Vague speculation and MAJOR canto iv spoilers
My only actual speculation is that the "cathy" (red text at the end) talking is carmen (trying to get hc to distort) and the purple text is cathy.
The whole cathy in the coffin image, yi sang talking about them 'producing a human' and Faust kind of agreeing, the parallels between that and lobcorp, the whole 'woman of light put in a coffin and. Is kind of related to light (carmen being yeah and cathy w the golden borough), the leviathan parallels (and also callbacks). Like my god
While I've never read Wuthering Heights I know like. Enough through osmosis. The constant mentions of dogs (both for Heathcliff and hindley), the book adaption of hc vs the lcb version , and my god
And the like. References to the bodysack ego
+ how other people have noticed that faust goes inbetween third person ans the recent 'I' (and how recently dante said that it seemed like she was pausing and looking off somewhere like. Omg lore)
+ the ryoshu lore like. Augh
The fact that this is the third distortion (bc as far as I remember ahab was an ego like dongbaek) and like. Cathy mentioning sins. Likenits so much to take in and I'm scared of whatever we'll face next week
I can only hope we'll actually see that hc mirror id (and learn how the hell he hopped mirror worlds)
12 notes
·
View notes
hi what do you think abt t4t kakayama (it's canon to me tbh)
:) hi ty for the question. i will do two sweet pictures of them being intimate and then under the cut there's going to be a longer very unsweet and more technical response
so i'm usually not a very shippy person! but that said i am also on the record as an occasional kakayama + kakayamagai enjoyer
i do hc them both as trans and in different ways w/ different experiences of transition and identity! i have no interest in proving my view as canon, but i do regard my reading of the text (text here including the anime) as a valid interpretation of yamato's experience of identity
yamato, for example, imo, doesnt have any real lived experience of being raised as a child of any gender. he was an experimental subject, and then he was Danzō's weapon/vessel for the mokuton, and then he was in anbu.
in a fun little word game which should not be taken seriously: it'd almost be more fitting to describe him as "adgender" rather than "transgender" since the prefix "trans" implies moving across where the prefix "cis" means to stand still, but the prefix "ad" means "to move towards" and i headcanon him as somebody who was degendered as a child, not in a cool nonbinary way, but instead in a dehumanizing, objectifying way, so his experience of creating his identity and his gender along with it is one of moving toward the concept of gender
this word doesn't and wont exist, but bc of the way english works it would probably be simplified to be spelled precisely the same as "agender" in the same way that "aggression" came from latin "aggredi" which came from "ad" (meaning to/toward) and and latin "gradus" (meaning step) (essentially the combination means "to step to" [in a threatening manner])
the only diferences is where agender (meaning no gender) is pronounced ay-gender, the agender that comes from adgender would be prounounced more like "uhgender" in the same way that agressive isnt pronounced like "ay-gressive" but instead like "uhgressive"
and then...as for kakashi? i just decided on vibes. i didn't think hard about it.
i guess i should also say that, while i draw kakayama very infrequently, when i do draw it i usually try to be very apparent about the transness in the artwork if i can?
especially if i'm drawing anything more intimate than a peck on the cheek.
it's no secret that shipping is often times the most energized part of fandom, and i kind of don't want to produce romantic or sexual artwork which will be enjoyed by people who don't think trans people can be attractive? or who find that trans headcanons make a character uninteresting to them? or worse, "ruin" a depiction of a character to them?
often i think about in terms of. IF there are people that follow me that love my work (usually) and think that kakashi or yamato are hot (usually) and love kakayama (usually) but get frustrated or even uncomfortable out when i draw them as explicitly trans? then i'm drawing all intimate artwork of them as explicitly trans.
it's a little like...nobody gets to love my work if transgender characters are a turnoff for them. that's the bar for entry, is the way i think of it, but really its more like putting onions in a dish. if you want to eat the dish you have to eat the onions. if you don't want to eat the onions, don't eat the dish. all the meals i make contain onions. i'll never compromise on my intention to put onions in every dish i make. that's my ninja way, as the kids say.
especially in the climate we're in right now.
i don't know. i have a lot of feelings about how most fandoms tend to view trans men, especially in terms of romantic and sexual relationships. I'm doing a bad job of expressing the depth of how much seeing how fandom treats trans male identity and transmasculine bodies impacts the way that i draw + write kakayama, but genuinely it's something i think about every single time i create content about them.
162 notes
·
View notes
Do you blue skills have specific activities to bond with each other? Other than arguing.
Of course we do, what sort of a question IS this? You've practically only seen our arguments -- we have plenty of other ways to get along, and *do*. Let's see here...
Personally, I can enjoy a nice, fun game of Scrabble with others here. The only issue is, Conceptualization tends to try to make up their own words to use. Then, when I try to tell them that the words have to be *in the dictionary*, Rhetoric comes in and starts using my own prattling on the roots of different parts of whatever word Conceptualization made up to try and say they'd be *justified*. It always turns into a big argument and honestly I'm just not prepared for that sort of thing. I'd rather play with Empathy; he's always a good games partner to me. Also, I think Drama ate most of the pieces, so we can't play anymore because of that, too. I am very annoyed about that.
Mh. Okay, maybe that one wasn't a great example to start off with. How about this one? Conceptualization and Drama actually had a little thing going briefly where they would organise plays together! Occasionally got me and Visual Calculus involved as well for some extra hands; I could talk at length about ideas for set pieces, Visual Calculus organising the lights... it was fun. Anyways, that didn't last though since they separated due to. Ah. "Creative differences". I understand it was a rather explosive argument, from what I gathered talking to them. When I consulted Conceptualization on the matter, he responded, and I quote: "That intransigent vexing little self-wank-fest of a fucking ball of gloop can't even *hold* a pen let alone understand the nuanced symbolism inherent to all media, they don't even fucking understand basic media literacy God help us all, their ability to write romance is surface-level at best and[...]". You can only imagine how long that continued on for. Anyways, when I asked Drama, all they did was think for a moment before allowing a wry smile to ripple over a great many of their faces, and saying: "Their writing was sub-par and their costuming was ill-fitting". So.
...Aaaalright, not *that* one either. Here, something much simpler, then. I can enjoy a good crossword every now and then, and Logic a Kakuro puzzle (though he much prefers Heyawake and Killer Sudoku), so he suggested collaborating on a neat step up from these, the cross-figure. Well, we *attempted* to collaborate -- I found myself only useful on general knowledge questions, which did not appear often as they are considered beginner, and Logic found beginner puzzles far too easy. So then we tried cryptic crosswords, which I did not find myself very useful in either, since while I may possess plenty of knowledge I don't have the logical capabilities to know when a clue could be referring to that. Then we hopped around cipher and fill-in crosswords, which turned out even *worse*. It culminated in a minor dispute between us where I claimed Logic was only prioritizing his *own* fun, which he argued to be untrue. Not really a fault on his part, in hindsight, and only heated on *my* end as a result of my own feeling of inefficacy... ultimately we agreed to be contented with doing our own puzzles, for now. (Well, aside from Heyawake. I'm *smashing* Heyawake.) Now it's mostly just Visual Calculus arguing with Logic to let *him* do the Kakuro in the fortnightly logic puzzle magazine for once.
Huh. Well, this one's *bound* to be a good example. At one point, Conceptualization was making little locked-room-style mysteries for Logic and Visual Calculus to solve. Full-size rooms they could walk around in -- it was quite impressive to watch them work. Didn't ever take them too long to solve them, but still. It was nice seeing something Conceptualization had asked me about crop up there. *Then* they started writing little honkaku-style mysteries for them, too, to see how fast they could figure out the solution to the crime before the end of the story. By my recommendation, obviously; I thought they would appreciate the rational, chess-like approach to mystery, compared to thriller novels which may not adhere to Van Dine's Commandments as strictly. Conceptualization appreciated it, too; "none of that hard-boiled crap, it's all shit" they said. I think they liked the digressions into criticism of the detective genre as a whole and fourth-wall breaking; Logic liked *all* the pieces being perfectly available and within grasp for a shrewd reader, Visual Calculus liked the heavy use of diagrams and such. Whenever Conceptualization didn't turn one of these diagrams into a three-dimensional playset, Visual Calculus was doing that. Anyways, the dear art snob never could quite seem to get the upper hand in their writing -- the pair were *unstoppable* in their natural disposal towards ratiocination. That is, until it started to get... rather strange. More and more the story would divagate into long-winded social commentary that served no purpose for the narrative (*not* a hallmark of honkaku, mind you), would make the solution increasingly convoluted (Rube Goldberg-type machines aren't out of place in honkaku, but they were getting quite far beyond the reasonable suspension of disbelief for a story within the detective genre), introduce irrational narrative elements such as supernatural phenomena (*also* not a hallmark of honkaku, though can and does crop up in shin honkaku -- I regret convincing the pair to continue giving Conceptualization a chance. The opportunity to grant them knowledge was not worth it, in the end. Come to think of it, that's happened *more* than once, hasn't it? Thinking back to the Moray Eel Incident... mmh). And, well, in hindsight it was an inevitability... but it all came to a boiling point when one such mystery, giving Logic and Visual Calculus quite a lot of grief, concluded *not* with a proper solution, but with a plain metaphor for-- love or capitalism or something ridiculous like that, I don't try to actively remember. The ensuing argument somehow had Logic and Visual Calculus turning against one another, too, despite the fact they were both on the *same side*. Probably had something to do with Drama being their throwing stones, as per usual. And Rhetoric, arguing whatever side they thought would inflame everyone else the most. Also, I was there too. Also, I was turning against Logic and Visual Calculus despite being on *their* side as well. Also, it was Drama and Rhetoric's fault as well. Damn those two. Embarrassing for me... anyways, we're not allowed to write our own mysteries anymore because Harry nearly had a stroke and died.
...
Ah.
Maybe *quite a lot* of our pastimes do involve arguing after all.
Perhaps I should stick to who I have already established myself as being able to get along with...
14 notes
·
View notes