#MY CURIOSITY HAS SPEAKED]] !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[asgardian--angels]

mage viktor discourse again on twitter and all i can say in my little corner over here once again is, I don't know why the entire fandom takes it as canon that mage Viktor failed to save every world he manipulated.

Canon does not provide evidence of this. This is fanon speculation. It's a fine headcanon to have, but everyone talks about it like it's canon when it isn't. Canon is ambiguous about the outcome of the timelines mage Viktor altered. The little nods we are given point, in my opinion, towards the opposite conclusion, that he successfully averted destruction.

I've written meta on this before but in summary:

1) 'In all timelines, in all possibilities' is worded precisely, it's not 'out of all timelines'; the implication is that every time, Jayce brings Viktor back from the brink, not just in our timeline. 'Only you' doesn't refer to our timeline's Jayce, it refers to all Jayces. Jayce always brings him home. If Viktor continuously put the fate of each timeline in Jayce's hands and Jayce failed over and over, I don't think he'd say those words. And the way he says them matters. His words are tinged with wonder, not sorrow. As if over and over again, he is shown that Jayce saves him, and it continues to amaze him. He doesn't sound defeated, like this is the next in a long line of Jayces he's sending off to die. The feeling is that Viktor's faith in Jayce has not been misplaced.

2) If mage Viktor doomed every timeline, there would be hundreds (or more) mage Viktors. All running around manipulating timelines. I highly doubt the writers wanted to get into that kind of sticky situation. The tragedy of mage Viktor is that he is singular. Alone. Burdened with the responsibility of the multiverse. The emotional gut punch of his fate is ruined if other timelines led to the same outcome, and from a practical standpoint, having multiple reality-bending omniscient mages would rip apart the fabric of the arcane.

There are other points, such as there being only one corrupted Mercury Hammer and our Jayce is the only one to receive it, and the fact that if mage Viktor is as omniscient as he is implied to be, he could easily step back into other timelines and correct course, because it's highly unlikely he could sit still and watch things go down in flames. But these things can be argued elsewhere.

While I love conversations about mage Viktor's motives and selfishness vs altruism, the writers & artbook have expressed that Jayce and Viktor care greatly about Runeterra and want to fix their mistakes to save it, and that their reconciliation is symbolic of Piltover and Zaun coming together as well. Yes, they make disastrous decisions towards each other, making choices for the other or without the other, which has negative consequences for their relationship and for Runeterra - but I think fandom pushes their selfishness even past what's canon sometimes, as if their entire goal hadn't always been to selflessly help the world around them. Their final reconciliation is about bridging the gap that grew between them - the pain and grief and secrets, betraying themselves and each other - to mutually choose each other openly and honestly. Part of the beauty of their story, as expressed by the creators, is that in their final moments, they chose each other and took responsibility for their actions by sacrificing themselves to end what they started, together - and that choosing each other saved the world. TPTB have stated this - that Jayce and Viktor are the glue holding civilization together, and when they come back to each other, they can restore balance. It's when they're apart, when they hurt each other and miscommunicate, when they abandon their commitment to each other and their dream, that the greater world suffers. Their strife is mirrored in the story-world at large.

Mage Viktor is framed as a solitary penitent figure, damned to an eternity of atoning for his mistakes. He paid the ultimate price and now is forced to live his personal nightmare of exactly what he was trying to avoid for himself with the glorious evolution. The narrative clues we're given point more in the direction that he saves timelines rather than dooms them. If Viktor's actions kept killing Jayce, the very boy he couldn't bear to not save each time, it would undermine these narrative choices. Yes, Viktor couldn't stand to live in a world where he never meets Jayce, so he ensures it keeps happening. But in that same breath, he couldn't bear to see a world where his actions continue to destroy Jayce and destroy Runeterra. His entire arc in s2 is born of his selfless desire to help humanity, help individual people. He would not lightly destroy entire worlds. That's his original grief multiplied a thousandfold, and narratively it would lessen the impact of the one, true loss he did suffer, his own Jayce. It wouldn't make sense for him to be alright with damning other timelines to suffer the same catastrophic tragedy that created him. I mean, maybe I'm delusional here, but is that not the entire point? Because that's what I took away when I watched the show.

As I said, I love discussions about mage Viktor, as there's a lot to play with. All I wish is that the fandom at large would not just assume or accept the Mage Viktor Dooms Every Timeline idea as canon, when there is nothing in the actual canon that confirms this. Maybe people need to just, go back and rewatch the actual episode, to recall how mage Viktor is presented to us, and what it's implied we're supposed to take away from his scenes, and separate that from the layers of headcanon the fandom has constructed.

[skeletoninthemelonland]

designing a former bortom city inhabitant, early fusionsprunt resident 🍀

[rubs my hands together deviously]

they’re part of some doomed robot yuri… but more on that later 😈

woah scrumptious character design! now this is- DID YOU SAY DOOMED ROBOT YURI

[tamsiblings]

so I've always wondered this in the back of my mind but your reblog recently brought it back to the forefront

this line especially, but also the vibe you get throughout the entire show that Simon is habitually caring for and protecting river since that what he's always done. And I've been wondering: protecting her from what? The show never shows us what Simon Protecting River looked like before he broke her out of the fucked up lab. I have a pretty good idea that it may have been a form of emotional neglect from their parents. They don't notice River's distress in her letters and basically disown Simon when he goes off to save her so maybe they were the type to never listen to their children or believe them when they expressed their needs. Or care more about how their children's behavior made their family appear socially and less about how their children were actually doing. I also wonder if River didn't have a bit of the Gifted Child syndrome going on and their parents treated her more as a prodigy than a daughter. And Simon had to stand up for her and try to get their parents to see her as a girl first and a genius second.

It would have been really cool to see this actually in the show as a flashback or something, but I bet you've thought about it loads and want to hear your take.

warning: this got reallly tangenty and long as i am wont to do oops <3 putting most of it under a cut

warnings for discussion of emotional neglect and a variety of other factors i think could reasonably be labelled as emotional and psychological abuse. emotional neglect on its own is to my understanding a form of emotional abuse, but i think there are other layers here as well.

anyway heyyyy bestie talking about the tams (including the parents tbh, the little we get of this family structure is fascinating to me) (we do actually get more on simon and river's background than anyone else! bc it's so connected to the current story anyway) is my favorite thing as you may have guessed so thank you for sending this.

and YES i have thought about this a lot <3

simon said he "always has" taken care of river and while i think on a literal level this is likely a Slight exaggeration (even if their parents weren't around physically for that whole aspect of taking care of, i think their material needs were always met and they likely had the means for a nanny or some other kind of support) but on an emotional level, i think this is very true.

i think you are 100 percent spot on with the emotional neglect and other unhealthy dynamics. here's some of what we know on that front:

the tam parents could be affectionate and even indulgent when it was easy and suited their own ends. ie. getting the source box for simon and assuring him he's worth it, calling them "you two geniuses" etc. this could be a very sweet moment and in some ways it is, because i truly believe the tams both believe in the worth and specialness of their children...

but their affection is clearly quite conditional. deeply. and, i think, more than anyone involved quite realizes. it's followed up by "that's the deal - dedicated sourcebox - brilliant doctor'. no matter how lightlyheartedly and affectionately it's said, it's clear it's seriously meant - and baby!simon clearly takes it to heart. (note: i've always interpreted this as simon already expressing interested in medicine and his father basically going "fine, but whatever you're doing, you have to be the best at it". i'm sure attorney or corporate ceo also would have sufficed for their image-focused needs, as long as he was successfuly and prestigious enough.)

i should also note that the the dynamic between regan and her children is far more implied because the focus in safe is mostly on gabriel.

a quote from an interview with sean maher: “It was great to learn where Simon came from. We see that his parents are incredibly ostentatious. There were so many expectations and Simon and River felt so much pressure, trying to be what their parents wanted them to be. And we got an idea of what happened to River. The parents sent her away to a school they thought would further her learning. Maybe they were naive in a sense, to think of only bettering her mind and not listening to her as a girl–as their daughter.” (emphasis mine)

notable here (and i love sean maher for noting this because, understandably because river isn't present in the flashbacks in the episode proper, it's not as clear what river's dynamic with their parents is, but certainly inferences can be made) is that both simon and river feel expectations and pressure from their parents, not just simon.

which leads to me wondering about river going to the academy. i think multiple things can be true here at once. i think, as simon says in the pilot, she did genuinely want to go. she was curious and brilliant and bright and not challenged enough in the current education system she found herself in or by her peers. she wanted something rigorous. i think a lot of that probably DID come from her. but i also do wonder if there was a level of their parents always expecting her to challenge herself in this way because, as you mention and i think implied in the quote above, they valued her brilliance and prodigy above her personhood. i also think it's possible (though i'm less sure on this) that river wanting to go to a school where she lives away from her parents and can both live up to their expectations but where she can distance herself from them could indicate something about how she feels. but might be reading too much into things.

there are also elements of controlling behavior that goes hand in hand with both the conditional love and the valuing their children for their intelligence/ability over simply valuing them as their childhood. in the shooting script, the offer simon gets goes through gabriel, and it's not presented as one opportunity or path simon can take. it's The Plan, and there's no room for deviation even when the most dire of circumstances calls for it. (and like, this would never happen because simon does genuinely value medicine and being a doctor, but in an interesting excercise: how would the conversation look if simon decided he didn't want to be a doctor o some other prestigious high paying XYZ? or even that he wanted to pursue a different opportunity he found on his own and is maybe not quite as prestigious in medicine? i don't get the sense it would have gone over that well.) we don't really get a sense of this with river because again, she's less present in the episode - but i think reasonable assumptions can be made.

^ it's a funny story that simon tells kaylee in object in space, about paying the feds off so they wouldn't tell his father about his drunken (and relatively harmless) escapade with his peers after making surgeon, and tbf, a lot of people probably wouldn't want their parents to know that. but in context with the rest of this, it feels very telling that simon did not want his father (or presumably his mother) knowing he acted at all in a way that could be considered undignified or that he got in any degree of trouble (it doesn't even sound like he was arrested, the police just showed up and he didn't want his parents to find out.)

in many ways, it seems clear both simon and river start off as golden children in their parents eyes - they care about them and value their gifts, but more like you would care about a trophy than a child. they care about what river and simon reflect on them. and notably, when river is no longer just the brilliant prodigy-child but vulnerable, in need of protection, and a symbol of inconvenient truth they don't want to face (a number of them, really - the misplaced trust in their government/society/system, the fragility of status and the false sense of security, their own culpability and failures to protect their children) - instead of helping her when she needs them the most, they ignore and abandon her. and when simon can't do the same, he - as the "truthteller" in many family dynamics of this structure often do - becomes some degree of a scapegoat. he faces the truth they are unable or unwilling to see. they turn a blind eye but simon can't, it's not who he is and he loves river too much. and suddenly, when he's not doing and saying and being exactly what they say he should because he's focused on helping river, he's treated like he's causing problems for no reason - like he's the problem. like he's making a big deal over nothing when he tries to show them the letters, when his father says "are you trying to destroy this family?" as though their daughter being kept and tortured against her will and their own refusal to acknowledge it isn't what's actually doing the family-destroying. and while i think simon getting scapegoated/othered/treated as a problem is a rather new development, and don't imagine they were getting constantly berated - in the scene at the end of safe, YMMV, but gabriel seems a little too comfortable quite ufairly berating simon for things that are quite obviously not his fault or for at all disappointing him. i don't think it was always happening - but i don't think this comes out of nowhere.

on the causing problems for no reason (or a reason they dismiss) component; this feels particularly insidious because they should know their son well enough to know simon doesn't do that. he doesn't do things for no reason, he has a highly overly developed sense of responsibility (which comes back into his dynamic with river ofc.) so like... either they do know that and are purposefully ignoring and even twisting it, or they don't know their son nearly as well as they should.

the scapegoating component lends itself to the extremely uncomfortable gaslighting component in safe. in fairness: i think this aspect of the Tams Very Poor Parenting Choices is likely much more situational and less indicative of past behaviors. regardless, it's pretty rough to watch simon point out things that are quite obviously strange (they don't KNOW anyone called d'arbanville) and have his parents treat him like he's paranoid and insane.

this also comes with a certain level of guilt tripping and beratement. i will say it forever: if i had a child and they were arrested, the FIRST thing i do is ask them if they're okay, figure the rest out later. "

and again: some aspects of all this are situational as we get into the river-at-the-academy component, but i think there's a lot that can be read into the tam family dynamic as a whole based on all this.

so on some level - a lot of THAT is why simon says he's always taken care of/protected river - i don't think he necessarily could have entirely saw or named or what their parents were doing for what it was (which i would argue, as you said, was some degree of emotional neglect and emotional abuse, though some of this is implied or inferred - i would argue based on evidence, but just something to keep in mind). but i do think he developed a sense of responsibility over her and a caretaking role as result.

because it's very notable to me that - for instance - in the river tam sessions, river specifically asks for simon. she doesn't say "i want to see my parents" or even "i want to see my family" but "i want to see my brother." and yes, you could argue that this is because that's who the audience who most care about/be familiar with - but with the rest of the context, it feels extremely significant. in the serenity film, she says something similar to what simon says in that shooting script flashback - "you take care of me, simon. you've always taken care of me. my turn" after simon gets shot and right before she goes in to get his bag and fight the reavers. and like, you could argue that she means ever since the academy - but "always" feels much more weighted than that to me.

it's also interesting to me that river doesn't seem to have as much difficulty reconciling with the fact that their parents abandoned them (and a whole host of other stuff, as established, but that's what the show most focuses on.) now, in fairness, river has a LOT going on - psychic and emotional overwhelm, lots of trauma and intrusive memories - both hers and others, etc - so it makes sense that maybe that just wouldn't be on her register regardless. but i also think... well 1) being so in tuned into what others think and feel, even if she might not have been quite able to name it, i do think she's understood longer than simon (maybe since before the academy; i am still curious if that's paret of why she left) how their parents really saw them. so she's had more time to accept and move on from it. 2) there's this other level where river DID have someone protecting her - simon - even if it took a long time to realize what he was protecting her from. while i think it probably looked less intense than it does in the show proper where she is so deeply traumatized, there is no doubt in my mind that if she was ever upset or anything ever went wrong, it was simon she turned to for comfort or help, not her parents. which tbc: <333 i love them. and this is not her fault at all. but simon Did Not Have That. i think he protected her without quite knowing that's what he was doing for a long time... and didn't realize he needed protection too and wasn't getting it.

which makes it difficult to reconcile and move on from, which is why in the moment in safe when river (seemingly talking about gabriel but likely talking about mal) insists "daddy" will come for them - simon totally shuts down. because he knows that's not going to happen, and it hurts a little too much to deal with, but he's still fairly RECENTLY coming to terms with How Their Parents Are - and the fact that he did not have emotional support. so now he doesn't know how to let himself even ADMIT that he also needs care.

final note (god sorry this is sooo long) i will also say that, while i (as a #tam siblings lover) am often very sad/angry/frustrated about simon and river's dynamic with their parents, and that i certainly will never excuse emotional abuse or this kind of parental behavior, that i try and hope to approach the tam parents in any analysis or ficwriting i might do from a very human angle. the range of human complexity is fascinating to me, and i don't think it does the themes of the show justice to act like the tam parents are outright monsters, totally good or totally bad (note: this is so not in the slightest me saying that i think you are doing this. more just thinking out loud about fandom discussions i have seen surrounding this topic.)

this gets at larger discourse both in fandom and in general i think there is a tendency in our society to want either completely villainize or idolize people (and this maybe becomes especially true in complicated relationships like this). when we talk about abuse to any degree and of any kind, people often want to dehumanize and villainize the abuser in such a way that separates themselves from that possibility - "abusers are evil and inhuman and i'm nothing like that so there's no way i could ever cause that kind of harm etc." but in actuality, there is no inherent internal quality that makes someone an abuser - it is a pattern of harmful behavior that people can choose to do and choose not to do. and i don't want to suggest that people who do this are abusive themselves, that's not what i mean - only that i think the mindset comes from a culture that insists on some very black and white thinking. i think it's a very natural human impulse to want to separate ourselves that way, but also maybe gets us away from seeing the bigger picture. and to be clear: i don't mean to suggest that anyone owes an abuser anything, or that simon and river, for example, should have to forgive their parents. that's not true here or in real life. i only mean to say that people are more complicated than being fully good or fully bad, and firefly reflecting this is one of my favorite things about it.

and again, this is complicated with the tam parents because i'm making a lot of (what i feel are supported, but even so) inferences and assumptions here. so whether you want to identify them as emotionally abusive/neglectful etc is a whole can of worms. but regardless, it's clear their behavior and parenting harmed their children. BUT here are where some major caveats come in:

similarly to the way people often do in other contexts, i have seen people want to outright completely villainize the tams and while i understand this impulse, i think it comes from the same place that a lot of well-meant but misguided discussions do. there are those that think they either must have never cared about river in any capacity at all or actively agreed to sell her out to the alliance (a theory i not only don't like or subscribe to but actually feel misses the point of what's going on with the tams and is less interesting even besides). but i think that sets up the tams to look cartoonishly evil in a way that the narrative doesn't support or intend. do i think the tams are good parents? well, no! i think it was easy to look like good parents when things were easy, but even then, there were cracks. (though i don't think everything was always bad - even in abusive situations, that is usually not the case - there are reasons why people love their parents and stay and have a hard time seeing the bad - because things aren't always like that.) i have also seen people insist or write like it's a given that the tams must have also been physically abusive, and while i don't want and would never tell anyone what they can and can't write, by my own reading, i find that unlikely. i think some of that is often coming from a place of people working through their own stuff, which again - never gonna tell anyone not to do that, you do you - but i also think at times it speaks to a societal tendency to assume that the harm isn't bad enough if it isn't physical - but i think we get a good sense of how deeply simon and river are affected even outside of the confirmation of any physical harm from their parents. (note: i do think the tams being willfully ignorant and leaving their daugher to be tortured and experimented on while on some level know that's what happening is a form of physical abuse or neglected, it's just situational and not in the traditional sense.)

but what i think is so important present, and much more interesting in this story, is that the tams are not evil, so to speak, or at least aren't mustache-twirling villains. they're not even entirely bad-intentioned; i believe they do genuinely want good things for their children, even if they have very specific ideas of what it should look like and how it will benefit them. but they have wholeheartedly, implicitly, without any room at all for questioning bought into the system values of the core and the alliance: prestige, status, and privilege treated as worth, family as a hollow projection of prestige, disruption as the ultimate trespass. to me, the story with regard to the tam parents isn't about them not caring or valuing simon and river at all - it's about valuing those things above them, and how their care is warped and shaped by those harmful systematic values.

now, this is rarer, but i have also seen people want to (maybe in response to above?), if not idolize, then absolve the tams of the role they played in river's abuse at the hands of the academy, but that doesn't ring true to me either. i want to be fair where it's due and say yes, there was danger involved (which simon put himself through) in helping river, but the fact is the narrative focuses much more on the tams focusing on what it could cost them on a social level - their status and "good name", prestige, etc. and at the end of the day, when you have children, you have responsibility to them - and the tam parents failed both of their children on that front.

one thing i also thing is so interesting to note is that simon and river are so loyal and value connection so deeply when it's clear that is not what was most instilled in them on a systematic level or taught to them by their parents. in fact, i think you could argue that while some of it was intrinsic to who they are (here's the old nature vs. nurture debate which i think you could argue simon and river are the two biggest representers of on the show), i also think it's a repsonse to this bond they formed specifically BECAUSE of their parents.

[sugarandice3]

If a guy asks me out, I'm more likely to say yes out of curiosity than out of interest.

[web-novel-polls]

The thing about the Have You Read This Web Novel polls is that it's mostly web novels I'm interested in, so it ends up composed of the most popular web novels that everyone's heard of, somewhat niche web novels, and one web novel I literally only learned about by reverse image searching the cover someone I follow on here posted untagged and have now binged nearly 100 chapters out of 300 in a couple of days.

[fullscoreshenanigans]

Debating whether to make the criminally underexplored platonic dynamics polls into a tournament (with the top two or three from the Grace Field kids, Goldy Pond crew, Lambda/Paradise Hideout gang, and free-for-all rounds advancing to a final round).

I'm also taking suggestions for any of these, either in the reblogs or replies of this post, or as asks or in a DM. The requirement is a panel of the two characters interacting* in the manga or a piece of official Demizu art must be included in the suggestion, or in lieu of the picture itself, the chapter citation of where the panel is in the manga.

Notes: • One suggestion per person per poll on a first come, first serve basis. 11 options per poll, with #12 being "other." • Adam, Emma, Lucas, and Yuugo are eligible characters for the GP poll. • Lucas & Oliver, Yuugo & Emma, Yuugo & Ray, and Gillian & Nigel are ineligible dynamics for any of the polls. • Free-for-all is technically everything not covered in the three prior polls (e.g., Nigel & Yvette, Gilda & Violet, Pepe & Ray, etc. If there's enough interest in a demon-exclusive poll, it can be a separate fifth poll. Otherwise, stuff like Leuvis & Sonju goes here.) • *"Interaction" preferably being them talking or engaging in something together intentionally, but if you want to stretch it, it can be two characters just conveniently standing next to each other (because the potential is there Shirai throw us a bone.)

[icharchivist]

one of my controversial take about DA is that, independently to whether i like him or not in DAO or the books, Loghain is literally the best Warden companion you can have to play HLTA.

I'm sorry but Hawke hitting him with "you just can't imagine a world without the wardens even though it's probably what we need" and seeing Loghain firmly defend the Wardens because "i betrayed the order once and it cost me everything -- i won't do it ever again" is the most emotional draw you could have in HLTA compared to Stroud and Alistair's unwavering faith in the Wardens.

[legolasghosty]

oh shit i forgot to send a new one! brain mush.

uh. let's say 75 please?

No worries, thanks for sending these, they're really nice!!! More Holograms (and the introduction of I think the last major character...)

Julie laughed and followed her brother in, Reggie and Alex on her heels. Fuego was standing beside the receptionist’s desk. He looked up and smiled when he heard them approach.  “Ah good, I’ll let Mr. Covington know you’re here.” He turned away from them, pink nails clicking against his tablet. Julie was about to ask about the agenda for the day when she heard a crash behind her. She whirled around to see Alex lying on the floor, someone else practically on top of him, clearly having just bowled him over. “Oh my gosh, I am so sorry,” the new person exclaimed, scrambling to their feet and holding out a hand to Alex. “I wasn’t even looking.”

(Send me a number and I'll write that many words in my WIP and show you!)

[mrsackermannx]

alpha gojo…what then??? what if i said that???….and like alpha geto…..like….both of them like fighting over you…both of them fucking their little p*t

[lovinglin]

Hey, just as a small reminder: I'm uncomfortable sharing P1co.

This also includes those who ship their own oc with him romantically/queerplatonically. I have nothing against oc x canon, but I prefer if you kept some distance from me if you do ship with him/ship your oc with him.

Thank you!

[deadpresidents]

Since you tend to read about a lot of different subject what is something that you still want to learn about?

I've been curious for almost 30 years about whether or not Selena paid for her meal in the "No Me Queda Más" video because it sure looked like a dine and dash.

You were probably expecting something less specific and more history-focused, though, weren't you?

[stuffedsand]

four and sixteen for milgram? :3

4- what was the last straw that made you finally block that annoying person?

Ok imma be real I've never blocked a person,,,,, I've blocked plenty bots tho

I've gotten reeeaaaallll close to blocking someone but like. I like seeing people's opinions even if I think they're unreasonable. It's a mix of a strange type of entertainment and kind of to keep me open minded? Cuz if I have to look at it and I wanna talk about it I gotta read it through in detail to make sure I'm reading them right so yeah I don't have anyone blocked 💥

16- you can't understand why so many people like _______

............ok I won't that theory because I have another ask that I'll do that for....

Maybe how some characterize yuno as just "girl boss" n not much else? Honestly jokingly it's totally fine but c'mon there's still a bit of girlfailure and inability to let others in there yk it'd be fun to talk Abt it more

Alternatively I do have things I don't understand about what people DISLIKE in this case es milgram I've talked to quite a few ppl (on disc mainly I don't think Ive seen it on tumblr much) who despise es and like!!!!! Bestie that's my silly lil guy you're talking about what'd they do to you!!!!!!!!!

I mean I understand why but also,,,,,they're just a lil creature man they're 15 and in a position of power with no memories of course they're gonna be a bit egotistic in this situation

[fromthemouthofkings]

A group of far-future linguists and archeologists suddenly *poof* into existence in front of me. One is holding a tablet. "What is the difference between 'red sauce' and 'tomato sauce?'" they ask me. "The distinction is not clear in extant texts from this time and place."

"Uh, they're the same thing," I tell them. "Who are you?"

"Yes!" the being with the tablet exclaims.

One of the other researchers groans. "No! My thesis...months of writing wasted..." One of the others comforts them.

"Now, what is this object for?" The first researcher holds up a discolored, dinged-up plastic object. It's clearly been buried in the ground for quite some time, but the two holes and the scuffed plastic window are distinctive.

"That's a cassette tape. You record music with it."

"Interesting, interesting." The being enters something on the tablet.

"How are you speaking English?"

"Sophisticated translation technology," one of the researchers confides. "We are students of your society. From the future."

"What does this pictogram represent?" The researcher with the tablet turns it around so that the screen faces me.

It's the eggplant emoji.

"Sex," I say. "Why do you need to ask me this if you can time travel or whatever? Can't you just go wherever you want to go and look around and see how these things are being used?"

The beings shift guiltily and look at each other. "Technically, travel to times and places prior the advent of time travel is strictly prohibited. Paradoxes, you know."

"Oh."

"We must get back before our advisor returns to the lab. Just don't tell anyone you saw us, alright? The space-time continuity depends on it. Can you do that?"

"Uh, sure, I guess?"

One of them pats me on the head. "And don't go to Mars."

"Okay. Wait, why? Is it dangerous?"

"No. Just not worth it."

The group disappears in a shimmering light.

The cassette clatters to the sidewalk behind them.

Out of befuddlement, mainly, I pick it up. It's clearly old, discolored and scuffed, but it still has tape in it.

I carry the tape around in my pocket for a while. The curiosity builds. I want to know what's on that tape. I don't have a cassette player anymore, so I go to Goodwill and pick up the first one I can find, praying that it still works. I plug it in. It turns on.

I slide the tape inside. It's dirty, but it still seems to be in decent shape. I snap the player closed and hit play. The wheels begin to turn. I hold my breath.

A familiar tune starts up. A wobbly voice comes out of the machine.

We're no strangers to love

[luna-azzurra]

Habits That Reveal Deep Character

(A.K.A. the quiet stuff that says everything without screaming it)

❥ The “I Always Sit Facing the Exit” Quirk They don’t talk about their childhood much, but they always know where the exits are. Every restaurant. Every train. Trauma has muscle memory. Your job is to notice what it’s saying without needing a monologue about it.

❥ The “I Can’t Sleep Until I Hear You Lock the Door” Habit It's not controlling. It's care shaped like paranoia. They say “Goodnight” like it’s casual, but they’re counting the clicks of the lock like a lullaby. Let that show more than “I love you.”

❥ The “I Keep Everything You’ve Ever Given Me” Thing Not just gifts. Receipts with your doodles. The crumpled note you wrote when you were mad. Every bit of you that felt real. It’s borderline hoarder behavior, but also? It’s devotion.

❥ The “I Cook When I’m Sad” Pattern Their world’s falling apart, but suddenly everyone has banana bread. It’s not about food—it’s about control, about creating something warm when everything else is cold. And they won’t say it out loud, but they're asking, “Will you stay?”

❥ The “I Practice Conversations in the Mirror” Secret Before big moments, hard talks, or just answering the phone. They're rehearsing being okay. They're trying to be the version of themselves people expect. That’s not weakness—it’s survival wrapped in performance art.

❥ The “I Fix Other People’s Problems to Ignore My Own��� Reflex Everyone calls them “strong,” but no one notices how fast they redirect. “How are you doing though?” they ask, one heartbeat after breaking down. Let your reader see how exhaustion wears a smile.

❥ The “I Never Miss A Birthday” Rule Even for people who forgot theirs. Even for exes. It’s not about being remembered—it’s about being someone who remembers. That’s character.

❥ The “I Clean When I Feel Powerless” Mechanism That sparkling sink? Not about hygiene. That’s grief control. That’s despair in a Clorox wipe. Let it speak volumes in the silence of a spotless room.

❥ The “I Pretend I Don’t Need Help” Lie They say, “I’m fine” like it’s a full stop. But their hands shake when they think no one’s looking. Let your other characters notice. Let someone care, even when they don’t ask for it.

❥ The “I Watch People When They’re Not Watching Me” Curiosity Not in a creepy way. In a poet’s way. In a “who are you when no one’s clapping” way. They love the in-between moments: laughter in elevators, fidgeting before speeches. That's who they are—observers, not performers.

[gigglewap]

Wow

Enjoy Annotation - Ghosts separates on three types: those who dead by soul and lost their heart, and as so they can't die forever. Those who dead by soul but haven't lost their heart, and as so they can die forever. And those whose soul still alive but they're lost their heart.