if you would ever like to elaborate further on the mountain dog/hunting dog joplittle dynamic you mentioned in the tags of that “Blanky about to lose his leg” gifset…. inquiring minds are simply piqued 👀
hi sorry that this took me. FOREVER. i didn't have time to answer the ask at first then i did it halfway and didn't have time again and i promise you this ask has been hounding me (hah hah) since the day it appeared in my inbox but i never seemed to be able to make the time to reply to it asfjdfjfd anyway! here it is now :')
ok im basing the idea of hunting dog = jopson and mountain/working dog = little on their respective personalities, the way they seem to think and how they react to specific circumstances. and slightly on their physiques as presented in the series but that's of minor importance. ofc both of them are loyal and listen well to superiors - to one man in particular, which is fairly common among dog breeds as well (i.e. whoever trained them), so that's not necessarily distinctive, but it does ofc make them dog-coded in general. but there are many many ways in which to be dog-coded and they're very different abt it so!
why i think jopson is more hunting dog coded is bc he is extremely competent, but quietly so, not noticeable until it becomes necessary. he's very skilled at providing specific information about the crew and the general goings-on around terror to crozier, and he becomes more focused in highly tense situations - in fact these are moments where he specifically stands out for how well-suited he seems to the task. and he is not aggressive, but there is definitely a sharpness to him that he can and does direct to those who threaten him or crozier first and foremost.
and all that really does remind me of hunting dogs - a good hunting dog is extremely well-trained, knows exactly what he is supposed to do, listens to commands, and stays at his master's side. im thinking especially of pointing dogs, i.e. dogs that point a hunter in the direction of prey that they have sensed:
these are of course very precarious situations wherein a hunter relies on his dog to steer him, and if hunter or dog make a wrong sound or movement, they may alert prey to their presence. there's a a correspondence here between dogs trained for these moments of focus to jopson, who is crozier's silent aid but also excels in such tense situations, and who is decisive, swift and capable. and i think it's really funny that being 'birdy' is a wanted trait in these dog types, bc 'i've shot smaller hawks than you' the comparison literally writes itself. also, pointers/setters tend to be lean dogs, which i think coincides well with jopson's natural elegance and grace
edward on the other hand is supposed to be sturdy, good-natured and broadly dependable. he appears increasingly anxious in the series, but that is because he is shouldering a lot of responsibility throughout it all. he'll take the insults and he'll take the extra tasks and he'll do it with barely a complaint. in fact it makes me think of the fact that dogs treated badly can come to exhibit traits that are not desirable in the breed at all. imo edward in ep 1 displays what i would call the desirable traits of, say, the bernese mountain dog, but events and crozier change that very rapidly.
you can fuck up any dog if you treat it badly for long enough, and edward is an abused dog to me.
id also say that edward is generally amiable, though he will make a point when he feels it is absolutely necessary, and he does have an innate want to protect what or whom he finds important, though he is seldom if ever very aggressive about it. he has an intense feeling of responsibility for the crew and the expedition as a whole, set against his feelings of loyalty towards crozier, who he wants to please almost at any cost as well. and then of course he also has a large family.
'search and rescue work'. yeah. and then of course mountain dogs are generally of a sturdy build. obviously matthew mcnulty is no absolute unit but by god the series tried their hardest to make edward appear like a well-built countryside boy. and by god does he try to carry every burden ever on those shoulders, like a dog pulling a cart bc that's what it was trained to do and it was enjoyable once. and he seems practically immune to scurvy and fares well in the cold, which, again, very mountain dog of him.
additionally, newfoundlands (neptune!) aren't mountain dogs, but they're big, sturdy, excellent swimmers, and therefore often used for rescue, so that's also a breed i associate with ned.
50 notes
·
View notes
sometimes when i get notifications from people interacting with my tumblr posts and check it out, i'll recognize the usernames and get unreasonably giddy. "oh i know this one! i remember them!!" like, what are you doing here again? i see you!
or i'll recognize an account from having checked out their blog before or their posts, and it'll have me kicking my feet a little because "omg they just interacted with my stuff? crazy!"
i think the reason why this happens pretty often is because the svsss fandom is a little bit more on the smaller side. i can't be the only one who feels this way i swear (i promise i have irl friends guys)
edit: hey hey hey. the literal moment i posted this some account immediately liked this and went on to start hearting like. half of my stuff. i kid you not. was that a coincidence? idk man
55 notes
·
View notes
So I've heard people give other etymologies for the name "Maugrim" in LWW, but to me it seems clear that it's derived from Managarm, the wolf who eats the moon in Norse mythology. My reasons for this are (a) Lewis was a noted Norse mythology enjoyer and also friends with Beowulf translator JRR Tolkien and (b) he had the name changed to Fenris Ulf in the American version.
Fenris Ulf is the name of Managarm's much more famous brother/father (?) in Norse mythology. So my theory is that this is basically a Philosopher's Stone situation in which Jack didn't think his American readers would get his obscure Norse mythology reference and thus replaced it with a more mainstream one. I am not an expert and could very easily be wrong about this, but as far as I am aware from reading Lewis's letters and stuff, no one can disprove me.
51 notes
·
View notes