap here in the sense that lana is definitely also interested in sexual violence and sexuality-as-violence, but in her work the violent or abusive man is generally a specific figure who's aberrant from the norm, and a lot of the artistic interest for lana comes (i think) from her interrogating what it is about this man that's appealing to her and how she sees herself through his eyes. with ethel, on the other hand, she portrays violence as coming through the infrastructure of normal and normative social structures, like the family and the church, with abuse understood to be a feature of these and not a bug. family, church, etc are in turn understood to be part of the infrastructure of american rural communities, casting the critique she's making through the ethel character onto this entire social apparatus (& there is some implication here of how this is all a part of westward colonial settlement—which is a potentially fruitful direction to go in, the idea of expansion into the 'frontier' as a narrative of, or narrative prerequisite to, violence).

so for example this is partly why, for ethel, incest specifically is a mode of sexuality & violence that she continually uses and interrogates: she's invoking it as an intensification of the 'normal functioning' of the family, which means the whole family structure gets pretty ruthlessly questioned through the character of ethel and the violence she faces. she invokes the trad aesthetic and the idyllic family homestead, then shows you the brutality that creates and is created by them. for lana, the family is not a concern in this way and is not something she's questioning or challenging the way ethel does (the daddy/girl thing in lana's work is p far removed from even a pseudo-incestuous reading most of the time, even in her lolita references). there's a similar distinction with how ethel examines protestant theology and practice with the explicit goal of pointing out inherently violent aspects of it, whereas for lana, invoking god or christian imagery is generally more on the level of playing off the way that american nationalism resembles and uses rituals of religious worship. lana takes political phenomena like the appeal of nationalism, and expresses them through the erotic configuration of these relationships with older, dominant men. with ethel it's more that she looks at social structures and practices signified by the rural americana aesthetic, and pokes and prods at these structures until the violence inherent to them is glaringly obvious to listeners through the ethel character's story. it's a way of problematising these institutions and practices, not letting them hide in plain sight by presenting themselves as benevolent.

so yeah i can understand why people might want to compare these two artists, but i think they're actually doing very different things. i would probably not say either of them 'subverts' americana or signifiers of nationalism, which is not a criticism, i just think that concept is often poorly defined and less frequently applicable to art than people sometimes think lol. ethel uses her character's story to deconstruct and question the american aesthetics and institutions her work invokes; lana translates these aesthetics and institutions into explicitly erotic discourses and dissects them through the allegorical figures of the people and relationships in her songs. (this is not to discount the importance of erotics in ethel's work as well obvi but this post is already long :P)

#ethel cain #lana

[commsroom]

as an extension of how hera reads as trans to me, hera/eiffel resonates with me specifically as a relationship between a trans woman and a cis man. loving hera requires eiffel to decentralize his own perspective in a way that ties into both his overall character arc and the themes of the show.

pop culture is baked into the dna of wolf 359, into eiffel’s worldview, and in how it builds off of a sci-fi savvy audience’s assumptions: common character types, plot beats, or dynamics, why would a real person behave this way? how would a real person react to that? eiffel is the “everyman” who assumes himself to be the default. hera is the “AI who is more human than a lot of humans,” but it doesn’t feel patronizing because it isn’t a learned or moral quality; she is a fundamentally human person who is routinely dehumanized and internalizes that.

eiffel/hera as a romance is compelling to me because there is a narrative precedent for some guy/AI or robot woman relationships in a way i think mirrors some attitudes about trans women: it’s a male power fantasy about a subclass of women, or it’s a cautionary tale, or it’s a deconstruction of a power fantasy that criticizes the way men treat women as subservient, as property. but what does that pop culture landscape mean in the context of desire? If you are a regular person, attracted to a regular person, who really does care for you and wants to do right by you, but is deeply saturated in these expectations? how do you navigate that?

I think that, in itself, is an aspect of communication worth exploring. sometimes you won’t get it. sometimes you can’t. and that’s not irreconcilable, either. it’s something wolf 359 is keenly aware of, and, crucially, always sides with hera on. eiffel screws up. he says insensitive things without meaning to. often, hera will call him out on it, and he will defer to her. in the one case where he notably doesn’t, the show calls attention to it and makes him reflect. it’s not a coincidence that the opening of shut up and listen has eiffel being particularly dismissive of hera - the microaggression of separating her from “men and women” and the insistence on using his preferred title over hers. there are things eiffel has just never considered before, and caring for hera the way he does means he has to consider them. he's never met someone like hera, but media has given him a lot of preconceptions about what people like her might be like.

there’s a whole other discussion to be had about the gender dynamics of wolf 359, even in the ways the show tries to avoid directly addressing them, and how sexual autonomy in particular can’t fully be disentangled from explorations of AI women. i don’t think eiffel fully recognizes what comments like “wind-up girl” imply, and the show is not prepared to reconcile with it, but it’s interesting to me. in the context of transness (and also considering hera’s disability, two things i think need to be discussed together), i think it’s worth discussing how hera’s self image is at odds with the way people perceive her, her disconnect from physicality, how she can’t be touched by conventional means, and the ways in which eiffel and hera manage to bridge that gap.

even the desire for embodiment, and the autonomy and type of intimacy that comes with it, means something different when it’s something she has to fight for, to acquire, to become accustomed to, rather than a circumstance of her birth. i suppose the reason i don’t care for half measures in discussions re: hera and embodiment is also because, to me, it is in many ways symbolically a discussion about medical transition, and the social fear of what’s “lost” in transition, whether or not those things were even desired in the first place.

hera’s relationship with eiffel is unquestionably the most supportive and equal one she has, but there are still privileges, freedoms, and abilities he has that she doesn’t, and he forgets that sometimes. he will never share her experiences, but he can choose to defer to her, to unlearn his pop culture biases and instead recognize the real person in front of him, and to use his own privilege as a shield to advocate for her. the point, to me - what’s meaningful about it - is that love isn’t about inherent understanding, it’s about willingness to listen, and to communicate. and that’s very much at the heart of the show.

#wolf 359 #w359 #doug eiffel #hera wolf 359 #hera w359 #eiffera #i still have a lot more to say about this honestly. but i hope this makes sense as an overview of my perspective. #with the caveat that i understand how personal trans headcanons are and whatever brings you comfort in that regard. i think is wonderful #but to me eiffel is one of the most cis men imaginable. and that's a big part of what he means to me in this context. #when i said some of this to beth @hephaestuscrew the other day they said. minkowski missteps in talking to hera based on #a real world assumption about AIs while eiffel missteps based on pop culture assumptions. and i think that's a meaningful distinction and #is something that resonates with me in this context as well

[destinygoldenstar]

What Separates Digital Circus’s Horror From Others

Disturbing.

Unnerving.

TERRIFYING.

BUT WHY?!

On the surface to the… five people that never watched The Amazing Digital Circus Pilot, this show looks like a Five Nights At Freddy’s knock off.

It’s a cute mascot show that is actually secretly a horror monster infested world.

Even people who haven’t seen FNAF at least seen a few clips of it and what it’s famous for. I know I have.

My sister is super into this, and she hogs the TV, so… RIP me.

That’s what most non-horror stans usually view horror as.

The jumpscares.

The unnerving imagery.

The designs made to freak out the viewers and make them uncomfortable.

It’s usually quite obvious when something is a horror, cause these aspects are often front and center. You can usually tell it’s a trailer of a horror movie by just looking at it.

At least, from my, a non-horror lover’s understanding. For some reason these sorts of things, especially indie animated ones, are the faces of a lot of content farms.

If the product itself isn’t r@%ing your audience, it’s those.

(TAKE MY WARNING AND TAKE IT SERIOUSLY: IF YOU VALUE YOUR MENTAL HEALTH AND YOUR SANITY, DO NOT LOOK UP THIS MOVIE)

BUT BACK ON SUBJECT.

Digital Circus… doesn’t really have this stuff.

There’s no jumpscares.

(I mean there is in a trailer, but it’s used as a joke.)

The character designs are very cute looking without any alternate versions that are scary.

And the imagery of the show remains cute and fun all throughout. The darkest it gets is in a realistic looking office.

But there are no jumpscares in that scene.

It’s just… a normal office.

If this was a horror, then perfect opportunity, right?

So… what’s going on here?

This, my friends, is why Digital Circus is not your typical indie animated horror flick.

And why people even call it ‘scary’ at all.

Here’s the trick this show uses.

It’s not the imagery.

It’s not the designs.

It’s not even intentionally trying to scare you.

Caine is not intentionally trying to scare the audience. He’s just acting like an A.I.

Yeah he has SOME unnerving moments.

But compared to THIS:

I’d say Caine is pretty tame.

Maybe it’s an indicator that he’s secretly a monster like the Other Mother in Coraline.

That horror flick is about the host lying to the protagonist and revealing their horror-like appearance later on.

But not only was it confirmed that Caine is NOT evil. But look at his design right away and his presentation.

There is no sign so far that he lies about anything. At least not what he doesn’t know.

Yes he lied about the exit. But the exit ITSELF was the thing that sent you to the VOID. So really he kinda tried to protect them.

If he didn’t, he’d let jester girl eject herself like Among Us.

So why is it unnerving?

Because it’s the POV we the audience are in for most of the episode: Pomni.

Pomni is an Audience Surrogate.

Audience Surrogates are characters designed specifically to be a placeholder for the audience.

People usually assume this trope as the character made to be the bland and generic one. But that’s actually not true.

An audience surrogate can be as simple as a First Person POV. As all it means is that the character is designed to have the same reactions the audience would in the situation they would find themselves in.

Course, not speaking for everybody, but majority that would consume the content.

Thus, with Pomni as the audience surrogate, we the audience are thrusted into her shoes the whole time. We feel the fear she does. We are experiencing the circus the same time she does.

Notice the editing in some scenes. Specifically the scenes Pomni is NOT in.

When Pomni is in a scene, there’s usually some change in lighting or camera movement that’s unnerving.

But when she isn’t in a scene, these editing moves aren’t there at all.

Which makes it pretty easy to suggest that these unnerving edits are just what’s going on in Pomni’s head.

So with that, when she’s scared. We’re scared. We’re in her POV.

But she’s scared all the time. That’s just her average personality, right?

Then why make these specific edits?

Let’s think about this:

This character is trapped in a world that isn’t her own. Everything is unusual, and she wants out. But instantly realizes there’s no escape.

And then gets told this is her new home and her new body.

A home she doesn’t recognize. And a body she doesn’t even know the name of.

She lost all sense of identity in an instant. Losing everything about herself in an instant. To the point where she can’t even remember what she was before.

And to make matters worse, because this is unusual, everything SEEMS terrifying. Even to those trying to help her adjust.

The only way out of such a confusing and terrifying world is to escape. Which is what she tries to find the entire time.

So THEREFORE:

The horror is this show is NOT the jumpscares or the creepy images.

The horror is THE VIEWER’S MIND.

This show constantly destroys your mind and breaks you through Pomni.

The idea of losing everything about yourself and being trapped in something unfamiliar forever. That IS terrifying.

If you were in this situation, you’d probably freak out even if you were the bravest being ever.

So it’s not about how scary the scene is on the outside.

It’s about what you’re THINKING that’s scary.

Ragatha’s distress monologue is not scary on the outside. But if you actually take into consideration what she says.

THATS terrifying.

That toys with your mind. And it also toys with Pomni’s.

The monster figure in the episode, the abstraction, is nowhere near as scary as something from FNAF

At least in my opinion.

Especially seeing what the monster does.

It can’t kill you. You’re just glitched.

Or maybe it CAN kill. But we never see that.

Even if Pomni ended up like Ragatha, Caine would’ve eventually came back, found them, and fixed them. And they would’ve been fine.

But then, rather out of nowhere, she STOPS.

And we get this shot.

I talked about this shot before. Said it quickly became one of my favorite shots in media.

This is why.

This shot makes me queasy every time.

The idea of looking in a mirror and not even being able to process or recognize yourself. Unable to even process your own reflection, that’s how unrecognizable you’ve become.

That’s horrifying.

And there’s no dialogue here either.

The episode effectively uses SHOW DONT TELL.

They SHOW you how scary the situation is. They SHOW you a single image that tells you everything.

It would’ve been so easy to just have Pomni say “I’m scared. I don’t recognize myself. Who is this person looking back at me?”

But no

They DON’T insult their audience.

They don’t TELL you.

They let you sink it in yourself.

Pomni doesn’t even have ANY lines after she goes through the exit door. And yet the shots after that with her have been plastered everywhere. Why? Cause she doesn’t need to tell you her mental state. You’re SHOWN it.

Can someone PLEASE tell the live action Avatar The Last Airbender that?!

Speaking of the office scene. This is the only moment in the show that looks… real. Not that cartoony.

Which I guess being in a setting that’s off putting from the rest makes it creepy, right?

Well not really.

Sure she’s running through rooms that seem to be repeating, which that of itself is sanity breaking. It reminds me a lot of another existential horror: The Stanley Parable.

But while that game is excellent and the monologue that plays in that ending is one of my favorites, it IS just telling you the sanity of the player.

Not that there’s anything wrong with this in that games style. There’s no other way that could’ve been done in that game.

Here, again, there’s no dialogue. It’s just Pomni running through these desperate for the exit.

The scary part about this is that we KNOW the absolute DESPERATION she has.

Even if we couldn’t see her face, that’s still across because we’ve seen it the entire episode.

And then there’s her break.

She snaps at the sight of a desk, and gets fangs, that of a FNAF character. But only for a second. She doesn’t even go out at the camera with them. She goes on her merry way.

But Pomni, being the POV character, really doesn’t have much to be scared at about her.

So why is this terrifying? Why not go all the way if this is supposed to be a jumpscare?

Well cause it’s not.

A way to scare your audience is to make them feel dread. Lingering longing dread. Sometimes irrational dread.

People with anxiety especially get scared at things even when they’re completely safe. They feel an unease in their stomachs. They feel unable to move. Unable to speak. Unable to put it into words at all.

It could be because we saw something unnerving that stays in our subconscious. It could be because we’re nervous about something coming up. It could be because we’re in an uncomfortable situation.

Either way, anything even remotely resembling that triggering thing can break someone to feel this anxiety. Sometimes even something as simple as the dark. Even if we know we’re completely safe.

(Speaking as a person with anxiety myself)

She only snaps and cackles when she sees a random desk with a computer. Which also has the headset she put on there. The thing that got her in this.

But you might not have even seen the headset on your first viewing. I didn’t.

But your subconscious sees it. The environment not being like the others aids in unnerving you and making it hard to process what you’re looking at.

Why is this terrifying? Why does it break you? Why does it mentally break Pomni? We don’t know. It just does.

We’ve been stuck going through doors in repeating rooms for hours.

Fear makes you not able to overthink it.

So all of that is build up to the near perfect shot of Pomni at the brink of snapping at the dinner table. With the others voices blurred in her mind. As all she can do is fake a smile.

Terrifying End.

It’s not scary because it’s scary. It’s scary because it toys with the character, and the viewer’s mind

Now, is Digital Circus the first media to do this technique?

No. Not at all.

One of the most acclaimed animated movies, Spirited Away, also uses these exact same tactics for example.

That’s obviously a master class at this tactic. And it scared me as a child as a result. For all these exact same reasons.

It’s not a horror. Not traditionally. It’s not trying to scare you. But it does anyway cause in your mind it’s a scary concept.

And also, well, Spirited Away is a completed story as of the time this post comes out.

And Digital Circus only has one episode. But we did get confirmation this would be a series. And I personally have high hopes that this brilliant tactic is kept. From the trailer, it does seem like they’re not forgetting the stuff I bring up here. So I hope this works out for the creators despite the drama and the internet BS surrounding this show.

But even if not, we at least get one case in this show where we all want to curl up in a ball and cry

Us too Pomni. Us too.

Thank you for reading my… analysis a ton of people made before me, and probably better. Happy day for you all.

#digital circus #the amazing digital circus #amazing digital circus #tadc pomni #tadc caine #horror #existential crisis #existential dread #existential horror #anxiety tw #anxiety attack

[scintillyyy]

yea so the thing with steph's death is that i'm genuinely of two minds here actually:

on one hand it *does* fall under the traditional complaints of fridging being that it was a senseless, violent death of a female comics character whose death is used largely to cause bruce & tim pain ergo she was fridged

on the other hand, unlike a lot of female characters who have been fridged through the years (babs being the big one, shondra kinsolving being another huge one), steph's death and the lead up to it, despite dripping in misogyny, actually do lend her a ton of agency and personal narrative growth specific to *her* that other senseless female deaths and maiming aren't usually afforded. the fact that her death has an entire narrative arc leading up to her death (misogynistic as it may be) about her learning and deciding for *herself* what being a hero truly means to her, her fortitude despite black mask's torture and her pushing through to get herself to leslie's clinic to still try and help despite the horrors she just underwent is there to further *her specific* heroic narrative leading up to her death, not necessarily just to cause bruce pain. even her death--which has a lot of very problematic aspects to it, don't get me wrong--is focused on whether she finally achieved her goals of being a good hero, what she always wanted to be. it's horrific and misogynistic, but the entire event of war games leading to steph's death revolving and stemming from steph's mistakes -> steph's redemption->steph's death is fundamentally about her and her agency leading into her death. it's not until war crimes when it comes out she was actually killed specifically to character assassinate another female character in bruce's life & cause him anguish about leslie's betrayal that makes it more of a fridging than her actual death and the events leading up to it.

#does this make sense idk #the thing about fridging being that. it does need to only be about the man & the man's response #but a character's death is almost always inherently there to further another character's motivations #so a character death at its core isn't necessarily fridging even if it's in the service of another character's story #because death means things to people & if a death carries the appropriate amount of narrative weight #then it's just a part of the story being told #anyways honestly gavin king was the main fridged character of war games. he had absolutely no agency in his death.

[iraprince]

I love the entire concept of Cookie... the look, the fashion, the gender... Would you mind telling us a little more about him? I'm also intrigued about why she's named Cooking with Gorgeous!

HI i would LOVE to talk about george thank you so much. also this makes me realize i've never actually sat down and just made a post unabashedly infodumping at length abt an oc before and it seems silly that i haven't. i ask only for all dear readers to please temper their expectations for this post with the knowledge that i just smoked half a joint before sitting down to answer it. a small one. but still. anyway

FIRST OF ALL FOR THE UNACQUAINTED THIS IS COOKING WITH GORGEOUS, aka cookie or george for short. he uses he/him and she/her pronouns interchangeably!

hi sorry that's not cookie that's a horse in a bridal veil that i. found in my stuff while trying to scroll and find my cookie art. i just got distracted and had to show you. okay no for real here's cookie

he's the character i'm playing in a playtest campaign of the absolutely mesmerizing sapphicworld, an in-development ttrpg!!! and if i'm going to be talking about cookie i feel like i HAVE to say i think a huge amount of her charm and dazzle and charisma comes directly from the charm and dazzle and charisma of the setting i created her for. i know i am laying it on really thick right now but that is on purpose. i want, desperately and unashamedly, for this game to get really popular bc 1. it's genuinely that good. and it's not even DONE yet and 2. i want everyone to get into it so that everyone will make sapphicworld characters and then i'll get to see everyone's sapphicworld characters.

EDIT i'm scrolling back up here and adding a readmore bc this is already getting so long lol. you asked for "a little more" and apparently i have graciously decided this means "literally every fact about cookie that exists in my brain"

SO a lot of the info/tidbits i haven't shared about cookie are i guess gameplay-specific stuff... his title (which is like a class/playbook) is "The Noble Sweetheart," though in sapphicworld "nobility" no longer has anything to do with wealth or class, and is instead entirely about amassing a court purely via devotion/popularity; her subculture (which is like, Who You Hang Out With; drifters, goths, poets, debauchers, cowpokes, etc) is Babe; and her kind (which is like ancestries but in sapphicworld is really just like, a physical form, which u can change more or less at will) is Lunarthrope, which is basically a werewolf!! or more broadly a furry, since u always look like whatever were-animal you are 24/7. just MORE at night, tho i suppose i don't represent that aspect much in my cookie art... ANYWAY i am restraining myself from just sitting here and like. transcribing her entire character sheet. but basically what all this means is that cookie's role in the world (at least at the beginning of the campaign) is "Professionally — no, VOCATIONALLY Hot Person who everyone loves so so so so so so much." cookie really enjoys this role.

he's named cooking with gorgeous because he's an avid cook, and he wants to share that with you, and he's gorgeous!! though honestly the cooking hasn't ended up as important to his character as it was when i first came up with him, lol — but my initial concept was kind of like, what's the equivalent of a bouncy normie recipe blogger/lifestyle influencer but in the context of the lush horny trans deathless psychedelic universe of sapphicworld. and it's cooking with gorgeous, a doggirl dyke with big blue boobs (six of them!!) who is so devastatingly cute and darling that a bunch of people just kind of pledge their fealty to him for no real reason other than he feeds them. and is cute

also her name is def influenced by the fantastic names of many canon sapphicworld npcs! like, quick example list of some npc names off the top of my head: the booty commie, death cybernetic, princess eureka!, the culinary goof (whom cookie dislikes. btw.), pizza friday (whom cookie loves!!!)

cookie is very very determined, and she's ALMOST always very confident. even when she isn't feeling confident, she's still very good at forcing herself to keep putting one foot in front of the other — maybe just while screaming or crying or uncontrollably barking or at least very ardently complaining. he has a tendency to be spoiled and, like, tactless-via-obliviousness, so sometimes he can be grating to interact with, and he has a petty/vindictive streak; but in general he's an AGGRESSIVELY kind person and usually aims all his shrill, cheerful stubbornness directly toward the goal of refusing to accept anything but the best for everyone.

at the beginning of our campaign cookie has JUST received a brand new castle!!!! (chateau gorgeous.) which he doesn't actually "own" bc, remember, no wealth or class in sapphicworld, but he's the ENTHUSIASTIC new caretaker and is chomping at the bit to renovate it so ppl can live there and he can throw a bunch of magnificent parties and basically continue living exactly as he has been, But Even More Fabulous. obviously this is exactly when the main plot threat of the campaign shows up and spoils everything and compels cookie to go on his First Ever Adventure!!!!!! she HAS to save the world otherwise NOBODY will be able to go to the first big party at chateau gorgeous :((((

at this point to prevent myself from just like, giving you guys a play by play of the entire campaign so far i am going to just start listing every cookie fact i can think of as bullet points

🎀 he owns a magical sword in the shape of a giant microplane. it's called The Microplane. he pronounces this "mee-crow-plah-nay"

🎀 george desperately wants to resurrect The Dog-Lich, an entity that once ruled over all beasts from its palace on the moon but was murdered and torn to pieces in a cosmic war far in the past. her attitude towards this desire is 50% devoted lunar cultist, 50% parasocially obsessive twitter stan

🎀 this isn't really a cookie fact but going back to how his title is The Noble Sweetheart — just for a glimpse at party composition, his fellow party members' titles are The Intimate Scholar, The Tentacle Advocate, and The Tw*nk Controversial (the * is the canon spelling).

^ aforementioned tw*nk. its name is Mwah ("pronounced like the kiss you blow at someone you just fucked over"). mwah is played by @/squiddelyfather on twitter!

🎀 mwah and cookie used to be very, very tight, BEFORE mwah became the tw*nk controversial. now that it's so.... you know.... controversial, well. they're still very close, but it has gotten a little stilted and weird (and watching them slowly un-weird it together as the campaign goes on has been one of my fav roleplay experiences ever honestly)

🎀 cookie's other adventuremates, skarligge and delaryn, are both very indulgent towards him. delaryn acts the most grumpy/dismissive about it but is honestly sometimes the worst about spoiling cookie out of anyone in the party (skarligge's player is twt@/clown_dream and delaryn's is twt@/glaiveguisarme and hey while im at it our fantastic gm is the sapphicworld dev, twt@/ddemoneclipse. hi guys i hope u don't mind me chattering abt ur ocs here lol it's just hard to talk abt the best of cookie w/o bringing up everyone else's characters and roleplay also!!!)

🎀 cookie is very VERY sensitive and will burst into tears at the drop of a hat. the precursor to this is her eyes getting So So So Big And Wet And Round. one of my favorite bits to menace the other party members with is when something is not going cookie's way i will lean into my mic and say "cookie's eyes are getting so so so big. they're getting so big and wet and round and shiny. they're so so round and fucking big her eyes are like big wet black glass marbles" and this is like kryptonite to them. this is like getting hit with deadly radiation

🎀 oh speaking of fashion!!!! one of cookie's perks from being a Babe is that she can always change her look whenever she wants. she will ALWAYS have whatever outfit she needs and can quickchange instantly. wait this reminds me i have a bunch of seasonal holiday outfits sketched out and i don't think i've ever posted them here but it'll only let me put one more image in this post. well here have this one

🎀 okay well suddenly i have forgotten all other george facts so that's all for now!!! from now on i will try to just dump oc facts like this more often tho this is really fun. ty for getting me going lol!!!

#my ocs #my art #cooking with gorgeous #sapphicworld

[anghraine]

I think I've talked about it before, but there's a pretty beloved book!Darcy line that's ... maybe not objectively misread, but often read in a very different way than I interpret it:

"But your family owe me nothing. Much as I respect them, I believe I thought only of you."

I've seen this interpreted as a romantic concession that Darcy's love for Elizabeth and concern for her were his true motives for intervening with Lydia. Less often, I've also seen it read much more uncharitably as an indictment of his principles—he only cares about this whole thing at all because Elizabeth does and he cares about her, so it's ultimately selfish.

And those readings (which are ultimately related) do make a certain amount of sense if you analyze the quote by itself. He outright says he was only thinking of Elizabeth! Yes, this is in specific reference to her family, but still, he's pretty clear that his true motive was Elizabeth's peace of mind.

In this case, his claim to the Gardiners that he was principally motivated by his sense of guilt over Wickham would simply be a lie—perhaps a benevolent one to protect Elizabeth from feeling pressured, perhaps a necessary one in the circumstances, but still not an actual motive and not truly an aspect of his character.

Interestingly, though, when Elizabeth receives Mrs Gardiner's account of the Lydia affair in her letter, she does not doubt that Darcy was telling the truth about his motives, even if his feelings for her also affected him:

he had liberality, and he had the means of exercising it; and though she would not place herself as his principal inducement, she could perhaps believe, that remaining partiality for her might assist his endeavours in a cause where her peace of mind must be materially concerned.

Elizabeth is in a lot of turmoil and uncertainty at the time, so it does make sense that she might not fully realize, or dare assume, that she really was his primary motivation—even if it means that she's largely wrong about him all over again.

...except, a mere two sentences before Darcy says "I thought only of you," he says something else that's often excluded from the romantic (or anti-Darcy) use of the original quote.

"That the wish of giving happiness to you might add force to the other inducements which led me on, I shall not attempt to deny."

So in this very passage, he says that he had other motives than Elizabeth's happiness, but that the possibility of making her happy strengthened his other motives. That is quite similar to what Elizabeth concluded when she read Mrs Gardiner's letter (even the phrasing is similar). She did underestimate the strength of Darcy's feelings during that whole phase of the story, yes—he certainly feels more than "remaining partiality." But she's not getting him fundamentally wrong at this point.

I think that, like Elizabeth, Darcy did feel guilty about Wickham (both of them disproportionately to their actual culpability, IMO). I think that this really was a driving motive for his intervention with Lydia—first in trying to get Lydia to leave Wickham, and secondly in arranging the marriage. Of course, his feelings for Elizabeth would strengthen that drive, and did! But I don't think he was mostly lying to the Gardiners or that Elizabeth's analysis of his actions and character were all that wrong this time.

IMO, when he says he was only thinking of Elizabeth, he's speaking specifically in the context of her attempt to voice the gratitude that her family (allegedly) would feel if they knew the truth of what he had done. He respects them as human beings at this point, but he wasn't acting for the sake of the Bennets as a group and doesn't feel like they really owe him anything. The only person he was particularly motivated by was Elizabeth. He also doesn't want her to feel like she owes him something, but if she's going to thank him personally, it should be for herself alone; anything else is kind of wrong and fake.

In that sense, he was only thinking about her—that is, as opposed to thinking about other people. But given his longer speech, in which he explicitly says he had other motives, Elizabeth's happiness being the only person's he was really preoccupied with doesn't prevent him from having more complicated, abstract, layered motives overall. It can be romantic without necessarily being simple.

#anghraine babbles #long post #austen blogging #austen fanwank #fitzwilliam darcy #elizabeth bennet #otp of otps #anghraine's meta #anghraine's headcanons #a bit of columns a and b honestly

[comradekatara]

nothing too insightful to say just !!! toph is the disabled character of all time and it means so much to me, personally. thinking specifically about what you mentioned on the last post about how she learns to let herself be loved; it is often such a fundamental aspect of growing up with a disability that “love” is the guise that adults stripping you of agency wear.

it’s not just being helped in a way that harms and deemed incompetent. it’s being perceived as incompetent, receiving help for your disability that strips you of autonomy, being vulnerable to the abuse and unable to speak for yourself in response to it because you are too frail, helpless, all under the premise of “love.” when disabled love becomes the equivalent of burdening another and being taken from yourself, toph is kind of incredible because it took me nearly twenty years to even begin to unlearn all of that, but she managed to open herself up to others within a few months (to varying degrees, it’s also interesting she seems to trust sokka the quickest, maybe i will send another ask after breakfast rambling about that).

but toph’s ability to adjust her concept of what love is and open herself to it, is genuinely one of the most powerful disability arcs i have ever seen. she becomes able to accept help and not have that feel like embodying weakness, which feels dangerous when disabled because your perceived social weakness is why you have been stripped of all agency and dehumanized, esp. as a disabled child. toph is incredibly strong in regards to earth bending, but truthfully it is this ability to listen, observe and adapt that is her greatest strength. her character is soooo good and her arc is so fucking beautiful

YES 💗 i don’t talk about toph’s disability enough because i don’t like getting too personal on here but you really do articulate that struggle perfectly and i agree so much with what you said.

toph’s foundational trauma is tied not to her experience being blind, but rather the abuse she received due to her blindness. the struggle of being disabled is always twofold: firstly, and i hate when people sugarcoat or ignore this, having a physical disability does make life more difficult. we see toph struggle when she’s not in a position to use her earthbending as a mobility aid; there are aspects of life that are difficult or genuinely impossible for her to participate in due to her limitations. she can and does often compensate by being a brilliant earthbender, but there are still some things she simply cannot do.

but what’s more important to toph’s experience with disability is the way she is treated by those around her, especially her parents. toph simultaneously struggles with being coddled and smothered due to her unique needs, denied agency due to the assumption that she is somehow less able to dictate her own choices, and treated like a shameful burden due to her disability. so by the time toph joins the gaang, she is very afraid of being seen as a burden, but she also doesn’t want anyone helping her with anything or telling her what to do, because she associates that with her parents’ abuse.

she bristles when katara tries to get her to help out, because she wants to be the kind of person who respects everyone else’s space and lets everyone be capable of “carrying their own weight,” just as she wants to be allowed to be left to her own devices. she doesn’t yet understand that a community or support network is not the same thing as a denial of agency, and so she assumes that katara is overbearing and motherly instead of a kid who comes from a place where everyone does an equal share of labor and expects everyone else to do the same.

that’s why i think a lot of people who have never experienced any kind of major disability firsthand don’t really understand toph, and just assume she’s spoiled and brash due to being rich and entitled. but that’s not the case at all. she’s spent her whole life being treated like a fragile doll instead of a person, and it’s dehumanizing and isolating. she doesn’t understand the value of a community because she’s sick of people trying to help her, and due to her own experiences being “helped,” assumes that help is necessarily negative and a denial of one’s agency.

the last thing she wants in that situation is to be overbearing, to be the one telling other people what to do and how to live their lives (yet another reason why she would never become a cop). of course, she signed on to be aang’s teacher, so pretty quickly she does have to get over herself and actually instruct, and she’s not a gentle pedagogue either. but she also knows that she is supremely qualified to teach earthbending, and so it’s easier for her to tell others what to do when she knows that her wisdom counts for something and she isn’t just imposing her will onto someone else for the hell of it, or because she doesn’t respect them.

she also definitely takes iroh’s advice to heart, because unlike a certain incorrigible nephew, she’s really wise and emotionally mature, able to respond to measured advice and actually internalize what iroh is saying. so it doesn’t take long for her to develop a bond with sokka where she doesn’t feel afraid to rely on him. and it’s funny, because she accuses katara of being overbearing and motherly, but she does actually listen to sokka and follow his every command, despite her supposed disdain for authority. and i think it’s the fact that even though sokka does sometimes forget that she’s blind, he’s never purposely insensitive, and he never bosses her around for the hell of it.

unlike katara, who is genuinely unkind to toph in “the chase,” sokka never disrespects toph, and he certainly never disrespects her disability. he’ll banter with her about it, like when he says “well you’ve never not seen anything like this” in “sokka’s master,” but the joke isn’t at her expense, unlike “the stars sure are beautiful tonight,” which is straight up cruel and lowkey unforgivable (sidenote: as someone who has been bullied for being disabled, i do think that this is hands down the worst thing katara ever says in the show, and i understand why toph would continue to hold a grudge against her for that for a long time). whereas sokka always treats toph like a person, and toph recognizes that, so she thus not only accepts his help, but actively asks for it and enjoys receiving it.

toph does grow and accept her own vulnerability remarkably fast, but to the gaang’s credit, they are great friends, and they all treat her like a person instead of a burden or a doll (including katara). having people who love you and understand you, both in terms of your strengths and your limitations, is really necessary, for anyone, but especially for disabled people. i’m really lucky to have people in my life who love me like that, and toph’s arc is so beautiful specifically because she is given that love and care and never takes it for granted. i definitely think that toph is one of the greatest disabled characters of all time, and it’s because her disability isn’t simply incidental to her character, but rather the central pillar of her arc that informs all her motivations at all times. she learns to ask for help, and accept help when it’s offered. she finds a community.

#amorphousea #asks #toph #analysis #katara&toph #sokka&toph #she means so much to me….. #and please do send that follow up ask about sokka because their dynamic is so important #honestly it’s probably what got me to like sokka in the first place #crazy i know . but his friendship w toph is just so perfect #& it rly made me appreciate him more as a kid

[audiblehush]

Listen, I’m on the “I’ll believe it when I see it” train with all these inconsistent S3 rumors because 1) LOL the fucking Sun, people, really?! and 2) “Well, the friend of my friend said… and they’re really reliable! Trust me!” 🙄

But even if it all ends up being true: I’ve already seen a handful of great posts talking about no, it’s NOT actually harming Colin’s character, thanks, and would make a lot of sense from what we know about where he’s at mentally so far - I’ll try not to rehash stuff they’ve already argued really well… and probably fail once i get going 😬

But I would also like to throw out that canonically… Book!Colin ALSO had experience prior to his relationship with Penelope?? Not to rakeish levels, but yeah, he had sexual encounters with women… That he then specifically mentions as meaning NOTHING once he compares it to what he has with Penelope because with her there is actual LOVE built over YEARS of INTIMACY.

And since Show!Colin is markedly younger than his book counterpart, it would make sense that this is something he is exploring, whether the initial choice is through coercion from his brother(s), or because he is curious, or… whatever he reason is?? It doesn’t matter??

He’s YOUNG. Being young means being curious about sex! It often means learning over time the difference between mere physicality vs intimacy. Learning about sex can be messy, confusing, wonderful, terrible, mediocre, not what you thought it’d be, etc etc etc.

Regardless of if we’re taking about Penelope OR Colin: Context is everything and WE. DON’T. HAVE. ANY. YET.

Penelope has her own coping mechanism for what she’s dealing with on her own throughout the show with LW; why is Colin any different, whether that’s drinking, tea, sex, etc? He’s clearly exploring different aspects of himself and finding what appeals or doesn’t appeal to him. And that’s normal!!

The IRONY of people claiming they’re furious at Colin treating women like sex toys… when that’s exactly how some people view Colin for Penelope. He is more than a prop for her! Their whole story is that they choose each other after years of self discovery and recognition of each others true selves… ALL of their past experiences included.

Even if the rumored second instance is true… 1) it would clearly be used as a way to prove that he’s miserable and NEEDS love and Pen and intimacy and 2) characters make mistakes... often ones they learn from. Pen has made her fair share of poor choices, too. Colin has and WILL make mistakes because that is what interesting, developing characters do, yet y’all act like he is unforgivable for being given his own plot scenes. He is NOT just there to have sex with Penelope!! He is a character outside of his romance with his own struggles to grapple with!

Also, please be real - this was SO NORMAL for men during this era, especially at his age! Why are MODERN DAY AUDIENCES acting so fucking scandalized?? One or two instances doesn’t even make him a real rake, ESPECIALLY if it’s being framed as him realizing it isn’t what he ultimately wants! Why are you even watching this show if something like this is so offensive to you?!

If all this ends up being accurate (which again, I doubt), I will admit I’ll probably be picky about how it’s handled… but I’ve always felt that way about this pairing in the short time I’ve been in the fandom.

But I NEED people to chill the fuck out until the season actually airs. You’re lambasting something you HAVEN’T EVEN SEEN YET.

#bridgerton #polin #colin bridgerton #BREAKING: HEALTHY AND CURIOUS YOUNG MAN TRIES OUT SEX IN ERA-APPROPRIATE FASHION #MORE AT ELEVEN #I did not get out of Catholicism to be seeing this pearl clutching in a SMUTTY REGENCY SHOW #take your great value Christianity purity culture and GTFO

[nunalastor]

tbh one of my biggest fandom pet peeves has got to be when people judge works by the same literary standards

because then you get annoying arguments like "it's not that deep" or "this interpretation is wrong because of this minor detail"

often, it has a lot to do with the type of creative who made the show and their intention.

with shows like breaking bad, hannibal, walking dead? a significant amount of the work is probably that deep. they're very traditional writers / film makers, one person is responsible for a lot of things and has a lot of creative control. so, they tend to care about things like color and name symbolism, foreshadowing, etc. etc. and if you read interviews with creators like greg nicotero, bryan fuller, or vince gilligan, you get a sense that a lot goes into every detail and there are massive canon bibles. it doesn't always mean it's true of every episode - but it is true of a significant amount of the work.

and it's not just fancy dramas - it's also sitcoms and animated shows/movies like over the garden wall and most disney stuff from the 90s like the lion king. but people are quick to dismiss those genres as "not that deep".

those are just some of the more obvious examples off my head.

then there are works that are somewhere in the between like a lot of modern sitcoms like community, most marvel movies, bluey, rick and morty, bojack horseman, and helluva boss/hazbin hotel where the creators put a lot of time, effort, and depth into certain ideas or parts of a work but are just having a good time with others. often, they can't be as precious with the work because there are a lot of people working on it. so, at the end of the day, their focus is good overall storytelling, good characters, or humor/entertainment.

their characters aren't always meant to be 100% in character. their world-building isn't always going to be 100% consistent - either because they don't have creative control over all of it or it's just not a priority for them. and on the most extreme end (e.g. marvel's civil war), they're going to shove characters into certain roles for the bigger picture theme/idea or do something extreme with them for a laugh (e.g. alastor doesn't sleep/shower- alastor would wear his clothes in the shower).

because at the end of the day, they want to tell a good story or good joke and there's more of a micro vs. macro focus. some people are focused on characters. some people are focused on the world. some people are focused on certain episodes.

but fandom tends to go to one of two extremes and dismiss it all as not-that-deep or try to analysis it by the same standards as something that's written more traditionally

for me? hazbin/helluva boss very much fit into that latter category.

a lot of parts of the show are just not that deep. the creators probably don't care about name or color symbolism. there are a lot of contradictory uses of it in the show. often, the names are picked arbitrarily (lute = lieutenant, sera/em = seraphim) because they had been calling them that so long

viv likes world-building and has assigned colors to each ring and differentiated male/female imps and classes of characters ... but she changes stuff a lot and would rather have a good shot than be nitpicky about color symbolism. she changes things so often, she forgets about's been established as canon. oftentimes, she dosn't want to sacrifice a cool design for something nitpicky.

she's not precious about every aspect of her characters' specific personalities - but you also can't totally dismiss them as not-that-deep because she does care a lot about certain personality traits and the arc the character will take based on it (e.g. blitzo's trust issues).

but in fandom, people use both extremes as a way to shit talk other creators' interpretations or police how they write or draw and it's just so tiring.

#hazbin hotel #discourse