#TI metacommentary

[krillposting]

Piter de Vries moodboard

[tanadrin]

Metacommentary on politics is always very annoying low-content low-effort stuff, but "X puts Y issue back at the center of the campaign!" as a headline in the NYT is extra annoying, because the one thing guaranteed to put something back at the center of the campaign is running headlines about it in one of the most popular newspapers in the country. Don't pretend to be a disinterested observer when your job is inextricably tied up in shaping political discourse!

[she-who-is-two-sizes-too-big]

Thinking back, i actually think MORØ making Frisk (and, by extension, Undertale) the primary representation of Toby Fox's games and not Kris or Deltarune makes sense because Deltarune is even more intrinsically tied to metacommentary about gaming as a medium than Undertale, in ways that would make it functionally impossible to be put in any other context.

Like, in Deltarune, it is a canon fact of the game's story that we, the player, are an otherworldly entity taking control of Kris' body.

[davekat-sucks]

In regards to a potential alternate homestuck with actual plans for June from page 1: Would it make sense for her emotional conflict to centre on her contradictory admiration of her father and her desire for a more feminine appearance? I had some thoughts

Like she's taught the ways of "fine manly grooming" and being an "emotional rock for the women in your life" and genuinely aspires to embody those suburbian values at the same time as (let's write over a bit of homestuck) hyperfocusing on hit 1994 movie Priscilla, Queen of the Desert and being unable to get Bernadette off her mind. You can even play off her discomfort with that one feminine Convict in Con Air.

You get a bunch of movie references homestuck style and parallels to Gamzee's veneration of the ICP clowns with the clownlike drag queens and emotional revelations stemming from communication with the opposite species. (Let's say in this alternate homestuck Trolls have no sexual dimorphism except for girls on average being stronger - June aspires to Dad's strength so gender crisis)

A few other details change such as June's dream self being gender ambiguous and her discovering wind powers results in her ability to change the desired shape of her body though she doesn't do this immediately. Her arc in total would be about letting go and allowing herself to in(heir)it the fluidity(wind) that she already has.

Most importantly her god tier death is not the point of transition - it comes before and after during experimentation with the wind powers, discussions with friends and the discovery of what she actually wants deep down. It can also spur on interesting interactions with other characters.

Rose tries to use outdated Freudian psychoanalysis which fails, starting her move away from the need to break everything down into black and white systems. Dave's bro becoming not his bro helps his reflection on the heroic image that he rejects. Jade's friend suddenly changing in an extremely unforeseen way that shakes up their dynamic after years of being able to predict everyone’s moves scares her.

Even Moreso - Jane's feelings of being trodden over and ignored get worse when someone who acts similar and is more cosmically important arrives. HEC's whole drag queen look can get tied into the Egbert/Peixes family relationship. You can even do a metacommentary on how drag queen/adjacent culture is a related ancestor to online trans areas (2010's period piece, of course).

And most importantly the resolution with the two warring desires within her (Be like Dad and transitioning) is related to the Classpect. You don't have to choose - womanhood is not a stereotype you need to tick boxes to affirm as if you’re one of the suburban housewives that June grew up around. You can wear power suits and cologne and be a woman.

I think this works? It's still John just the arc is about learning that the simple childhood that they yearn for (spelled out in Sunsetter (Ska)) is both gone and was never real in the first place and that they must inherit the fluidity of life to truly grow. That fits with homestuck - kids with problems preventing them from growing up learning about their pasts, identity and potential and maybe maturing and growing older.

But yeah, I would like your thoughts and opinions on it as a certified hater; It's fun to see how much better you can do than those schmucks over at HS2 that really screwed the pig.

I wonder how would the Drag Queen culture would fit for the Peixes because the theme of Homestuck was that it's women who are put in high positions, knowledge over a lot of things, and control over anything. This extends to even characters like the Black Queen aka Snowman, Vriska, Aradia (after death), Rose, Jade Harley, White Queen, and of course, Meenah. They are all cis women that gained those positions by not only through work but by birth alone or being in position roles that allow them to have certain information no other characters couold have (the troll girls with blood color, Snowman/Black Queen still working even after Derse as destroyed with her death being the major factor that it can destroy the universe, Jade being raised by Prospitians, and Rose being into psychoanalysis and the smart girl in the friend group). I kind of think having the Peixes/Egbert(John/June/Jane) be Drag Queens would kind of break the theme. If not for feminist sake, then it raises the question of why couldn't girls like Rose or Jade have that role that June Egbert would be in since they are also important characters. Vriska also being a natural born female if the Peixes are drags. Fuchsiablood trolls so far is only known to birth women. How would it work if someone like Meenah or Feferi was born male? Would it also be fine about the implications that go with it? Like Meenah drag queen still being the one who BULLIED Damara into going crazy and the catalyst for the rise and continued appearance of Lord English. Or same Drag Queen The Condesce is also the one that set up the classist and hemospectrum system that would also put mutantbloods like Karkat on target for culling. Sure Karkat doesn't mind as he would still dream to become part of the high ranks if it means he can be an exception, but would others be fine knowing something that is considered part of LGBT culture be fine that figure would be the one that makes Alternia the living hell that is? Same Condesce would also soon learn to take over the Alpha session. It would give people like Roxy and Dirk, the kids who are living under the Condesce's reign and trying to survive against her, a reason to dislike drag queens and possibly LGBT if they have to fight for their own lives. Dirk being seen in the fandom as the actual gay person, would that mean his relationship with Jane be different then? What about Jake? If upon dying and becoming god tier can let the user change to their own desired image, it brings question then with the Doomed Timelines that has similar situations of characters becoming better. Nobody is allowed to improve and the set canon is the only true one. Themes of breaking fate and cycle is also another theme that goes with Homestuck. How would one play up Breath's theme of supposed freedom play more into this with John/June or people like Tavros and Rufioh?

[artbyblastweave]

Who was your favorite character in the sequel trilogy?

Finn and Kylo Ren are tied, at least in the first movie- Finn in terms of how radical a departure he was from previous protagonists within the mainline movies, Kylo Ren for serving as interesting metacommentary on Darth Vader and the difficulty of one-upping him with a new antagonist. Finn ultimately wins out, though, because his novel arc (traumatized child soldier who despite his good intentions also wants to get the hell away from the main plot for basically understandable reasons, before ultimately deciding to stop running and make a stand for the sake of his newfound friends) was carried through basically to a functional completion within Episode 7. Whereas Kylo Ren presented some interesting ideas but ended episode 7 without a good position from which to follow through on any of them, and it was all downhill from there.

[kilowogcore]

Heya poozers, it's time fer Kilowog's pick a' the week! This is where I pick the best comic I read this week and give ya' a non-spoiler review of it. Keep in mind I really only read DC comics. I want to read more, but I ain't got the time. This week was another tough one, because Batman's arc finale was amazin' and actually made me love Batman, which ain't easy ta' do, but ultimately I had ta' go a different direction.

Kilowog's Pick: John Constantine: Hellblazer: Dead in America Vol. 1 #6 by Simon Spurrier, Aaron Campbell, Jordie Bellaire, Steve Wands, Matthew Levine, and Chris Conroy.

This whole series has been fantastic, with Simon Spurrier showin' he can write horror an' Aaron Campbell showin' he can illustrate it, but this issue really took the cake fer me.

They play around with metacommentary an' fourth wall breakin'. That's something we see all the time from people like Deadpool an' Harley Quinn, or from writers like Alan Moore an' Grant Morrison, but when they do it it's makin' big serious points, or else bein' silly an' goofy.

This is about horror. It's a horror comic. A twisted tale a' obsession with story an' obsession with makin' story perfect, the madness of bein' able ta' change things narratively, an' some fantastic art that takes full advantage of the comics medium to show the fourth-wall-breakin' an' reality-warpin' powers at play.

Yeah, any time there's a fourth wall break comic it's kinda whimsical, but whimsy can turn ta' horror easily under the hand of a good writer, an' Simon Spurrier is a good writer.

The issue ties in with the larger plot of this series, but the metacommentary stands alone an' I think it'd be enjoyable even fer people who ain't readin' the rest of it.

An that's my pick a' the week!

[lesbiankermitposting]

Is Gotham War good as a Batman story? No. But it’s interesting to look at from an ideological standpoint. I think it’s more of a metacommentary on Batman and the War on Crime.

One thing that’s always been impossible to separate from Batman is the real life implications of policing and incarceration. By believing in the system, by even having a “war on crime,” and putting people in jail, Batman cannot be separated from our real world justice system. There’s been attempts — showing Jim Gordon as a “good” cop, Bruce trying to un-corrupt the police force, making the criminals Batman fights unquestionably evil — but Batman’s idea of redemption and rehabilitation is unfortunately tied to the carceral state, just because he’s operating in America and in an approximation of the real world.

Gotham War, albeit clumsily, I think is trying to reckon with that history. Batman deeming all criminals the same, regardless of their level of crime, is a commentary. Jason says that putting these criminals back into prison just for trying to survive is supposed to be the more modern perspective. And, since Batman is incorrect in his belief and faith in the police and prison system, he has to be incorrect in Gotham War.

Idk. I’m seeing a lot of Hot Takes about Gotham War and though yes it’s not a good STORY it’s really interesting to see Batman as a brand struggle with this issue from the inside.

[junebugwriter]

Scott Pilgrim Takes Off is a perfect sequel/metacommentary on the first. It's a reflection and meditation on growing up. I ove it and I'm going to gush for a bit now. Spoilers ahead.

I read the comics when they came out, and was thrilled with the movie adaptation and its changes. This new series is completely different, but it relies on you knowing what happened in the books/movie, so go into it knowing that. But that's OK. The movie is a breezy experience and that's all you really need to get caught up.

I call it a sequel, because of that reason. The first episode follows the first book, right up until the end... and then it changes. This series focuses on not Scott, but rather Ramona and the supporting cast. Given an episode each, all the exes are given room to breathe, develop, grow and change. In fact, that's the point of the series.

Scott Pilgrim is relatable because he resembles the mistakes of young adulthood, self-centeredness, and the mythologies we build up around our life. Ramona is relatable because she is the avatar of a youth afraid of connection and facing the hard realities of relationships. In each encounter with the Exes, Ramona realizes that she's the tragic catalyst in their past. She left the one she loved each time, and never quite knew how to end things because endings are difficult. She runs away, and learns freedom has consequences. Scott, on the other hand, learns that he HAS to fight for his relationship no matter what. That's what being in a relationship is all about. You have to communicate, talk things out. Love is hard, but it is ultimately worth it if you make the effort.

The series feels like a person in their 30s reflecting on their 20s, and coming away learning that there is no discontinuity between the past and future. It's always just you. All your mistakes, all your triumphs, the key to it is always... just you. You can't control people. You can't manipulate them and expect them to be okay with it. You can't run away from your mistakes, because they will always be tied to you. It's like trying to run away from your shadow. You have to deal with them. You have to complete the circle.

The change in focus only deepens the characters in question. As much as it focuses on Ramona, it's just as much about Scott in the end. We are who we are, flaws and all. Growing up is just learning to own it, and be okay with it, but also be determined to be better.

The only person you ever have to defeat, in the end, is yourself. Your past, your flaws, it's all you. And it's good to struggle with it, because you come out better in the end.

Please watch the show. The cast has a blast, the animation is slick. It's a perfect sequel.

[charcubed]

I'm curious, what are the main reasons why Dean is your favorite canon bisexual in media? Love your meta and that video btw

Ooooo, anon, thank you for the kind words and for giving me an excuse to talk about my love for bisexual icon Dean Winchester <3

I'm going to be really annoying (sorry) and quote part of my meta first. It summarizes and articulates many of my thoughts on this. And then to further answer your question I'll add a bit under it!

From the very beginning, Dean Winchester has been a character tied to classic elements of American masculinity. He was introduced with a superficial veneer involving those elements, but almost immediately the early episodes provide a look at the complexity of his character underneath it. Over the years, that complexity was further explored, and he came to embody a study in things society would often have us think should be incompatible contrasts: the gruffness and grit of hunting life and its associated masculine iconography, paired with his open and deep emotional care for the world; unabashed love for classic rock, superheroes, and horror movies, as well as unabashed joy connected to TV dramas, chick flicks, and childhood favorites like Scooby-Doo; life on the road with a muscle car, but the desire for a home base with creature comforts he can make his own; motivation to always help people, but the clear longing for balance with personal domesticity and relaxation so he could save not only others but also himself.

As a whole, his character functions as an effective deconstruction of toxic masculinity and stereotypical American heroism. And while much of Dean’s most masculine traits and interests are said to come from his father’s influence, part of his journey is loving those parts of himself on their own merit not because he ever had to but because he wants to. He is not his father, and he redefines those valued parts of his identity so they are his and his alone. He also crucially learns to recognize and joyfully embody that those masculine traits were never all that he had to be, working through and overcoming shame and hesitancy along the way. The result? He’s “good with who he is.”

He and the audience are encouraged to see that there are no rules his identity and interests must subscribe to, on a micro or a macro level. The message is to disregard predetermined destiny or duty. Free will means his life is his to determine, his family can be what he makes of it and how he defines it, and what he needs and wants do not ever have to be mutually exclusive. Dean’s journey is about freedom from outwardly-imposed limitations–whether those limitations come from his father’s example and the God altering his story, or from the pervasive societal ideals and network/executive interference outside of it. Dean can and should contain multitudes, all at once.

In this way, Dean’s story is a powerfully queer narrative that acts as metacommentary. In the fullness of its execution, it is also specifically a deeply bisexual narrative.

The not-so-hidden truth is that Dean is canonically a bisexual man. His story was afforded something that’s rare for most characters and almost nonexistent for queer ones: fifteen years of lengthy, nuanced development.

[...]

Again: Dean’s identity journey is about how he can and does contain the capacity for multitudes, and it’s part of what makes him such a compelling character. He can like “this” and “that.” He can be attracted to women and men. Or, as writer Ben Edlund and director Phil Sgriccia said in a DVD commentary, Dean has “the potential for love in all places.”

I wanted to include the above verbatim because it spells out something specific: Dean's narrative is bisexual in its bones. Supernatural evolved to become a queer text, but the specific ways the show and Dean as a character evolved are very intertwined with and informed by the fact that Dean is a masculine bisexual man. SPN is a story that was not meant to be about being queer, but as it became about freedom through free will, those themes were then leveraged and emphasized in connection to queerness because of Destiel. And by the end, the free will narrative and Dean's journey as a bi man are utterly inseparable, because Dean's fight for true freedom is tied to his love for a man and their untraditional family in a way that higher forces are trying to hinder.

You cannot cut out or edit or remove Dean's bisexuality from the story, or several narratives and plot lines (not just Destiel) would at minimum be misunderstood or at maximum fall apart. And yet, simultaneously? Dean's bisexuality is also far from being the sole important thing about his character because he is written with such nuanced complexities and across so many years of material.

Of course, add onto this the overall unique situation that surrounds Supernatural as a piece of media. People talk at length about how there will never be anything like it again, including me; that's obviously true from multiple different angles and for multiple different reasons, with Destiel being prime amongst them. But a related yet distinctly significant branch of that topic is there will never be another bisexual character who is written and evolves quite like Dean.

Was Dean supposed to be bisexual from the very start, out of the mind of Kripke? Who can know for sure, but probably not. Were certain writers and members of production deliberately putting more queercoding and subtext into Dean's character/story from the very start? Who can know for sure, but potentially yes, and certainly the answer becomes unarguably definitely yes the farther you get into the show. That's part of my love and passion for him too, because all of that is deeply unique and incredibly cool.

Dean's bisexuality evolved in a way that (against all odds) actually feels organic, seamless, and like it's simply a part of his character that's been there all along. The effect when you look at Supernatural as a whole body of work is that Dean's always been bi, and his expressions of and acknowledgements of that part of him ebb and flow depending on situation–which is a very relatable notion for many queer people. And as those writing the show became more committed and certain about that piece of who Dean is, so did he, in nuanced and subtle ways skillfully embedded into his story by design. It's bafflingly, impressively cohesive; gives him an incredibly realistic feel; matches his overall character growth; and rings true to his demographic, age, personality, and experiences.

Dean and his story and the situation(s) surrounding both are simply incomparable, and that will be true forever ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

...also. Well. I simply love him, y'know? For even more reasons unconnected to this. How can you not, right? :')

Thank you for asking, and thanks for reading this bi Dean manifesto!

Putting my video that you mentioned here for anyone who's not watched it:

My new magnum opus, please stream, etc.

(or watch on Tumblr here)

[rebeccadumaurier]

my notes on bungo stray dogs season 4

alright now that i've finally watched s4, i can be insane about this show for a bit. spoilers abound below obviously, and also i only watch the show and don't follow the manga (not something i intend to change anytime soon, so pls don't spoil haha <3)

my thoughts

crazy how reading meta on the character and relationship foils in BSD actually significantly improved my media literacy, not to mention increased my respect for asagiri a lot. but speaking of foils i went insane watching this season. the way it BUILDS on so much of the previous seasons is wild

everything about mushitari and yokomizo's relationship is SOOOOO much and we barely know them. the theme of trying to be remembered forever through your writing. the foils to the murakami arc, the way ango is dazai's translator despite their own strained relationship, do i even need to explain how it parallels poe and ranpo's relationship.

not to mention the way the manuscript / evidence destroyer arc is constructed reminds me a lot of how they foiled dazai x chuuya with steinbeck x lovecraft in the double black episode.

speaking of which, ranpo fans (and ranpo/poe fans) really had their time this season! yes i'm getting queerbaited no i don't care i love this this is awesome. i havent been queerbaited like this since i watched double black and it permanently rewired my brain (affectionate)

the book as metacommentary on storytelling and what it means to construct and alter reality and the evils of trying to play God as written by a real-life writer, an inherent role of playing God. im shaking asagiri like a ragdoll for answers

unsure how i feel about the continuous upping of stakes but do respect the overall lack of power creep for our main characters. dazai, yosano etc are exactly as powerful as they were when they first started, and i enjoy that.

the obvious contrast in ranpo as silly emotionally volatile 14-year-old vs grown-up ranpo in present time and how he's developed so much as a character and grown to care for others. the relationship between him and fukuzawa. im going to be sick. i need him to be safe and protected so bad...i just want him to be happy.

the empathetic and thoughtful way BSD approaches the treatment of children really gets to me. the attempt to preserve innocence and the way it is so often destroyed. but also it's worrying how with each flashback going further back in time, the characters depicted are progressively younger - dazai at 18 -> dazai and chuuya at 15 -> ranpo at 14 -> yosano at 11. if we continue in this direction, i think we will probably see akutagawa's childhood and him joining the PM, which i can't imagine will exactly be a happy fun time.

speaking of which, the contrast in this season between the patience and compassion with which fukuzawa treats teenage ranpo vs the cruelty with which mori treats child yosano and then the fact fukuzawa and mori's friendship ended over that treatment. oh my goddd. and i'm sure there will be further examination of the trickledown-effect of how mori's teachings impacted dazai which then impacted akutagawa which then impacted kyouka. the intergenerational trauma of it all

-> the parallel between mori shooting yosano's friend to force her to heal him with her ability vs dazai shooting akutagawa to force him to protect himself with his ability. oh my god!!!!

on the decay of the angels: really confused by how nikolai's character ties in to the real-life gogol (who i don't know super well, but i've read a few of his stories and like his writing). waiting for a mishima character to show up, since well, the decay of the angel is a real-life mishima book. excited for that since real-life mishima was also....quite a character, to say the least

my questions (and further thoughts)

so far, the state of several ADA members remain unknown. we currently only know the whereabouts of dazai, atsushi, kyouka, and fukuzawa, and that's because uh, 2/4 are in prison.

(also the parallel of fukuchi helping fukuzawa find oda in prison vs fukuchi's conversation with fukuzawa in prison. hm.)

speaking of which — i'm curious where mersault really is. it's obviously not a normal prison — there's most likely at least one ability user at work in making it function. (plus i need an albert camus character so bad PLEASE.) the way it's depicted, with the yellow confined spheres, reminds me a lot of the ability of camus's countryman, arthur rimbaud (from the the fifteen arc). hm! anyway, to go over the remaining ADA members:

so, where's yosano? tachihara spared her (unsurprising imo, though there's no doubt a degree of poetry for him in forcing her to heal herself over and over like she did his brother, but he's clearly not the sadistic torturer type).

ranpo is...somewhere. he was able to contact kyouka at some point about the manuscript, and he's obviously not dead. the question i have, although this applies to pretty much all of them, is what is he doing??? presumably he has...plans, of some sort.

tanizaki and kenji - i'll be a little surprised if tanizaki doesn't try to get in touch w/ naomi. the fact we still know very little about kenji, and he remains a fairly static character, makes me nervous considering how fleshed-out the other ADA members are. i dunno, i really feel like he's hiding something. my theory is that he's a spy the way tachihara / ango were spies but i have no good evidence here besides "does not pass vibe check."

kunikida's fate also unknown, besides "alive"

the margaret / hawthorne subplot seems unresolved - both character fates are like, extremely ambiguous. will say though obsessed with lucy casually throwing hawthorne into the void and atsushi just expresses no concern whatsoever.

(obsessed with everything about lucy tbh she was a member of an incredibly powerful gifted organization and then decided to just become a waitress at a cafe, where she bullies atsushi all the time and uses her pocket dimension to store her boss's coffee, and then she quits her job to go on an incredibly risky mission for the ADA. lucy i would do anything for you)

so confused as to what happened w nikolai 😭😭 maybe i should just accept that if you're a major character in this series who exists in the present, there's no such thing as permanent death.

the most notable exclusion from this season to me: where the hell is akutagawa? dude, you can't tell me asagiri just didn't have room for him. i don't believe that. i am nervous for him!!

[krillposting]

Piter de Vries x Andrasta of the Word

Ship moodboard - The Interrogation

[garland-on-thy-brow]

[La Morte Di Cesare II.11 (Sertor/Bianchi, by 1797 edition) / Catone in Utica II.10 (Metastasio/Vinci, 1728)]

I love here not only the reference to Catone in Utica itself (not the first one, by the way: Porzia in Act 1 borrows lines both from Cato and from Emilia). What I also love is the metacommentary on it ("Bruto, lo vedo: ti sedusse Caton"). Really gives the sense of continuity.

[soul-dwelling]

Do you think it's possible that there'd never BE a season 3 of Fire Force. I mean, a lot of anime shows on TV are pretty much advertisements for the original manga, and when some anime ended on cliffhangers the studios didn't bother picking up on them once the manga concluded (Bleach seems to be an exception to this rule after a long wait between the manga's end). While Attack on Titan's manga is finished and a final season was announced, still no word about Fire Force.

It has been about a year since Season 3 was confirmed to be happening, along with a mobile game.

So, I don't see any reason why Fire Force wouldn't wrap up as an anime that finishes adapting the rest of the manga, especially given the (admittedly hallow) buzz the ending generated that would make producers say, "Hey, let's get this adapted!" and especially to get Soul Eater fans onboard (and get malcontents like me to still talk about it, which is still free publicity even when I freaking hate that ending and how that series turned out...)

I haven't looked at manga sales or merchandise sales, but I haven't seen anything suggesting they weren't good enough to get another season made.

The series has co-production money coming out of Crunchyroll (and I thought Bilibili?), so it has funding.

My guess? Look how long it took between Bungo Stray Dogs (which I love, but even I have to face it, it's not that big a franchise) getting its fourth season announced and how long it took to get any trailer and then any episodes. Animation takes time, industry challenges and failures to support animators' livelihood and health makes it harder to get new episodes made, COVID is still a thing. And David Pro is still making JoJo and trying to establish Undead Unluck as a new franchise, so that takes priority to get that fanbase built, rather than spending time on more Fire Force episodes when that fanbase is what it is already...

...And I don't see that fanbase getting much bigger with the newest anime season(s). Unless people are really going to be in awe over silly live-action crap, metacommentary that is actually pretty offensive when it comes to Tamaki, and such a hamfisted attempt to tie all of this into Soul Eater, I don't know, I imagine the newest anime season(s) will generate the exact same buzz that the last months of the manga did from some of the most foolish people online ("Oh my God, it all ties into Soul Eater and it's so meta, this is amazing!") before that buzz dies out.

Fire Force is not some Evangelion groundbreaking series: it ended with a spectacle that I don't think will remain memorable after it ends, it'll be nostalgia viewing for people who enjoy the animation, the music, the story, the characters, but I don't see it becoming iconic and the same kind of inspiration that others series have been. (For crying out loud, The Owl House shows Soul Eater has had more impact than I think Fire Force ever will.)

[a-secret-bolton-vampire]

Been wanting to do this one for a long while. Thinking a lot about Fire and Blood because House of the Dragon is coming up, and there are quite a lot of parallels between the Dance of the Dragons and the main ASOIAF series. More below...

The Dance of the Dragons happened, in part, because the legitimacy of Rhaenyra's children was in question. Jacaerys, Lucerys, and Joffrey (how fitting, two bastard children named Joffrey) had brown hair instead of the typical silver-blonde hair of Targaryen and Velaryon children, and their father was not Laenor Velaryon, but rather Harwin Strong. Because of this, Rhaenyra's claim to the Iron Throne was contested, since her heirs would be bastards.

Not too dissimilar to the beginning of the War of the Five Kings, where Cersei, the beautiful queen of King Robert, fathered three bastard children in secret with her brother Jaime, all of them with the golden blond hair of the Lannisters. Then when Robert died, Joffrey ascended the throne, and Ned backed Stannis, who was in truth the rightful heir to the throne... we all know how that went of course. Also, while Rhaenyra's Joffrey was the youngest of the three, Cersei's Joffrey was the oldest of the three.

Rhaenyra and Cersei are very strong parallels. Rhaenyra was secretly involved in an affair with a family member (her uncle Daemon) whilst Cersei was involved in a secret affair with her own family member (brother Jaime). The difference, of course, being that Rhaenyra ended up marrying Daemon because Targs do Targ things, and Cersei just kept her affair with Jaime secret because they weren't Targs. In addition, Rhaenyra ended up losing all three of her children, becoming more and more bitter and distraught, becoming prone to paranoia.

Meanwhile, Cersei has thus far only lost Joffrey, but the valonqar prophecy states she will lose all three of her children. Like Rhaenyra, though, after the death of Joffrey, she does become more prone to paranoia and is increasingly bitter. Rhaenyra was eventually fed to Sunfyre by her half-brother Aegon. If Jaime is truly the valonqar, then Cersei might end up being killed by her brother as well. Eventually, Rhaenyra did end up becoming estranged from Daemon, and currently Cersei is estranged from Jaime.

However, a better Dance parallel with Cersei and Jaime is Rhaenyra and Criston Cole. They were lovers, a future queen with a member of the Kingsguard. They later suffered some sort of estrangement (the nature of which is a source of conflict in terms of what is real) that led to Criston eventually siding with the greens over the blacks during the Dance. Criston also was made Hand of the King, while Cersei presses for Jaime to be made Hand, but he refuses the position.

However, Rhaenyra isn't the only Cersei parallel. Alicent Hightower is another. Like Cersei, she supports her eldest son in claiming the throne against its lawful heir, and is the dowager queen of the former king... And she is the daughter of the Hand of the King, who is a member of one of the richest, most powerful families in the kingdoms. However, Rh

But the parallels run even deeper than that. It shocked me to see how far these go. The story of Aegon III and Viserys II as children is not too dissimilar to both the story of Daenerys and Viserys after Robert's Rebellion and some of the Stark children. Like Dany and Viserys, Viserys II ended up spending a lot of time in the Free Cities, specifically Lys, although he was captured in battle and returned as a hostage, whereas Dany and Viserys spent time in Illyrio's mansion as guests. Arya also went to Braavos, a Free City, but that's about where the similarities end so that isn't very intentional, I think.

Nonetheless, both Aegon and Viserys spent the majority of the war separated from each other and only reunited after it ended. Likewise, the Stark children were separated from each other for the majority of the war as well, and seem poised to reunite after the initial War of the Five Kings is over. And speaking of Starks, Aegon III does have a slight parallel with Bran.

As confirmed by George, Bran will be the King of Westeros by the end of the books, and there is a moniker given to him in the show that actually does appear in the books, of Bran the Broken. Meanwhile, at the end of the Dance, Aegon is now the King, and he is known as the Broken King, because of his extreme PTSD and depression from his traumatic experiences during the war.

Doesn't even end there. Now we get into some of, in my opinion, the biggest parallels with the Dance and ASOIAF proper. We all know about R+L=J, and the Dance has not one, but two big nods to this. First is the story told by Mushroom of when Jacaerys visited Winterfell. Supposedly, he fell in love with Cregan's bastard half-sister Sara Snow, and the two secretly wed before the Winterfell heart tree. Regardless of the validity of the story, Cregan and Jace did end up agreeing to what was called the Pact of Ice and Fire, wherein Jace's firstborn daughter would marry Cregan's son Rickon... son of a Targaryen king marrying the daughter of Lord Stark? Hmmm....

However, the other one is a lot more significant, to me anyways, and that would be the relationship between Crown Prince Aemond One-Eye and Alys Rivers. During the Dance, when Aemond took over Harrenhal, he took Alys Rivers as his paramour. The mysterious Alys was said to be a witch who was a bastard of House Strong, a House that has strong ties to the First Men. So, Valyrian crown prince and a First Man woman in love... but don't worry, it gets extremely apparent afterwards.

Aemond impregnates Alys and leaves her in a tower to go fight Daemon, during which Aemond is killed, leaving Alys all alone. Rhaegar impregnates Lyanna and leaves her in a tower to go fight Robert, during which Rhaegar is killed and leaves Alys all alone... then, years later, during winter, the Hand of the King Tyland Lannister tries to get together a force to retake Harrenhal, as it is held by brigands and thieves and broken men, only to find Alys there... with a young child she calls her and Aemond's trueborn son, and the rightful King of Westeros.

If that isn't enough for you, there is a very distinct similarity in the armour of Rhaegar and Aemond. Rhaegar's armour is mentioned to have been;

Seventeen and new to knighthood, Rhaegar Targaryen had worn black plate over golden ringmail when he cantered onto the lists.

And:

The day had been windy when he said farewell to Rhaegar, in the yard of the Red Keep. The prince had donned his night-black armor, with the three-headed dragon picked out in rubies on his breastplate.

Compare this to Aemond's own armour.

Vhagar had come at last, and on her back rode the one-eyed Prince Aemond Targaryen, clad in nightblack armor chased with gold.

It seems clear to me that George is trying to tell us something. I think Aemond and Alys are a sort of dark mirror to Rhaegar and Lyanna. Rhaegar was considered a very noble, chivalrous prince who was well loved by the smallfolk, and Lyanna had a strong sense of Stark justice (as seen in the Knight of the Laughing Tree story). Meanwhile, Aemond was a narcissistic, psychopathic mass murderer who seems almost Ramsay-esque in his demeanour. And Alys seems more power hungry and eventually took over Harrenhal as its witch queen. But the fact they have what Alys claims to be their trueborn child and true king of Westeros does strongly suggest Rhaegar and Lyanna did eventually marry and Jon is their trueborn son, not a bastard.

I hoped I would be done by now, but there is still even more parallels. Cregan Stark and Eddard Stark are parallels and foils. Ned becomes Hand of the King and travels south to uncover who poisoned the previous Hand of the King, before the War of the Five Kings starts. Meanwhile, Cregan travels south and arrives at King's Landing after the Dance was over, then becomes Hand of the King to uncover who poisoned the previous king (Aegon II). However, while Ned was cautious and not really a big player of the game of thrones, Cregan was ambitious and knew what he was doing, even if his actions weren't always the best (attacking Storm's End, Oldtown, and Casterly Rock after the war was essentially over? Not a good idea, Stark).

The Regency of Aegon III in and of itself is a metacommentary to the writing process of ASOIAF. Originally, after GRRM finished ASOS, he decided to do a 5-year gap between that and what was to be ADWD. However, that ended up not working out, so he scrapped it all together. During that time, Tommen would've remained king, and his reign would be under a regency. So thus, Aegon III having a 5-year regency (from 131 to 136 AC) during that time alludes to that.

And then you get to Unwin Peake, my least favourite character in Fire and Blood. He appears to be a combination of Mace Tyrell and Randyll Tarly. Personality wise, he is very much like Randyll. He is a very outspoken misogynist, a very proud man, and a noted warrior wielding a Valyrian steel blade (that he likely stole from Tumbleton since Orphan-Maker was from House Roxton originally). He also changed out Aegon III's master-at-arms to be Gareth Long, who was a very harsh taskmaster, who routinely engaged in abusive tactics with the boys he trained when they didn't meet his expectations, including days without sleep, doused in tubs of ice water, being beat, and having their heads shaved, which is very reminiscent of Randyll's abuse of Sam as a child.

Unwin and Randyll also dealt with lawful punishment in very harsh ways, as seen by Randyll's treatment of those who break the law at Maidenpool, and Unwin's clearing the Red Keep cells during the Feast of Our Father Above. However, Unwin has a lot of similarities with Mace Tyrell as well. Mace is on the small council, and has routinely tried to engage in nepotism by implanting allies and family members of his into positions at the council and at King's Landing, including marrying Margaery to the king, becoming Hand of the King, having Paxter Redwyne be the lord admiral and Randyll Tarly the lord justiciar, try to bring his uncle Garth to become the new master of coin, and Garth's bastard sons to join the gold cloaks, not to mention the Conclave nearly sending his uncle Gormon to become the new Grand Maester (something Mace will surely approve of), Mace having his son Loras join the Kingsguard, and even try to betroth his heir Willas to Myrcella.

Meanwhile, Unwin engaged in much more rampant and unchecked nepotism. He was Hand of the King and Lord Regent, had Ser Gareth as master-at-arms at the Red Keep, since he was master-at-arms at Starpike, while his widowed aunt Clarice Osgrey was put in charge of Queen Jaehaera's household, Lord George Graceford (a member of the Caltrops that Peake himself was involved in) was appointed as the Lord Confessor, and Ser Victor Risley, the other surviving member of the Caltrops, was appointed to the position of the King's Justice.

He even dismissed Septon Eustace and replaced him with Septon Bernard, another relative of his. He also had his nephew Amaury and his bastard half-brother Ser Mervyn Flowers put onto the Kingsguard, while his uncle Gedmund was made the master of ships. Not to mention his attempted marriage between his daughter Myrielle and Aegon III. So basically the Peakes are the Tyrells of their day, trying to take control of the Seven Kingdoms and the Iron Throne.

And that is all that I can remember! I'm sure there is a lot more, but it's striking to see just how many parallels there are between the Dance and ASOIAF itself.

[leporellian]

I'm super sorry for asking this (I really don't want to make you uncomfortable or anything; I'm just curious) but what is your opinion on the racism/antisemitism/Nazi controversies surrounding Wagner and his music?

hmm. now i don’t actually deal with wagner at all in opera- like i’m sorry but his operas have just Never appealed to me, especially because 1) they cause my sensory circuits to fry up and 2) i have the attention span of a fruit fly. but if i for whatever reason were placed as a director on a wagner opera, and i couldn’t get out of it, i would place the opinions of people of color and jewish people at the highest priority. i would want to get their opinions and perspectives on the situation, and i would consult them first and foremost because as a white non-jewish person i’ve been inherently sculpted by societal privilege and will never understand the experiences those groups have. not to sound like captain obvious here of course but it’s important, with these kinds of scenarios, to consult and listen to the minorities at hand. (now honestly i’d try to get consultants like this on nearly every opera i’d direct, but i think it’s especially important with wagner given the implications wagner music carries.) 

also, to be honest, i’d really want to kind of... point out how flawed wagner is using the production? like you know those magic flute productions that very transparently show that sarastro is a Bad Person just by use of staging and characterization without changing the libretto all too much... something along those lines. you have to be careful with metacommentary in opera, but in wagner i feel like it’s kind of necessary to point it out. 

now i’m not sure this has been a very satisfying answer. but i’ll tell you this: the worst way to approach wagner is to be one of those “separate the art from artist!!!” people. because art is inherently tied to its artist. when someone makes a piece of art, it’s a little shard of the mirror in their soul, and while it may depict whatever is in its reflection, it will be warped in the same way the mirror it came from is. art is inherently tied to its artist, for better or for worse- and simply ignoring wagner’s bigotry won’t do anyone any favors. 

[allofthefeelings]

I saw the tags on that Black Canary gifset you reblogged and I was actually the opposite! I went in expecting to love Canary but walked out wanting Huntress to shoot me with her crossbow 😳 I’d love to hear your thoughts on the movie too!!!

Oh, don’t get me wrong, Huntress was excellent (and anyone who said she wasn’t hot is telling on themselves something fierce), and your choice is excellent.

The movie was basically if they took my favorite character archetypes and split them among a bunch of characters. I just thought I knew what my deepest id desire is, but despite canon giving us TWO characters with deep trauma who went on to become child vigilantes, it turns out that sometimes the heart just wants what that wants and while it’s OFTEN murderbabies sometimes it’s a good person stuck in a terrible situation who does what she can to undermine it from within rather than tearing the whole system down until she’s in a position where she thinks she can actually effect change like that.

I think it was a really good movie that I enjoyed immensely but I was not quite the target audience for, in a way that has left me feeling like I don’t have a real way to talk about it well.

I’ll put more under a cut.

I really enjoyed the movie. I laughed out loud more than I have in ages, including at straight-up comedies, and the characters were generally really well-acted; they all felt lived in. Even when we didn’t get a lot to go on each of them were easily empathize-able, and I like seeing a movie where I can just unambiguously want the protagonists to win.

That said, I had a few moments where I felt like I was in that weird in-between space where I knew there were references I was missing but I didn’t know what they were. I think they would have been fine for anyone with no knowledge and delightful treats for people with LOTS of knowledge, but they did leave me a little unsettled as a viewer- like I was just slightly distanced from the story, because I knew just enough to realize how much I didn’t know.

When that’s my biggest criticism, it’s a very good sign.

I thought they built an exceptional world. I love that the dark underbelly of Gotham didn’t keep the movie from being bright and sunny. I love that this is a world where the presence of supervillains, superheroes, and vigilantes doesn’t stop everything; people are living in it. I love that they let Harley be smart and I love that she had a confetti gun- a weapon I wish to see in every movie in the future, please, whether or not Harley is in it- and I love how heavily the drama over her egg sandwich was weighted by the narrative, because yes, when everything is the worst sometimes the egg sandwich IS the most important part.

This is the first movie I’ve seen where rather than “Why do they have an abandoned amusement park?” I was like “Yes, this seems like a place that would support at least five abandoned amusement parks, and it makes sense to specify which abandoned amusement park would be most centrally located.“

I really liked Harley’s narration, and the way the voiceover and animations enabled them to play with narrative. I have a soft spot for stories that know how to manipulate narrative while still being clear, and even more of one for stories that are interrogating what narrative means. By having Harley’s narration and playing with the audience’s knowledge at various times in the movie, I felt like it was also a pretty strong metacommentary on the audience’s understanding of Harley to this point: like so much of Gotham, we’ve only seen her as a side character in Joker’s story, and this re-framing not only lets her be the protagonist without losing anything but also forces the viewer to recontextualize everything we’ve seen so far.

That said, while this makes the rationale for making the story Harley-focused not just logical but productive for the DCEU as a whole as well as for this movie in particular, I wanted to see more of the BoP themselves. Harley is a great character but she’s a lot, constantly- that’s her whole point!- and I both wanted more of the BoP because they were interesting and because I think Harley works best as a counterpoint to the more grounded world of the rest of them. I think the movie recognized and was utilizing that, but I would have liked to see it leaned in to even more; the contrast and their choice to work together despite that was strong but could have been even stronger.

Specifically, I feel like I got just enough of Dinah, Helena, and Renee’s backstories and current situations to whet my appetite and make me excited to see more from them, but not quite enough that I wasn’t filling in pieces myself. Which is fun, as a general rule- that’s what fandom is FOR- but this ties back to my big concern: when I know there’s so much background for them out there, I don’t want to fill in my pieces because I know I could be contradicting the Truth (I know any medium with multiple creators doesn’t have one real Truth but you know what I mean), and that leaves me kind of unsure where to go with this? Like, I’m not sure how to engage fannishly without saying “fuck canon” (which I am not terribly good at doing- I mean, I‘m great at it once I know intent but before that I’m in a constant state of “i need more knowledge to decide!”) or without doing a deep-dive of research, which I don’t currently have time to do. And while they absolutely needed every scene they had to establish where Harley was and how far she fell to achieve the rest of the movie- I think it was smart filmmaking- I wish that some of that time had gone to the other women, so I didn’t feel like I was grasping in the dark without a flashlight.

So I guess basically this is a very long way of saying that the movie was fun, I look forward to watching it again and getting even more out of it, but I feel like I am just slightly off from the intended audience in ways that makes it hard for me to engage smartly, and my best bet is to read what other people think instead. Does that make sense?