daydreamer-in-reverie

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

We all know the Capitol isn’t above reaping the children of Victors should they prove themselves to be problematic.

But what about siblings?

We know of one instance where siblings both entered the games.

Cashmere and Gloss won back-to-back Games, with Gloss winning before Cashmere did.

What if Gloss, like Haymitch or Johanna or Katniss, was a problematic Victor and the Capitol had his sister reaped because as punishment? And when his sister survived against all odds, she was punished too by forcing her to sell her body?

It’s no secret that while District 1 is a career district, they were still one of the most rebellious ones. It was just the mistake of the other Districts not to trust them. What if Gloss did something during his Games that no one knew about because the Capitol wiped it clean from their records, Maysilee Donner style?

What if, what if, what if?

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

Finished Sunrise on the Reaping and I realized that after 25 years, Haymitch found another girl worth jumping in front of Peacekeepers for (him interceding on behalf of Katniss when Gale was being whipped) and that’s the moment Snow realized that Haymitch has found love again and also the moment that doomed Haymitch into getting reaped for the 75th Hunger Games again.

I am clearly not okay 🥹

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

good things will happen 🧿

things that are meant to be will fall into place 🧿

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

I’m on booktok and this whole conversation about how “books aren’t political” has to be one of the DUMBEST, most ASININE, most BEFUDDLING stances I have ever encountered in my life.

Listen, I completely understand the desire to read books and turn your brain off. That’s okay. I do it too. When I read, I shut off external distractors and focus and enjoy the things I read because reading is escapism.

But completely disregard the fact that reading is inherently political, ESPECIALLY AS A WOMAN, is not only borderline stupid, it’s also dangerous.

It wasn’t that long ago that people were literally smuggling books as a form of resistance from a fascist, authoritarian regime whose goal was to exterminate an entire race of people. It wasn’t that long ago that that same regime burned books to keep people from reading the things within it.

It wasn’t that long ago that authors were being persecuted, condemned and executed for the things they were writing and for who they were as people. Oscar Wilde was persecuted for being a closeted gay man. Jane Austen had to write under the veil of anonymity because she was a woman. The Color Purple by Alice Walker, a book written by a black woman about the struggles of black people, is actively being banned today.

It wasn’t that long ago that minorities and women weren’t taught to read because we were thought to be incapable of it.

Books are political because reading is political.

That’s not even to say about the contents of the books your reading.

Fantasy as a genre has always been enduringly popular not only because of the fanatical elements but also because most fantasy books talk about toppling authoritarian regimes. From JKR Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings to SJM’s Throne of Glass, hell, even Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein! These are all books that speak of love and acceptance. These are ideas that were completely radicalized when they shouldn’t have been. Hell, the main characters of these books struggle against societal oppression! Feyre Archeron was poor in the first book and she struggled to free human beings from oppression by their Fae overlords and you don’t think that’s political?

And all those romance books that women in the right enjoy? Even those are unerringly political. Women who openly write about sex and are unapologetic about it are radical ideas that wouldn’t have come to fruition 20 years ago let alone 50 to a hundred years ago. If Sierra Simone had written Priest two hundred years ago, she would have been branded a heretic and burned at the stake.

It is absolutely INSANE to me when readers are incapable of discerning what is right from wrong. Readers have been known to be more empathetic, more tolerant and more accepting of others because these are things we practice when we put ourselves in the shoes of the characters we read. The rise of anti-intellectualism in the book community of all things is not only disappointing, it is dangerous.

Imagine boiling down an epic fantasy like the Poppy War and saying it’s an enemies-to-lover trope when it’s so much more than that. Imagine calling the Hunger Games as a great love triangle story when it’s so much more than that. Imagine looking up to characters like Aelin Galathynius and Feyre Archeron and diminishing their capabilities and values to fit your own narrative of what their story is.

Reading is political.

Books are political.

Anyone who says otherwise is wrong.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

As a writer, I am so jealous of artists and their ability to bring their imagination into life with nothing but color and paper. You see worlds colored with the galaxy but the vividness of my imagination stays in black and white.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

Bridgerton (esp S3) deserves a lot of criticisms but LEAVE HER ALONE. SHE’S LITERALLY GORGEOUS AND THE ONLY THING THAT WILL TEMPER MY EXCITEMENT FOR BENOPHIE WOULD BE IF THEY COMPLETELY FUCK UP THE STORY (crossing my fingers they don’t)

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

If you see this on your dashboard, reblog this, NO MATTER WHAT and all your dreams and wishes will come true.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

Watching McLaren BEG Lando to let Oscar through and then the cooldown room afterwards with Lando lashing out at Lewis when all Lewis did was compliment their car was PAINFUL to watch

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

I want to put focus on how significant parents are in the Hunger Games franchise, most especially on the role a parent has in shaping their child’s psyche and I want to do this by using Katniss, Peeta and Snow as reference. 

In the books and the movies, parents are more or less background characters. We truly only see glimpses of them. Both of Peeta’s parents are alive yet we rarely see them featured prominently in the books/movies. Both of Snow’s parents are dead and we only get to hear of them in passing and while Mrs. Everdeen is alive, she’s often relegated to the background because of how dismissive Katniss is towards her mother. 

Yet these characters and the very essence of their beings are shaped by their parents. 

Beginning with Katniss, we saw how deeply her father’s death wounded her. He was their provider, the sole person responsible for bringing food onto their table. We know how deeply he was loved by his children and his wife and how beloved he was by the other citizens of 12 by Katniss’ stories. Mr. Everdeen was a well known figure in the Hobb and Katniss firmly believed that it was because of him that people took pity on her and allowed her to bargain with them. It was his death that served as a catalyst to Katniss’ journey to becoming a Victor. Without his death, without Katniss being forced to hunt to serve her family, she wouldn’t have made it out of the arena. To Katniss, her father was the hero deserving of being placed on a pedestal and it was his values and actions that she tried desperately to emulate to protect her family. 

On the other hand, Katniss scorned her mother. She hated Mrs. Everdeen’s inaction when she spiraled into a deep depression after her husband died. And though it wasn’t Mrs. Everdeen’s fault, I can’t blame Katniss for feeling this way about her mother. She and her sister were near the brink of death by starvation on the day she met Peeta. Even when Mr. Everdeen was alive, Katniss was partial to her father because he stoked the rebellion in Katniss’ heart while it was her mother who tried to stop it. Katniss perceived her mother’s depression as a weakness and even after she got better, Katniss was determined to keep her at arms length. The love she felt for her mother may have been unconditional but she constantly put her mother under the test. Waiting to see if she would disappoint her, fail her by abandoning her once again. And when Prim died and Mrs. Everdeen left for District 4, Katniss’s unconscious bias against her mother was once again reaffirmed. 

It’s why Katniss struggles to form a good bond with motherly characters like Effie but maintains relatively good relationships with fatherly figures like Haymitch and Cinna. Katniss openly admits that of the two people who guided them throughout the Hunger Games, it was Haymitch she was most alike. They grew up at the Seam, and shared similar features and she was adamant that should she have been forced into becoming a mentor like Haymitch was, she was looking at what her future would have looked like. Drunk and continuously intoxicated like Haymitch was. 

On the other hand, we have Peeta. 

Peeta was routinely abused by his mother. While we don’t know the full extent of what it was he had to endure, we know that it wasn’t a pleasant experience. Peeta’s mother took pride in the knowledge that District 12 would finally have another Victor, and she wasn’t referring to Peeta. We saw him take a beating to feed Katniss and whatever relationship Peeta had with his father was practically nonexistent. It was his mother that served to be the looming presence in his life the same way Katniss’ father haunted her. It’s why I believe Peeta got along so well with Effie and why Effie likely preferred Peeta over Katniss. Aside from the fact that Peeta was so much more civil to Effie than Katniss was to Effie, Peeta always deferred to Effie. He and Effie are similar in the same way Katniss and Haymitch are similar. 

Peeta was characterized to be of the merchant class, the “upper” class of District 12. As a given, Effie is from the Capitol, the upper crust of Panem. It was Effie who provided Katniss and Peeta with the script necessary to ensure their survival after the 74th Games and in return, Effie knew how effectively a person’s image and reputation could mean life and death in the arena and in this, Peeta is in agreement. While Katniss may have used a bow as a weapon, Peeta used his words. He always knew the right things to say and do to get people to side with him, so much so that he managed to convince the careers of the 74th Games, his biggest enemies in the arena, to ally with him. Had anyone else been in his situation, they would have been killed. Peeta craved Effie’s maternalism the same way Katniss craved Haymitch’s paternalism because these were the things they lacked growing up.

And then there’s Coriolanus, who lost both his parents and it is both of these parents who haunt him. His mother, described to be beautiful and kind, was represented by the powder compact he kept with him constantly. His father, harsh and cruel, represented by the handkerchief that Snow kept with him.

In TBOSAS, Snow has two mentors himself. 

Dean Highbottom and Dr. Gaul.

It’s not lost on me that in them, the characterization of the two are reversed from Snow’s parents. Highbottom, like Snow’s father is stern and harsh. He is Snow’s biggest critic and while I doubt Mr. Snow would go so far as to hate his own child, he would not have been kind to Coriolanus had he lived past the war. Yet Highbottom and Mr. Snow’s similarities end there. Because of Highbottom’s remorse and the kindness that he showed Lucy Gray after she won the Games, he takes after Snow’s mother in that regard. He is compassionate and filled with horror at the abomination he created.

On the other hand, Gaul treats Snow with a gentleness that Highbottom never had for him. Though Snow finds Gaul creepy, it is Gaul that takes him under his wing. It is Gaul who stitches up his wounds after he is attacked in the arena and retrieves Sejanus and Gaul who praises him for his ingenuity at suggesting the sponsoring system. Gaul genuinely likes Snow and begins grooming him to become her replacement in the event that she dies. But while Gaul may have been a woman with the capacity for gentleness, she is a terrible human being who threw children into the arena to fight for their survival. She is the same woman who hung a child for running away from the games and paraded the corpses of children on the streets of the Capitol. She is pure evil. She is exactly like Snow’s father. 

It isn’t loss on me that Snow, who has an abundance of maternal figures in his grandmother and Tigris, chooses to take after Gaul, who is externally like his mother but internally like his father, rather than Highbottom, who is the opposite. 

At every instance Snow had to do good, to choose to do the right thing and be like his mother, he intentionally continued to do the evil thing for the sake of his selfishness and be like his father. 

“You look just like your father, Coriolanus.” Were the words Tigris used to describe him at the end of the movie because that is precisely who he chose to become. 

And as Snow poisons Highbottom and becomes a gamemaker under Gaul’s tutelage, he kills whatever remnant of his mother he had left in him, fully embodying his cruel father’s ideals.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

One of my absolute favorite points of comparison about Snow in the original trilogy vs in TBOSAS is his ability and willingness to lie.

In the original trilogy, Snow, despite all of his villainy, is a person Katniss trusts. Why? Because they promised never to lie to each other and they kept that promise. Snow told Katniss the truth, always. And in turn, Katniss could trust that Snow would always act on his worst impulses. He was never duplicitous in his intentions, never tried to mask his actions as good. He was always truthful and that is why Katniss always trusted what he said. She could trust that Snow would always act on his worst intentions. She could trust that he will always choose the worst option. She could trust that he would always tell her the truth. When Snow revealed that it was 13 who bombed Prim, Katniss trusted him immediately because Snow, in spite of everything, had never lied to her before. This is a quality that she couldn’t rely on when it comes to Coin and that’s why she never trusts her. Coin never told Katniss what she meant. Coin’s foible was how two-faced she was. She never said what she meant and she always hid her intentions, so much so that even her right hand man, Boggs, didn’t trust her. Despite all his faults, Snow was not a liar.

Which is so entirely different from the Snow we meet in TBOSAS.

Snow in TBOSAS lied through his teeth. He lied about his family’s wealth, lied about their destitution. He lied about liking Sejanus and then back-stabbing him to his Academy friends the moment he has the chance to. He lies about his Academy friends, pretending as if he liked any of them when really, he hated them. He lied to the Peacekeepers to get into the Tribute’s train when they first arrived and then he lied to Lucky Flickerman when he falls into the zoo cage. He lies about whether or not Clemensia wrote the paper with him and helped cover up the fact that she didn’t do anything. He lied about helping Lucy Gray in the Arena, so much so that he rigged the Games in her favor. He lied so he could become a Peacekeeper in 12 instead of in 8 and when he saw Lucy Gray, he lied again. He lied to Sejanus when he promised to keep Sejanus’ secret and when Sejanus is executed for treason because of Snow reporting Sejanu’s actions to Gaul, he lied to himself about his role in Sejanus’ execution. And in the climax of the story he lied to Lucy Gray when she asked who was the third person he killed. And then when he gets back to the Capitol, he lies to Sejanus’ parents about how his role in their son’s death.

In every chance that he could, Snow lied. And yet he never lied to Katniss.

I could spend hours speculating on why and not get a definitive answer. I’d like to believe it’s because Snow, for once in his life, wanted the truth. He always demanded the truth from Lucy Gray and yet never gave her the truth in return.

Lucy Gray valued one thing above all, above love and music. Trust.

Her trust, once lost, cannot be easily regained.

And Snow lost that.

In literature, when people lie there is always a motive. An intention to hide, a secret meant to be kept in the dark. In his youth, Snow was ashamed of his current situation. The Snows were once a the cream of the crop in Capitol society. They were prominent businessmen with huge military reserves in 13 and it wasn’t until the Dark Ages and the fall of District 13 that they lost all their fortune. Even his family, he was ashamed of. His senile grandmother, who did everything she could to raise the grandchildren left in her charge, and his older cousin Tigris, who did everything she could to ensure she followed her dreams while keeping their family afloat. Snow scorned that Tigris never went into higher education and even if he didn’t voice it to her out loud, his contempt at her career, the menial labor she was forced to endure, even the very act of prostituting herself to put food in their table, are all things Snow was ashamed of. And so he lied through his teeth. He never once let his shame fall through the cracks.

The characterization of how he evolved from this gangly 17 year old boy who lied about everything to a man who held absolute power and never lied is so interesting to me and I really hope we see more of how he became like this in Sunrise on the Reaping.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

Can we like, take a minute and talk about the difference between Wait For Me and Wait For Me (Reprise) because wow.

I haven’t had the chance to watch Hadestown yet aside from snippets on TikTok but I have been obsessively listening to the original cast recording for the past few days and after every listen, I always go back to comparing Wait For Me’s non-reprise to the reprise and how it goes from a song of desperation to a song of hope and then back again.

When Orpheus sings Wait For Me, we hear him seized with despair and desperation to get Eurydice back. In this part of the musical, it’s Orpheus who was left behind, not Eurydice. It is Eurydice who failed him all because she refused to wait for him to finish his song and him singing “Wait for me. I’m coming for you” is the sound of Orpheus telling Eurydice that because she cannot go to him, he will go to her. We hear Hermes telling Orpheus how to get to Hadestown, and the Fates’ questioning who Orpheus is and their questions get silenced by his song. The original version of Wait For Me is absent of the chorus of voices we hear in the reprise. We don’t hear the whole company singing with Orpheus the way we hear them singing with Eurydice. Orpheus is entirely alone on his journey to the Underworld and in his loneliness, we hear his desperation to get to Eurydice and this is evidenced by the slowness of the melody. The hopeless yearning in his voice asking Eurydice to please wait for him. And then we start to hear the chorus sing along with him. Wait for me, Eurydice. I’m coming for you. He’s no longer alone in this journey. Armed with his song, he begins to fill with hope as the rocks and stones begin to echo his song. He’s filled with hope now that he’ll get to Eurydice, that Eurydice is waiting for him. As the melody begins to crescendo, his hope reaches a fever pitch before it comes crashing down and we’re left with the intermission.

In the reprise of Wait For Me, we hear Eurydice’s hope and trust that Orpheus will wait for her and we hear Orpheus’ own hope. We hear the members of the ensemble sing for them, filled with the same amount of hope that Eurydice and Orpheus are filled with. If they can get out, so can the rest of Hadestown. The melody picks up and everyone is hopeful that they will succeed. Now it is Eurydice telling Orpheus to wait for her. Don’t leave me behind. I’m coming with you. Even the small snippet of Hades and Persephone’s conversation is filled with hope. Hope that they, too, will try again and get better next fall. This is no longer a song of despair and desperation but of hope above all else.

Except this time, it is not Eurydice who fails Orpheus. It is Orpheus who fails her. We hear the Chorus and the Fates telling Orpheus to show the way, urging him to go on. We hear Eurydice trying desperately to let Orpheus know that she’s coming for him, he doesn’t need to turn around. She’s trying to tell him here is where my feet fall, the rocks and stones are echoing their song, reassuring him that Eurydice is right behind him. But Orpheus doesn’t hear her. He can’t hear her. But he sings his song of love because he’s hoping, still, that she’s right behind him. And then the Doubt Comes In and as he sings his song a final time, he turns. His song, his love for Eurydice, is what made him turn around and it is this same love that dooms them both.

Wait For Me goes from desperation to hope then back again to despair when we get to Doubt Comes In. It is so beautiful and the emotional gut-punch of the story is made even more clear and effective because tragedies like the story of Orpheus and Eurydice are made worse by the feeling of hope. The most devastating tragedies in literature have always utilized the meaning of almost—of failed success—and no tragedy uses this more effectively than Eurydice and Orpheus. In Hadestown, the tragedy of almost is embodied by Wait For Me. I’m almost there. Wait for me. I’m coming with you. The song is so tragic precisely because it is filled with such hope.

I really wish they release a proshot filmed version of Hadestown like they did Hamilton because this is quickly becoming one of my favorite musicals of all time and I haven’t even had the chance to watch it.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

The Victor’s purge is absolutely something that just blows my mind.

The Capitol propaganda against Victors were so effective, even the very people fighting for their freedom turned on them.

During the events of TBOSAS, we learn that the first 10 winners of the Hunger Games received no compensation for their participation in the games. Why would they? They’re nobodies. Reminders of a war that had forced the people of the Capitol to turn on each other, forcing them into such desperate lengths that they had to resort to eating other people just to survive. They were not celebrated like the Victors we recognize in the 75th Hunger Games. They were not victors but survivors. In fact, we learn that not many people wanted to watch the Hunger Games in the beginning. It left a bitter taste in a person’s mouth to watch children fight to the death and have the event sensationalized, even if the child is considered the enemy.

And yet, with Victors being placed on a pedestal after the events of TBOSAS, we saw how quickly the Victors were woven into the Capitol’s society.

Upon winning, Victors were alienated in their own Districts. They were given beautiful mansions, fed three square meals a day, and their families wanted for nothing. They became mentors, becoming active participants in the very Games designed to kill members of their own Districts. Their participation may have been forced but when you smile and wave at cameras and show off your new found wealth, it’s hard to believe you didn’t want these things.

Victors are even further alienated outside of their own Districts with the Victor’s parade. A whole week of traveling through the 12 districts to show off your vitality and strength and your life, the very thing you took from the other tributes in order to survive. Victors did not need to drip themselves with jewels to offend the other Districts, their survival was insult enough. Never mind that you didn’t want to kill these kids. Never mind that you are a child yourself.

Every place you turn, you’re met with jealousy, derision and contempt. No longer the perfect quintessential victim but a killer of children who “benefitted” from the very system designed to oppress you. By winning the Hunger Games you are no longer District.

So you turn to the one place that showers you with any hint of adoration.

Ingratiating themselves into the Capitol’s society cemented their identity as Other. They may live in the Distrcts, may be forced to subject themselves in horrors that are far worse than any modicum of starvation they faced in the Districts, but they are no longer one of them.

And so the Rebels forget who exactly they’re fighting for, forgot who actually experienced the horror they could only dread.

Yes, they are fighting against their own oppression. Yes, they fight for their child’s right to live and never play in the Games. But they forget about the 59 other Victors who actually went through the horrors they’re fighting against. They forget about the biggest victims of the system they are fighting against.

Snow alienated Victors from the rest of the Districts so much that of the surviving 59 Victors before the events of Mockingjay, only 7 come out alive.

7 out of 59.

There’s not even enough of them to distribute one to every district.

The biggest victims of the Capitol’s oppression also became the biggest victims of the rebel’s war.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

I think that, as a literary device, Finnick’s story is one of the most effective ones I have ever read.

When you think of victims of sex-related crimes, you so rarely think of a man.

In our modern society, we more often imagine women to be victims of such crimes. Beautiful women who are battered and bruised, their eyes holding that faraway gleam of pain and trauma. Sex-related violence against women is such a common occurrence that it is difficult to find a woman who doesn’t have intimate knowledge about it. Perhaps not every woman has been raped but every woman knows at least one who has. As young girls, we’re told so many things to try and prevent rape. Don’t go out by yourself at night. Be careful of what you wear. Don’t drink alcohol. Fight them off. And yet, if you did everything right and still fail at protecting yourself, just give in. Better raped than dead. Come home to your family and friends hurt and bruised but alive.

And it is this message that Finnick, a man, lives by.

Better taken advantage of, bruised and hurt, than dead. Better you than your parents or your siblings or Mags or Annie. Do whatever it takes to stay alive.

And, the thing is, we didn’t have to hear this story from him. We could have heard it from Cashmere.

In his propo to the Capitol, Finnick reveals that attractive Victors are pimped out by President Snow to the residents of the Capitol. One such Victor is Cashmere.

Knowing this layer of her story makes Cashmere the picture perfect victim. A woman who is repeatedly described as beautiful. She is a typical description of what a rape victim is. Suzanne could have used her character instead of Finnick’s to portray an instance so familiar to so many women and yet, she didn’t.

She chose Finnick. And I think the reason why she did that is because hearing it from Cashmere would have made the story fall flat.

Would we have blinked an eye had it been Cashmere who revealed the horrors of being a Victor? Would we have felt anything other than a vague sense of sympathy? I don’t think so. Like so many women before her, Cashmere’s story is so familiar to us that it no longer leaves that bitter taste in our mouths. We, as a society, have been so deeply desensitized to this plight that we no longer feel the same indignation we used to feel. Instead we are resigned to our fate. Cashemere isn’t the first victim of rape and she won’t be the last.

Yet to hear it from Finnick had us shocked. Finnick? A man? Attractive, to be sure, but he is at the prime of his life and yet he is a victim? Finnick, who can wield a trident so effectively he became the youngest Victor in the 75 years the Hunger Games operated, was raped? Finnick, who has literally killed people with his bare hands, was prostituted? Finnick, who cracked jokes about killing people was whored out by President Snow?

It is absurd! It is a bizarre and strange! It has to be untrue!

And yet it’s not.

Finnick being representative of that particular storyline was effective at reminding us of what it means to be victimized like that. And using Finnick, a man, instead of Cashmere, a woman, reminded us of why we have to be rightfully angry and upset about such things instead of resigned to our fates.

Suzanne Collins is an absolute literary genius.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

On an anonymous ask:

Hi, interesting perspective on S3 and I agree. I'd be very curious to hear your thoughts on Francesca character assassination and deviation from the books. The Michael/Michaela is very controversial and I prefered to reach out anonymous but I couldn't in your asks. That would be great if you could make a post, if you feel like doing so. Thanks!

HUGE BRIDGERTON SPOILERS

Francesca’s and Michael’s love story is one of my favorites from the books and I absolutely hate how much it has changed and NOT because Michael is now Michaela. I want to preface this by saying that I am an ally of the community and have always adored LGBTQIA+ representation on the screen.

That said, I don’t think I’ll enjoy Francesca and Michaela and not because Michaela’s a woman.

In the books, Francesca and Michael loved each other, albeit differently. Francesca loved Michael like one would love a brother while Michael was actually in love with Francesca. Michael longed and loved her in secret, yearning for any small moment they could share yet hating himself for falling for the one woman his cousin, John, the man he practically called brother, loved. It was his inner turmoil, the foil in his characterization that makes him so complex and the reason why it works so well is because Francesca doesn’t feel the same way at the start because Francesca loved John.

Francesca loved John will all her heart. Theirs was a true love match and it absolutely delighted Violet in the books that Francesca made a match so quickly and was so in love even if she had to move away. Francesca in the books never would have looked at Michael in the same way she looked at John until John’s death. It was John’s death that served as a catalyst to their love story because Francesca and Michael’s love story is finding love after grief.

Their story centered on themes of grief. How much they grieved John’s death together and how John’s death affected them both differently. Michael’s inner struggles of taking over the title of Earl of Kilmartin and moving into John’s old home made Michael feel like a usurper especially because he was in love with Francesca. Francesca’s grief over John’s death and losing their unborn child is what propels her to want to marry again because she didn’t just lose the husband she loved, she lost their child.

Grief is the only way their story can be told convincingly.

And yet, in a single stroke, we lose all sense of it with Francesca experiencing love at first sight upon meeting Michaela.

Because Francesca’s grief over John’s eventual death feels unconvincing and cheap because of how she looked at Michaela. How can she truly mourn the man that stands in the way of the woman she’s fallen in love with?

My gripe over Francesca/John/Michael/a is that essentially, their story has changed. And this changed wasn’t brought about because Michael is now Michaela but because Francesca loved Michaela before she ever truly loved John.

And don’t even get me started on Francesca not wanting children.

Francesca wanted kids point blank. She may have been the black sheep of her family (being firmly sequestered in the middle of the birth order) but she wanted kids. She wanted her own children to love and it’s what ultimately spurns her to once again trying her luck on the marriage mart. No sane widow of the time would marry again unless there was a need to. Francesca didn’t need to. She was extremely close with both John and Michael as well as their respective parents. They all adored her and even if Michael married a different woman, he would never have turned her out on the street. He even said he’d willingly provide her an allowance and a house with her own retinue of servants if that’s what she so wanted but it was Francesca who refused because she wanted children and wanted to give the marriage mart a try once again in the hopes she would find another man to love and marry. Francesca’s yearning for children is another catalyst to Francesca’s and Michael’s love story because Francesca never would have wanted to love again without it.

I truly believe an interesting story on Francesca’s struggles with infertility and grief could be told by her and Michaela’s relationship. I truly believe that with Michael now Michaela, Francesca’s want for children vs the reality of her situation could be told in a different way. In the books, Francesca eventually gets the children she wants (2) but it took her years of trying. With Michael now Michaela, her fertility journey could end with her not having children at all, and her learning to accept this fact. We so rarely see this struggle rightfully represented in media. Whenever couples struggle with infertility, they hit bump after bump after bump but eventually they’re granted children for their efforts in way or another (either through IVF or adoption). In reality, this isn’t always the case and so Francesca never having kids despite her desire for them would make for an interesting storyline. For a character to want, and struggle, and yearn for something yet ultimately fail at it is a story that will always have its audience. And in this context of a gay couple struggling to have children and ultimately not being able to, is something many LGBT couples will relate to. Not to mention the women as well, who project themselves onto Francesca’s struggle with infertility.

Essentially Francesca’s characterization was assassinated. Even Michael’s too, to an extent. Michael can’t struggle with feeling like he took everything from his cousin if he’s a woman because women at that time never inherited and so any feeling Michaela has about “taking” what’s rightfully John’s feels cheap. It’s not a true struggle if it’s impossible to have in the first place.

I’ll still watch Bridgerton because I firmly believe Benedict (who is my favorite character in both the books and the series) is next. But I’m losing hope that they’ll be able to tell his story and his struggles well if Francesca and Polin’s story is of any indication.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

SHADOW AND BONE HAS A LARGE AND VERY DEDICATED FAN BASE BECAUSE OF THE BOOKS. THIS IS A LIE!

THE AUDACITY OF THEM TO SAY THIS, FUCK NETFLIX FR

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

I think one of my biggest gripes about S3 of Bridgerton is that I am utterly unconvinced that Colin and Penelope started as friends.

Now hear me out. I believe that Eloise and Penelope are friends. I believe that they grew up together, having lived across each other. I believe that Eloise loved Pen so much, Penelope was always welcomed to the Bridgerton home. I believe that by virtue of Eloise loving Pen and having her as a best friend, the Bridgerton family loved Pen as an extension.

But I’m unconvinced that Colin ever saw Pen or loved her as more than his sister’s best friend.

They tried so hard to convince us that it was Colin and Penelope who met first and that theirs is a stronger bond than what Eloise and Pen have by virtue of this but I just remain skeptical. In S1 and S2, we never really see them interact without the intervention of a ball or a social gathering. Eloise and Penelope actively seek the other person out while it was only Pen who looked for Colin and never the other way around. Colin only ever stumbled upon Penelope. He never scanned the room the find her, never tried to pull her away from Eloise so they could have their own conversation. I always felt like Penelope was such an afterthought to Colin while Penelope always made space for Colin in his life. Even while Colin was writing letters to Pen, and it was only Pen who consistently read and replied to his missives, it felt so one-sided. Penelope was eager to know of Colin’s adventures but Colin never asks Penelope about her own life and hobbies.

In all honesty, I think this could have easily been remedied by a good flashback. In Bridgerton S1, S2 and even in Queen Charlotte, flashbacks were the mediums used to fill in the gaps of the story. To inform the readers of a character’s history, and why the choose to do the things they do.

In a single episode, we saw how horribly Simon was mistreated by his father. In a single episode, we saw how deeply Edmund’s death wrecked Anthony’s boyhood and broke his mother’s heart. These flashbacks told us why Simon refused to procreate or why Anthony didn’t want to marry for love. We saw how deeply these core memories hooked themselves into these characters psyches, forcing them to become the people we know today. Without these integral flashbacks, we’re left with words said in passing to convince us of the story they’re trying to sell.

And don’t tell me flashbacks in the Bridgerton-verse are unimportant. Flashbacks have always been Julia Quinn’s method of choice when trying to inform readers of a character’s decisions. In Book 1 and 2, we got the same flashbacks as S1 and S2. In Benedict’s book, we got Sophie’s flashbacks. How her father treated her and how much her life changed after he died. In Book 4, which is Polin’s book, we still got flashbacks on Pen and Colin’s relationship and how much their friendship actually meant to the other. Book 5 showed us Philip’s backstory while 6 showed Michael’s and Francesca’s and John’s friendship, and 7 showed Garett’s and 8 showed Lucy.. While these flashbacks maybe used to showcase the love-interest’s past, they were still utilized by Julia Quinn to give us insights on the characterizations that make up their respective relationships.

I feel like this season, while having its moments, wasn’t what I was hoping it would be. There were so many changes that I feel the original plot of the story got lost. Polin didn’t feel like the main couple, just a couple with a story to be told. There were so many plots told in such extended ways that the main event was sidelined. The Mondriches, Benedict (who by the way is my favorite character), Francesca were all put on spotlight more than Polin was. In the books Francesca barely gets a passing mention of her marriage until her actual book (an act I believe to be intentional on Quinn’s part. It fits that the black sheep of the family who prefers the quiet didn’t have all of the fanfare that came with marrying an earl) yet her time at the marriage mart was put as a spotlight. In fact, when Francesca and John marry, it doesn’t happen with the series and happens much in the same way as Prudence’s marriage is (by this I mean it happens off screen). Don’t even get me started on her character assassination and deviation from the books (I can write a whole essay on this without even mentioning Michael/Michaela). All of these plot points, were put as main focuses when they shouldn’t have been. A waste of Polin’s amazing love story, if you ask me.

[daydreamer-in-reverie]

If you ask me if I think Snow ever loved Lucy Gray, the answer is is an easy yes and I can 100% back up my belief.

In the beginning of TBOSAS, we saw the Mayor of D12 pulling names out of the Reaping bowl, with Snow speculating that the Reaping was likely rigged by the Mayor because of how flippantly he read Lucy Gray’s name. And it’s easy to assume that to be case when we find out the history between Lucy Gray, Billy Taupe and Mayfair. Of course the mayor would rig the games to send Lucy Gray to her death, his daughter asked him too. From the get go, the odds were not in Lucy Gray’s favor and this is an injustice that even Snow was affronted by.

And yet, in the 74th Hunger Games, escorts like Effie Trinket become fundamental members of the Game’s system. So much so that winners of the Hunger Games make use of their services as they go on their Victory Tour, guiding them as they go through every District. Escorts like Effie are impartial, objective members of the Capitol, with no personal ties with the Districts they associate with. There is no way for them to rig the Games to call out the names of people they didn’t like because it’s not as if they can form an opinion on the children they’re sending to their deaths.

I can’t imagine a world where it wasn’t Snow who suggested this change. Even if it wasn’t his suggestion, with how quickly he amassed power (it was heavily implied he even became Head Gamemaker at one point), he would have had the ability to approve or veto this idea. He would have likely consulted with Gaul if it had been lobbied by someone else before he had the chance to become Head Gamemaker as he swiftly became her top confidant, groomed to take her place on the day she died. Whether or not it was his idea, he would have done whatever it took to see it implemented.

Escorts are a small kindness, to ensure that it is truly the odds that determine whether a child gets sent to the Arena or not and not the machinations of a vindictive person with a vendetta against a certain family or child. A small mercy, to be sure, but a mercy nonetheless. The one single echo of Snow’s love for Lucy Gray, the only woman he ever loved. So that what happened to her does not happen to another child again.