#TO BE CLEAR I THINK THIS IS AN INTERESTING AND NUANCED RELATIONSHIP

[carnivalcarriondiscarded]

Sometimes I feel that Barnaby and Wally have this friendship like big bro/Lil bro, and Howdy being Barnabys bf has to put up with a lot of Wallys shenanigans for Barnaby (doesn't mind cause he also adores Wally I'm a big bro way)

i view them (as a trio) Similarly! though a little to the Left cause i don't view Barnaby & Wally's relationship as big/lil bro. rn to me they're very close friends - borderline queerplatonic! like... Wally is Barnaby's special little guy, yk?

so in my mind, in this trio, Wally's not exactly a. uh. third wheel to Barnaby/Howdy i suppose? oh this is difficult to translate into words - he's part of the relationship without being Part of it if that makes any sense? like of course he's gonna be With them a lot. Barnaby's not gonna be like "ok go do something else so i can make doe eyes at Howdy". that's his Little Buddy. they're gonna Include him as much as possible, i'd imagine. and i doubt Wally would mind being around while they flirt chat. he'd probably love being Barnaby's "wingman"

[noaestheticacademic]

On the Identity of "Chat"

Like all the linguistics folks on Tumblr, I've been sent the "chat is a fourth person pronoun" post by a bunch of well-meaning people and and I've been thinking waaay too much about it. @hbmmaster made a wonderful post explaining exactly why "chat" ISN'T a fourth person pronoun, and after reading it I wanted to go a little deeper on what it might actually be doing linguistically, because it is a really interesting phenomenon. Here's a little proposal on what might be going on, with the caveat that it's not backed up by a sociolinguistic survey (which would be fun but more than I could throw together this morning).

On Pronouns

Studying linguistics has been really beneficial for me because understanding that language is constantly changing helped me to become comfortable with using they/them pronouns for myself. I've since done a decent amount of work with pronouns, and here are some basic ideas.

A basic substitution test shows that "chat" is not syntactically a pronoun: it can't be replaced with a pronoun in a sentence.

"Chat, what do we think about that?"

"He*, what do we think about that?" (* = ungrammatical, a native speaker of English would think it sounds wrong)

Linguists identify pronouns as bundles of features identifying the speaker, addressee, and/or someone outside the current discourse. So, a first person pronoun refers to the speaker, a second person pronoun refers to the addressee, and a third person pronoun refers to someone who is neither the speaker nor the addressee (but who is still known to the speaker and addressee). This configuration doesn't leave a lot of room for a "fourth" person. But the intuition people have that "chat" refers to something external to the discourse is worth exploring.

Hypothesis 1: Chat is a fourth-person pronoun.

We've knocked this one right out.

Hypothesis 2: Chat is an address term.

So what's an address term? These are words like "dude, bro, girl, sir" that we use to talk to people. In the original context where "chat" appears - streamers addressing their viewers - it is absolutely an address term. We can easily replace "chat" with any of these address terms in the example sentence above. It's clear that the speaker is referring to a specific group (viewers) who are observing and commenting on (but not fully participating in) the discourse of the stream. The distinction between OBSERVATION and PARTICIPATION is a secret tool that will come in handy later.

But when a student in a classroom says "wow chat, I hate this," is that student referring to their peers as a chat? In other words, is the student expecting any sort of participation or observation by the other students of their utterance? Could "chat" be replaced with "guys" in this instance and retain its nuance? My intuition as a zillenial (which could be way off, please drop your intuitions in the comments) is that the relationship between a streamer and chat is not exactly what the speaker in this case expects out of their peers. Which brings me to...

Hypothesis 3: chat is a stylistic index.

What's an index in linguistics? To put it very simply, it's anything that has acquired a social meaning based on the context in which it's said. In its original streaming context, it's an address term. But it can be used in contexts where there is not a chat, or even any group of people that could be abstracted into being a chat. Instead, people use this linguistic structure to explicitly mimic the style which streamers use.

And that much seems obvious, right? Of course people are mimicking streamers. It doesn't take a graduate degree to figure that out. What's interesting to me is why people choose to employ streaming language in certain scenarios. How is it different from the same sentence, minus the streamer style?

This all comes down to the indexicality, or social meaning, of streamer speak. This is where I ask you all to take over: what sorts of attitudes and qualities do you associate with that kind of person and that kind of speech? I think it has to do with (here it comes!) the PARTICIPANT/OBSERVER distinction. By framing speech as having observers, a speaker takes on the persona of someone who is observed - a self-styled celebrity. To use "chat" is to position oneself as a celebrity, and in some cases even to mock the notion of such a position. We can see a logical path from how streamers use "chat" as an address term to how it is co-opted to reference streamer culture and that celebrity/observer relationship in non-streaming mediated discourse. If we think about it that way, then it's easy to see why the "fourth person pronoun" post is so appealing. It highlights a discourse relationship that is being invoked wherein "chat" is not a group but a style.

[kookygobbledygook]

Some people have been saying this, but I don't think it's been said enough and I'm just going to add my voice to the mix.

Nimona's nomination is being framed as an example of "Look at what Disney missed out on!" and I get it. It's a nice, tasty schadenfreude situation and we all like to see The Mouse get taken down a peg.

But I think we need to be very clear; Disney did not miss out on anything because they were never going to take that sort of risk.

Disney was never going to release anything close to the Nimona we got. It would have been sanded down until anything obviously queer or controversial was as faint and unnoticeable as possible by the casual viewer. And then they would still be too scared of any potential backlash. So they would have given the film a limited release at theatres, with no advertising, or social media or support.

Like what happened with Strange World.

You remember Strange World, right?

No?

That's because no one does.

And I believe that was deliberate, because that way Disney can go "Weeellll... obviously we would LOVEto take more risks and have more inclusive stories but that's clearly not what the public wants!"

Look at the original concepts for Wish. The evil royal couple? The peter-panesque star boy that would have made the gen zers go feral the same way millenials went feral for Jack Frost? These could have been the best things about the movie, and even they were scrapped, and replaced with something more homogenised. And those ideas are nowhere near the level of the concepts and discussions Nimona brought to the table.

Disney can barely have explicit gay people. Nimona has a gay south Asian man in a relationship with an east Asian man. As a protagonist! But more than that, you think Disney could ever come up with a relationship as complicated and difficult as Boldheart and Goldenloin's? They would never have the guts to show one love interest cutting off the other's arm in a straight relationship. Let alone a gay one! And then for them to be on opposite sides of the conflict, shifting between feelings of betrayal, and questioning each other motives? That's some adult dark shit for a kids film.

Asha as a character was forced into the quirky girl role that Disney has already flogged to death with Anna and Rapunzel. You ever think they would allow a Disney princess to be as dark and violent and nuanced as Nimona? You ever picture the titial character of a Disney film AS the third act conflict, rampaging through a city in a self destructive rage? Nimona is anti authoritarian, vengeful, bloodthirsty, a pretty explicit trans allegory, and even, by the climax, openly suicidal. You KNOW that terrified Disney.

I had a thing about the Director here too but I was shocked by how long that got so I'll have to save her for a different post.

My point is the things that make Nimona art, that make Nimona a great story, that make the film important and Oscar worthy, are all things that Disney has become too chicken shit to produce. If Disney had released a film called Nimona it wouldn't have been Nimona. I fully believe that if the film hadn't had been 90% finished it wouldn't have been shelved. It would have been lobotomised and vivisected. Everything special and vital about the movie and its message would have been removed, and no one would have known what could have been. Once again we would have gotten scraps and been thankful for them.

It makes me think about films like Wish (and others we don't know the name of, and never will) and think of what they could have been if studio's like Disney were braver and let their artists make art, instead of content.

tl;dr Disney didn't miss out on Nimona because they are incapable of making Nimona. If they had produced it the real Nimona wouldn't exist. We didn't miss out on Nimona. And that's purely by luck.

[mauesartetc]

Redesigning Helluva Beelzebub

Hoo boy, roll up the sleeves for this one.

The Original

In my review of Helluva Boss 108, I mentioned that Beelzebub's character design put me in mind of how some DeviantArt kid's fursona might look. And... Yeah I stand by that statement. The most likely reason I can figure Viv Medrano wanted her to be dog-like was to make a reference to her Die Young music video, which featured an anthro wolf singing a Kesha song (for context, Kesha herself voiced Beelzebub and co-wrote a song for this episode).

But for those who are unaware, Beelzebub's traditional depiction looks nothing like this.

Really the only visual similarities the Helluva version shares with the Infernal Dictionary version are the insect wings, six limbs, and the crown thingy over the head. (At least I think that's a crown-? Kinda hard to tell on both counts.)

Bee's eyes get somewhat more insectoid later in the episode, but that feels like a cop-out. Wow, her eyes and colors changed. Totally a bug demon, right?

They had the same problem in Hazbin Hotel with Katie Killjoy, who's allegedly supposed to be a praying mantis but barely resembles one, even after her transformation.

I understand the desire for fresh takes on old figures, and taking creative liberties so the new interpretation doesn't feel generic. But the changes should at least make sense. By now it's pretty clear Viv couldn't care less about representing Ars Goetia demons faithfully, as demonstrated with Paimon, Andrealphus, and now Beelzebub. You could slap completely different names on these characters and it wouldn't change a thing. I posted this meme a while back but it's never been more relevant:

On top of that, what reason could there possibly be for the design to be this damn complex? Why did she need so many markings on her face? Why did she need so many layers of hair? Why did she need flowing goo for her hair, tail, and body, each requiring dedicated effects animation?

When it comes to a hand-drawn production, less is more. Any superfluous details on a character just make unnecessary work for the animators.

Anyway, here's what Viv has to say about it.

Alright, I'll admit: The lava lamp bit is a little clever. Basically it works as a regular stomach does, but on demonic steroids. But it wouldn't look so much like Viv's making this up as she goes if we'd seen Bee's stomach performing its intended function in the episode. Let her chow down on a giant piece of food (maybe that cotton candy she's been handing out-?) and swallow it, and let Loona (and the audience) see it dissolving in her transparent belly. As a general rule, if it's not shown or explained in the work itself, it's not canon. Like I've said before, Viv: Elaborate on the nuances in the story you're telling, not on social media.

Also, "Her ears are designed after beehives"? Wh...Wha? Ma'am have you ever seen a beehive.

(Hell, even if you told me the ears were inspired by the generic cartoon beehive we're all familiar with, I wouldn't have guessed. There's a difference between being subtle and being vague.)

I can kinda see it in the overall shape, but that's a very specific design inspiration that wasn't clear at all in the design itself. Same with the "animal trainer" thing: I never would have picked up on that if Viv hadn't pointed it out. If a character design doesn't visually convey all the necessary information, it's not a successful design. Show, don't tell. There's a communication breakdown between what Viv's telling us and what Bee's design shows us.

(It's possible she actually meant "Her ears are designed after honeycombs", but even then, each compartment has a specific pentagonal shape that's not coming across at all here.)

I also find it interesting that Bee and Loona have almost the exact same body type. Of course Viv's pretty infamous for samebody syndrome, but it's actually unnerving how similar these two are.

Might this be a reference to Vortex's "type"? Is this foreshadowing a relationship with Loona? Am I overthinking this? Yeah, probably. Viv's demonstrated a clear preference for tall, skinny body types over the years, so it's safer to assume that's the explanation. It's all aesthetics. It ain't that deep. Occam's Razor and all that.

Finally, Bee how the hell does your shirt work.

The Concept

So at this point it seems most logical to lean into the "bee" thing for the redesign, and scrap all the canine elements. As for the blobby hair and tail... yeeeah let's nix those too. We're going for a streamlined version that's easier to animate. And because I ignored the ringmaster look for my redesign of Asmodeus, it only makes sense to do the same for Bee's animal trainer vibe (what little there is) for the sake of consistency. I know this version of Hell has a circus theme with its highest-ranking demons, but there's never been an in-universe explanation for why that is.

Let's look at actual bees, then. A quick peek at Google has informed me that certain insect species have smaller, "simple" eyes (also known as ocelli), in addition to their compound eyes. In bees, this manifests as a triangular grouping of three beady eyes on top of the head.

In her Helluva Boss episode, Bee's full demon form has three eyes, which could be a reference to this triangular arrangement, plus her regular form has two spots on her forehead in addition to the third eye. So it's possible Viv actually did research for something. Pleasantly surprised on that front.

Next, the body. I've noticed that some folks find Bee's skinny body type refreshing, as the sin of gluttony is too often personified with fatness. And that's fair. That's valid. But consider this:

Imagine any Vivziepop character saying that about a chubby person. Imagine the series sending the message that fat people can be sexy too, and that they have worth outside of their appearance, enough for at least one character to consider them girlfriend material. That they're valued and appreciated regardless of this culture's beauty standards (which we know nothing about since the worldbuilding is as thin and flimsy as tissue paper, but whatever). Imagine if this show finally had a fat female character who wasn't relegated to the background. Don't know about y'all, but that would be refreshing to me. And when you take into account all the fat-shaming of a character who isn't even fat, portraying a fat character as attractive would be a nice change of pace for this show.

Now let's talk about clothing. In the episode, Bee's clothes show off a lot of her body, with a cutout crop top and short shorts. We can take a similar approach for the redesign (something that still shows off her chest, belly, and limbs, in keeping with the extroverted "party girl" persona), but that perhaps includes more queenly elements.

The Redesign

Because this is a redesign, many elements were already in place, but I still had to figure out how this character would look as a bee. Here's where the preliminary sketches came in. Lots of trial and error in this process.

Wrestling with this character's face got a lot easier once I realized I could mold it into a pentagonal shape akin to a honeycomb compartment. It took a few tries, but at last, I had a final sketch.

All that was left to do was test out some color combinations.

I tried a few different approaches, but in the end, this is the version I felt worked best.

I used many of the colors from the original, but pushed the orange much harder since orange is the symbolic color of gluttony as a sin. And overall it gives Bee a nice honey-ish look rather than the generic black and yellow we already see on so many bees in cartoons. I thought the colored outlines on her clothing would add a soft, feminine touch, as well.

And just for kicks, here's a quick sketch of her giant form, inspired by the Infernal Dictionary drawing of Beelzebub.

Conclusion

The canon version of this character exists in the form she does for no reason than to stroke her creator's ego. "Hey guys, remember when I animated that Kesha fan video? Remember how cool that was? Wanna see me foist this unnecessarily-complex character design on other animators while I take a victory lap?" I wouldn't mind so much if Viv animated any of this herself, but she didn't. I could almost excuse this if she had no animation experience and didn't know how much work it requires, but she does. The self-aggrandizing entitlement is just off the charts. But a nonsensical design is leagues better than a stolen one, so... brownie points for that, I guess.

[sugar-grigri]

Nayuta must become the big sister

I think what's especially interesting to note in chapter 154 is Nayuta's failure to use the right tactics.

Denji raised Nayuta correctly, emphasizing going to school, trying to control her possessive outbursts while being extremely present for her. In short, he nurtured her, giving her the protection he hadn't enjoyed as a child himself.

Although Nayuta knows her own nature and instincts, and is not naturally altruistic, she still looks at herself in a certain way: from society's point of view, and from her own, she is a child.

What I'm trying to say is that it's not insignificant to have Makima reincarnated; we could very well have had Nayuta, already an adult, because she's a devil who doesn't grow up. Nayuta already seems to grow up much faster than humans, so Fujimoto could very well have decided that a demon, especially a knight of the apocalypse, should already be born as an adult.

She grew up more quickly, and by the time Denji had finished devouring Makima, she already had the appearance of a 4/5-year-old child.

Fujimoto made Nayuta a child, because it's this state of being that makes her a control demon so paradoxical. Indeed, if Makima was so powerful, it wasn't just because she was older; the fact that Denji had killed Makima didn't change anything in terms of the fear one can feel of control.

What affects Nayuta's power, capable of controlling only 3 people at a time, is the way she conceives herself.

Makima was so powerful because she occupied a fairly high hierarchical position among public hunters, just as she had unquestionable authority over her agents. What's more, the government assigned her an objective of a universal nature: to protect all mankind from evil things. This role of universal protector, albeit a protective one, naturally places Makima, the control demon, in the role of guardian, humanity being as harmless as obedient puppies. The only thing Makima couldn't feel superior to was Chainsaw Man, for he is the entity that provides the means to pursue her universal goal of protection.

The key to Nayuta's fate is the fact that she has been loved and pampered by Denji. She makes it clear: it's natural for a demon to kill humans. Which, on the other hand, indicates that it's completely unnatural and almost unnatural for a demon to love and be loved by a human.

To have been loved, to have been happy, enabled the control demon to understand other ways of relating than pure domination, whereas Makima didn't understand human relationships, to the point of being moved by a hug, so unattainable for her.

Nayuta understands the nuances of relationships, just as she claims not to be the leader of powerful public officials but a mere child, which always places her in an inferior position to her enemies. That's why she's less powerful: to be in control, she needs to feel superior, which she can't easily do when she sees all these adults surrounding her so vehemently.

She focuses more on her social role as a child to be protected than as a demon attacking head-on. She still adheres to her role as a child, she's not obsessed with CSM because she can't reach him, he's now in her inner circle, she doesn't have a universal goal such as protecting the humanity like Fami suggested, she just wants to go to school.

In short, the control demon no longer wants to control, no longer needs to, or when she does, it's out of sheer necessity. The fact that she's weaker was Kishibe's objective when he gave custody of the demon to CSM, to make the control demon more human, more childlike, to avoid this exponential need for control. In short, the fact that the Control Demon's supreme objective is to be loved has contained its power, because its objectives have been achieved.

We can see how love is an unnatural thing, because it limits a demon who should be supreme through his solitude. For Nayuta's sake, to get out of her situation in chapter 154 would be to have a crisis of ego, and I think that symbolically it's not out of the question that if Nayuta abandons her role as a child, she'll grow up brutally. For a demon, appearance and age are simply a question of positioning in society. Makima had chosen to take on the appearance of a femme fatale to enable her to manipulate more effectively.

A soft voice, an attractive appearance to encourage us to lower our guard, the better to control coldly.

This is also why Barem is so dangerous to her: he's big-boned, aggressive and very tall, so he can be naturally frightening to a child. If Nayuta wants to control him and regain the upper hand, she mustn't see herself as a child with a gun pointed at her head. That even when assaulted, even when held at gunpoint, she's still in full control, that despite the chaos, she's still superior.

It's no coincidence that it's a gun that's pointed at her. Guns are fatal for humans, but for demons, especially the most powerful ones, they don't mean much. Nayuta doesn't need to be afraid of a gun, she needs to embrace her demon nature.

And she's on that track because protecting CSM, rather than being protected by him, means she can now play the role of a big sister.

What's more, she needs to get to know her own need for violence and cruelty. Chaos isn't what she likes, this chain of violence and combat isn't what she desires, because what she wants is cold, absolute control, where all she gets is unfailing obedience, people falling into line, not men with spears fighting each other in a primal manner.

She has been brought up by Denji, adopting his mannerisms and his way of speaking, but she also needs to distance herself from this fraternal figure in order to be herself.

All this leads me to say that the Knights of the Apocalypse, by moving away from what they are, are THE ONES who bring about the apocalypse, which is totally obvious, hence their name.

By loving something abnormal for the demon of control, by falling in love with his worst enemy for the demon of war, by wanting to save humanity to better eat what it produces for the demon of famine... show how they are all affected by humanity, to the point of putting aside their demonic nature.

Think of it as a kind of broken balance, which leads the eldest, the demon of death, to intervene. Why? For death represents absolute equilibrium; no one can escape it, it is an absolute rule from which it cannot be dislodged, it is an inevitable and firm end. Common to all species.

So she intervenes, to pull the ears of her little sisters Nostradamus' prophecy doesn't predict the apocalypse - in fact, it predicts that it will be triggered by the Knights of the Apocalypse, who have set out to protect mankind from the apocalypse. It may sound complicated when you put it like that, but the idea is to reinforce the idea of inevitability: protecting mankind from the apocalypse isn't a rebellion, something that can work; on the contrary, Fami's plan triggers it because she denies her nature. It's a losing game.

When I say that Nayuta needs to be a little more Makima again, it's not just for her own good, it's also for the good of humanity, and I find that ultra interesting: it's necessary for the antagonist we got rid of in part 1 to return, at least partially, in part 2.

But she mustn't go back to being that obsessive protector, she must simply resume its role as predator. Mankind needs predators: with the evolution of technology, it thought it could challenge its food chain, but paradoxically it needs to be bruised by demons to survive, since the balance of the world is at stake.

It's all the more symbolic that Barem and Fami use the wrong strategy: like Prometheus, they give fire to men via contracts with the fire demon, reinforcing the idea of evolution to escape its nature. It's even more symbolic that many weapons serve this project, such as Miri, the demon of the whip and the spear, hybrids linked to this civilisation.

It's absurd for the demon of control to argue that she's just a child. If she wants CSM to escape, she must also allow him to free himself from his role as big brother and protector. And the answer to this question was given by Fumiko, who didn't realise that dogs and Meowy weren't just animals. What she should despise is certainly not her own family.

Humanity is nothing more than pets, and this realisation is the key for Nayuta to become herself again.

[kerosene-in-a-blender]

It's been interesting now that Dorian's back to watch certain segments of the fandom fixate on the idea that he's more than his relationships and claim it's reductive to focus on those aspects of him. Because on one hand, I agree that he's a complex and interesting character on his own; I've written several lengthy meta on him because I just think he's neat! On the other though, it feels disingenuous to claim that people focusing on how he relates to others are somehow belittling his character, because he's one of those characters whose relationships are deeply important to how he moves through the narrative.

He's very other-centred! His morality is focused on his friends and their well-being above all else, to the point he's made some noticeably Not Good choices or suggestions (Making his deal with Lolth; suggesting the group kill all the Pumats in order to get the magic items in the shop) for their benefit. The thing that initially caused him to leave Bells Hells wasn't any need to go on a personal journey, it was because he had to keep his brother safe. What brought him back was that the Sendings he got from Orym after the Solstice made it clear that he needed him. Even mechanically, he's a bard, the sole true support class in 5e. And the way Robbie plays him as such meant we didn't definitively know his subclass for months because he prefers to use his uses of Bardic Inspiration to buff his allies rather than to use Blade Flourishes. How he relates to and supports people is a massive part of his character and trying to erase that erases a large part of what makes him a nuanced and interesting character in the first place.

[thelingodingo]

BTS' Speech Styles

Like anybody, the members of BTS have their own speech patterns and language quirks that make their speaking unique to themselves. So I thought it would be interesting to make a post that goes deeper into the details of how each member speaks in Korean!

Jin: He talks in an old-fashioned manner (very exaggerated ahjusshi) and doesn’t use much slang. He also uses a lot of puns consistently, its quite impressive and cringy honestly. His vocabulary isn't as varied and wide as RM but his grammar is pretty spot on. Also very speedy at talking and hard to understand sometimes. On top that, he's great at getting his point across in serious situations without adding unnecessary emotion.

Suga: I think I once heard a fandom myth that he has a lisp (which he very much does not). But he does mumble a lot and stretches his ㅔ's, making it very difficult for even native Korean speakers to understand him properly. On top of that, Suga also speaks incredibly quickly, making it another thing that makes it very hard to understand him (no wonder he's a rapper). Sometimes, he speaks very swaggy. Sometimes, he speaks like an old uncle. Sometimes, he's like RM and gets very eloquent with his wording.

J-Hope: Because of his dialect, he sounds very warm and friendly. He also seems to enjoy using words such as 되게 (really) and 뭔가 (somewhat) veryveryvery often. His tone fluctuates alot and something about the way he pronounces words is very crisp and staccato-like. He can also be very serious and deadass as well.

RM: He speaks very intellectually and educated. Both his vocabulary and sentence structure is very high-level, sometimes choosing difficult and unconventional words. Every now and then he jokes around in the many different dialects he picked up from the rest of the members (he doesn't come from a place that speaks a different dialect like the others). His normal speaking is also very unique sometimes due to the influence he has from the different dialects of the members, over the years he basically created his very own dialect that's a mix of all the different dialects together. This makes his speech so nuanced and special and difficult to fully translate/convey.

Jimin: Has a very friendly and down to earth tone when talking to fans since he speaks informally. His speech pattern is very playful, sweet, and cheeky. During other occasions, he speaks formally to fans and has the most "feminine" sounding speech style. You can tell he selects words very carefully and delicately to be as nice as possible. In Korea, he has a nickname of Park DaJeong, meaning "Tender Park" due to his speech style. Sometimes, he slips into dialect which is when he sounds a bit "rougher".

Taehyung: Is a big fan of using and repeating adverbs such as 약간, 조금, 진짜, etc. In Korea, people call the way he speaks 태태어 (Tae's language) because of how interestingly different and lowkey peculiarly he speaks Korean. It doesn't have much to do with his dialect, he literally just speaks that way. (he can speak amazingly when needed, it's just that he has his own quirks when speaking in casual situations)

Jungkook: He speaks with hints of dialect quite often, making him sound very rough and most "masculine" sounding in Korean out of all the members. I think he has a very clear and smooth tone which makes it easy to listen to him, so if you're learning Korean he might be a good person to do listening practice. He's not as polished in vocabulary/grammar compared to RM and Jimin but he's still great at speaking.

Something I want to mention is that the younger members very commonly use honorifics/polite social conventions/formal speech towards the older members even with their closeness and family-like relationship. This is actually something about BTS that is highly praised among Korean society due to how professional and respectful it makes them seem.

There's probably more to analyze and delve into when it comes to the members' speaking styles and patterns but this post is just a general overview.

Please let me know if theres any inaccuracies or if you want more posts like this!

[powdermelonkeg]

just saw ur gale/mystra analysis post. im new to the game and dnd lore and honestly… ur take on their relationship feels like the most natural/compelling one??? esp since its all too easy to simplify topics that have many facets and nuance….

thanks for sharing i love analysis and reading people’s takes on narratives : D

My pleasure! (Bee from the future here: congrats, you spawned another meta!)

I love complicated characters, WAY more than I like a clear cut-and-dry case. Flaws, to me, are what make a character compelling and lead to interesting stories about them with choices that can get them into situations. I'm both writing a fanfic and running a campaign where I'm playing as Gale, and in the interest of portraying him properly and in-character, I've gone into SUCH a deep dive into all the decisions and facts that make him him.

It helps to, y'know, also be in love with the fictional wizard, but I digress

The thing about Baldur's Gate 3 is that no character in there is perfect. I've seen a couple analyses about the theme of continuing cycles of abuse vs breaking out of them, but in my mind, in terms of the characters themselves, it goes like this:

The origin characters have just come out of the lowest situation of their lives (Lae'zel being the exception; being tadpoled is a gith's worst nightmare. You're seeing that lowest situation in real time).

Not the lowest point, mind. Gale's lowest was probably the day after he got the Orb. Wyll's was probably the day his father cast him out. Karlach's was the day she lost her heart. But the lowest, accepted normal for them is what they've just left.

They're then thrown out of their depth and forced to rely on you to live. That's #1 priority: living. We get the extremes of these characters before we get their nuances, because they're quite literally at their breaking points.

Then once we get to know them, we see their wants, their hopes, their fears, as they open up to us. Every companion's story is at their own pace, but they all have a moment where they ping-pong between despondency and desire. Sometimes that desire is what we know isn't good for them, like Shadowheart wanting to be a Dark Justiciar. Sometimes that despondency is only for a flicker, like Astarion's realization that he's condemned 7000 people to a half-life of tortured spawnhood for as long as he's been a vampire.

Romance lets us crack all that open more, because if you pursue a romantic partner, they see you as their closest confidant. They WANT to trust you, so they're more willing to explain how they see the world and what decisions they want to chase.

And then their endings. Those often get simplified as good/bad, continuing the cycle vs breaking away from it. But how is Duke Wyll on the same platform as Ascended Astarion? He's not evil, he's not even entirely unhappy. He might even have broken out of his abusive cycle with Mizora, if you played your cards right. And Ascended Astarion is overjoyed, even if he is remarkably more cold.

I think that the endings are less a dichotomy of "this is good for them" vs "this is bad for them," and more one of "bringing out their best traits" vs "bringing out their worst."

Wyll's worst trait is being willing to sacrifice his own wants for whatever people desire of him. His best is standing for what he believes in and ensuring people are safe. Duke Wyll leans into that necessity to turn the other cheek in the name of people who count on him, while the Blade of Avernus has seized that moral compass of his and forged it out of mithral.

Shadowheart's worst trait is blind obedience at the cost of her individuality, while her best is her desire to be kind to things that don't deserve to be hurt. Mother Superior Shadowheart's whole life is defined by Shar. Selûnite Shadowheart's life is defined by her hospitality, especially towards animals.

Karlach's worst trait is how willing she is to accept that things are (to quote her) fucked, letting despair override hope. Her best is her durability in the face of horror. Exploded Karlach would rather die than try to work out a solution in the Hells, because she's terrified of facing Zariel alone. Mindflayer Karlach has accepted her fate and decides to give up her heart and soul to go out a hero, losing who she is. Fury of Avernus Karlach is willing to keep fighting for a solution, and by the time the epilogue happens, she's got her sights set on one.

Astarion's worst trait is his desire for power over people. His best trait is using the tools he has to his advantage. Ascended Astarion has let his powerhungry nature and paranoia lead all of his decisions, with his sights set on dominating mankind. Spawn Astarion has embraced what he is, and carved out a life for himself where he can do as he pleases.

Lae'zel's worst trait is her blind fanaticism, while her best trait is her individual dedication, making her loyalty a marriage of the two. Ascended Lae'zel is a meal for the lich queen, turning a blind eye to all Vlaakith's tried to do to her and literally being consumed by her fervor. Champion of Orpheus Lae'zel has turned her loyalty into something productive for diplomacy. Faerûnian Lae'zel has seized her individuality by the throat and decided her own future.

And then Gale. Gale's worst traits are his hubris and, paradoxically, his low self worth. His best traits are his creativity and wonder for the world. God Gale is the embodiment of ambition, having burned away all but that in pursuit of perfection. Exploded Gale has let his remorse blot out all hope for a redemption in which he does not die, because he thinks he's earned it. Professor Gale leads his life by embracing the school of Illusion and letting his creativity thrive, teaching others to do the same. House Husband Gale has multiple creative projects he's working on, and Adventurer Gale is always finding new sights to see and wanting to share them with you.

There are arguments to be made on which ending the origins are happiest in, certainly, or which one benefits them the most, but each ending represents the extreme of a facet they possess.

So with all that, there's a sort of malleable method to figuring out the ins and outs of a character.

You take their endings—all of them, all variables they can have—and reverse-engineer the flaws and details they carry. Then you start to notice how those work into their approvals for minor things: Astarion approving of your taking of the Blood of Lathander, or Shadowheart approving of standing up for Arabella. Getting a list of approvals and disapprovals is helpful, but having those endings on hand tells you why they react like that to a majority of their decisions.

You take their romance-route explanations of how they act, and apply those to earlier decisions. Astarion's confession to manipulating you and Araj-prompted admittance to using himself as a tool brings to light how he reacts to your decisions, regardless of his actual opinions on them. Wyll's fairytale romance and love of poetic adages speaks to his idealistic nature, and why he takes a sometimes-blinded approach to decisions in which the "right" answer isn't always the smart one.

You take their beginning reactions to stress and use that to measure how future decisions impact them. Lae'zel locks down and gets snappy when she's scared, while Gale immediately turns to diplomacy. Shadowheart has gallows humor, while Wyll turns to quiet acceptance. If they break from these and seem even worse, you know the situation is more dire in their minds than having seven days to live.

And then you factor in all their fun facts and dialogue choices and backstories.

A wizard falls in love with a goddess and her magic, attempts to retrieve a piece of her power for her, is scorned for his attempt and is cursed to die.

Give that backstory to a Tav. Look at how it changes.

A chaotic good wizard fell in love with a goddess, thought retrieving a piece of power for her would be a showy bouquet of love, and was punished for not thinking things through.

A lawful evil wizard fell in love with a goddess's power, snatched the most precious thing she owned, tried to use it to barter his way through to the secrets she kept, and was given a swift retribution.

Same backstory. Same class, same act, same goddess. Wildly different connotations. Wildly different conclusions as to who is in the wrong.

If you take all there is to Gale, all that the game shows us makes up his character, and apply it to this backstory, you get what really happened:

A wizard, enamored with magic, fell in love with a goddess. His desires led him to want more than she was willing to give. In his well-buried fear of inadequacy, he concluded that the reason she wouldn't indulge his ambitions was because he just hadn't proven himself worthy enough. So he tried to prove himself, but he lacked the context for what he was proving himself with. And the goddess, seeing a weapon that had killed her predecessor, saw this ambitious wizard as losing his way and coming for her just like the weapon's creator had. She was angry, she withdrew his link to her, and he didn't know why. So he drew the conclusion that she took his powers to punish him, and let that encompass his fall from grace.

Was he wrong to reach for what was out there?

If you knew that the answers to everything you cared about were not only known, but kept by someone you loved—someone who adored you—what would you do to ask to see them? What if your curiosities were if there were other planets with life out there, or how dark matter worked, or whether or not we could one day travel in the stars? What if it was the potential cure to an illness that's little-understood, or the way to make a program you dreamt up, or the scope of the true limits of your artistic talents? Would your answer change?

Was she wrong to cut him off?

If you were once hurt, and the person you loved—the person who adored you—brought the thing that caused it to your door, believing you'd want it, how would you react to seeing it? What if that thing was someone you thought you'd broken contact with, like a friend or family member you'd been trying to avoid? Would your answer change?

That's the sort of scope that needs to be applied to this, on both sides. You have to take the perspectives of each party, and apply two analogies instead of one.

Gale saw the vastness of the universe, untold wonders, the solution to every question he could ever dream up, and saw Mystra as withholding this from him because she thought he just wasn't worthy enough. To claim Mystra knew his perspective does her a disservice.

Mystra saw a cruel weapon she thought long gone, in the hands of someone who could use it, brought right to her, and thought Gale was willingly following the path of Karsus. To claim Gale knew her perspective does him a disservice.

Should Gale have researched his prize more, so he knew just what he was obtaining? Should he have kept his hands off a cursed book that would devour him? Of course he should have.

Should he have given up on chasing his dreams?

Should Mystra have understood that Gale's pursuit of power was nothing like Karsus'? Should she have communicated when she was angry instead of giving the cold shoulder? Of course she should have.

Should she have given him the benefit of the doubt?

That's the root of their falling out. That's what leads to hurt being inflicted. Understandable, human reactions to the situations they perceive. Unhealthy, unwise choices made afterwards.

You work backwards from this to figure out their dynamic as Chosen and goddess. You work forward from this to understand more of where Gale and Mystra are during the events of Baldur's Gate 3. Gale reached too high, and understands this. His goddess hates him, and he regrets this. Mystra isolated Gale, and understands this. Her Chosen wants redemption, and she wants to make it happen.

Just like we took Gale's character into account, we also have to take Mystra's.

A goddess is faced with a problem. She uses someone who's desperate for approval to solve it, by telling him to kill himself.

An evil goddess is faced with a threat to her reign. She sees someone who's unfailingly loyal and hates himself, and elects to have him tear himself apart rather than do anything about it.

A good goddess is terrified of the future. She sees someone who tried to hurt her, who's going to die anyways, and tells him to use it to save the world.

Same story. Same act, same power, same pawn. Different character. Different perspective. Different outlook on whether or not this is the right thing to do.

Mystra has died, multiple times, to people trying to stake claim to her domain. Someone appears with the very thing that could do it again, right as she's regained her stability.

She does not see mortals the way mortals do. She is timeless. She is eternal. She has a duty to protect billions of people, and one person lost to protect that number is more than worth the sacrifice.

People like to bring up the Seven Sisters as proof of Mystra's cruelty. For those unaware, Mystra asked permission to, then possessed, a woman, used her to court a man (with dubious consent from the woman), and bore seven children, all of whom were capable of bearing Mystra's power as Chosen without dying. The woman she possessed was killed in the process (reduced to no more than a husk, then slain by her now-husband, hoping to end her suffering), and the husband was horrified by the whole story.

Mystra needed Chosen in order to restore herself in the event that she was killed again, to prevent magic as a whole from collapsing and wreaking havoc on the mortal realm, like it had in the few seconds Mystryl had been dead. Elminster, Khelben Blackstaff, and the Seven Sisters contributed to this. The more Chosen she has, the better; what happens if Elminster dies? She can't afford to have all her eggs in one basket.

Mystra has Volo (yeah, that Volo) as a Weave Anchor, imparted with a portion of her power to prevent the Weave from shredding itself to pieces in her absence. All Chosen of Mystra are Weave Anchors by nature. The creation of Weave Anchors was mandated by Ao, the Overgod, and Chosen are the best way to make sure those anchors aren't drained by ambitious people hoping for godlike power. Chosen can, and will, defend themselves, unlike static locations (which Mystra also has). The anchors are why the Weave wasn't completely obliterated during Mystra's last death, when the Spellplague rose up, because they stabilized the Weave around them.

Everything Mystra does is in the name of the big picture, to prevent a catastrophe like the fall of Netheril from happening again. Her restriction of magic, her numerous Chosen, her creation of Weave Anchors, her destruction of those who would claim her power, it's all in the name of the stability she's been charged with. Dornal Silverhand's grief and Elué Silverhand's death, while regrettable, were worth it to bring seven more anchors into existence to save all of the Material.

So someone appears with the Crown of Karsus, potentially powerful enough to try to kill the other gods in the name of the Dead Three. She can't risk being a target of them. She can't risk the destruction of magic again.

Gale is going to die. He lives in fear. He begs for forgiveness.

In Mystra's eyes, she's offering him the best outcome. She'll let him die in service to her, to save Faerûn, and she'll forgive him. He's going to die anyways, and if he does this, she'll give him everything (she thinks) he could ever want in her realm. She's asking him to do what (she thinks) is the right thing.

"She would consider what she considers to be forgiveness."

Notably, she leaves the decision in his hands. She doesn't have Elminster lead him to the Nether Brain. She doesn't activate him as soon as he's there. When he lives yet, she doesn't revoke the charm that keeps him stable. And when he declines, when he lets it go and starts pursuing Karsus' path, she doesn't smite him on the spot.

She is (she thinks) being incredibly patient. If Gale is going to try to be Karsus II, she's ready for him. If he decides to walk off and keep the Orb, he's dug his own grave in the Fugue Plane (those who don't have a god to claim them roam endlessly as husks and form a wall of bodies around the City of Judgement).

From her perspective, she's not being unreasonable. But from the perspective of a mortal, she absolutely is.

"Now, I have a question for thee: what is the worth of a single mortal's life?"

This is a question she cannot answer properly.

I think a lot of characterization is lost whenever someone paints one of them as being totally in the right. But I also think you have to be invested in them as characters to want to see that characterization. If you want to write about Mystra, you have to try to get into her head, analyze the decisions she made, figure out why she thinks she was right, and follow the pattern.

Gale's sacrifice is a very predictable thing for her to ask for.

[cer-rata]

An incomplete but very angry diatribe about the missed potential of the Star Sapphires

So back in the day Geoff Johns and co decided to open up the Green Lantern mythos and add some more flavor and expand the concept of sci-fi tech powered by elemental emotion to more than just willpower. Which yes, is not an emotion, we ignore it and move on.

Anyway we got some really cool stuff! A rage tyrant fueled by experiencing incredible injustice on a personal and cosmic scale, whose vendetta twisted him into something terrible. An avatar of greed who was never allowed to have anything, not freedom, not family, not safety, who takes and takes and takes to fill a void that can never be satisfied. A priest who lost everything but presses on through his unshakable hope that the future can and will be better. It's a lot of fun stuff!

So in this great creative re-imagining, they had to do something clever and fun with the idea of an all female corps powered by love right? They took the opportunity to move past the purely romantic, sexual idea of love and the obsessed femme fatale archetype, because they had the chance to really explore different types of affection now that there were a bunch of different avatars with different stories to pull from right?

Right?

Nope! The only Sapphires we ever learn about are heartbroken over a cursed romance like Carol, grieving a dead fiance like Miri Riam, forcibly mind controlled to be one like Fatality, or just Miss Bloss who...kind of said she wanted to join up? No clue what her deal is, as far as I'm aware that's never really explained. And then we just never learn about anyone else, and still haven't. The hell is "The Lost Sapphire"? No idea, we'll likely never know.

It's frustrating because not only is this a glaring example of the depth of plotlines offered to women in comics compared to their male counterparts, but also a wild lack of imagination. Love is one of the most complicated emotions we experience. Fear, anger, hope, all pretty easy to quickly define. Love is multifaceted, cultural, incredibly contextual and a factor in so many different kinds of relationship. Just thinking logically it should be much easier to flesh out the motivations of a group pulling from such a nuanced source of power, versus something as clear-cut as rage. But no, the red lanterns got so many varied reasons for their rage, the male ones especially: Bleez being the woman was of course given the SA narrative, which I don't think is inappropriate on its own, that's an incredibly valid reason to be angry, but as the ONLY truly prominent female Red Lantern it's like...c'mon guys. But still, at least she and Atrocitus had different reasons for becoming what they are, and that variation was played for plot and drama.

But there's not a single Star Sapphire that personally champions something other than romantic love. And before you shoot me, it is explicitly mentioned that they DO protect other forms of love, so there's no reason for them to all be sexy and obsessed with kissing people. There are no Sapphires that are driven by:

The love of their children and families, even in a tragic sense, like Atrocitus and Saint Walker and Larfleez are...

Their love of their people, or their culture. It would have been interesting if Fatality was inducted BECAUSE of her pain at losing her world, but no, they just...replaced her anger with lovey vibes and called it a day.

Their love for nature. Not everyone is social, but social love isn't the only way to strongly experience the emotion.

Their love for themselves. Where is the fun narcissistic ass who loves their own self image to the point of getting powers? It would have been a fun twist and a cool way to get another villainous Sapphire if you wanted to.

Their platonic love of ANYTHING really. Are ace/aro people just...not capable of love then? It doesn't mean anything to be willing to drive cross country to help a friend move just because they needed it and you care? No? You need to be fucking for it to count?

It's like...fascinating if you really think about it. In this vast fantasy universe full of alien races with wildly different perceptions and life cycles, and where the other corps have plenty of non-human, truly alien looking members, that the women's only love corps is full of only hot hot scantily clad baddies. Most love that people experience in their lives isn't even romantic! You will have far more experiences with friends and family members and even loving strangers than you will have with romantic partners.

Like the reason is clearly sexism, duh, but we know sexism is bad, that's obvious, what I really want to make clear is how much this blatant, unexplored sexism just completely desecrated the potential of the worldbuilding here.

From another angle even: Let's say this this WAS the sex and romance all the time corps. Let's say that you wanted to keep it all women. I hate the idea that women are capable of love in a way that men aren't, that's such a bad take and just regressive and unhelpful, but let's just play ball for a moment. They're not even hot? Their designs are such ridiculously narrow versions of feminine attractiveness that they're not even successful at really being mass appeal sexy. I haven't even reached the point of complaining about the fatphobia and criminal lack of different body types yet, I'm still just saying that from the standpoint of fantasy sexy it's not even good at being stereotypical offensive fantasy sexy. It's just boring! They're all so visually boring! You can be scantily clad and still have an interesting and coherent character design! But that is not what they gave these women! They actually redesigned the classic Star Sapphire costume and made it MORE sexist and boring:

Yeah it was cheesy but it was also cute and fun? The design is playful classic sci-fi girl and this is when she was still a dangerous unhinged villain. Its fun to look at and feels tonally coherent next to Green Lantern.

And then they just...

No actually, I will not explain this one, you have eyes.

And yeah they fixed her costume finally,

But! She's still stuck as Hal Jordan's romantic punching bag, and has not gotten to have any new adventures on her own.

So.

What I'm saying is it's a flop all around. 2/10, and only because despite everything Fatality STILL managed to serve. I actually think that all of the corps have been poorly used since blackest night, even the greens actually, but they never even gave the Sapphires a chance. They last showed up in...a WW annual I think? During the whole dark gods event, they needed Diana to help them fight the evil god of love, and there was a guy in the corp finally, and they talked about sisterhood and then we haven't heard a peep from them since. I think Carol might be due to get her ring back in the GL ongoing but she's not really been treated well so far, so I'm not hopeful for anything fresh and well reasoned.

So my lovely ladies (and that one unnamed guy), until they let you get it together it may be time to

[livwritesstuff]

Hi, you once had a post about Steves Dad dying and Steve and his mom kind of reconnecting... how did that first meeting between her and the kids but also with Eddie go? And is it a stable relationship or kinda like it was with Steve, fizzling out and just popping in whenever?

I really love this AU, excited for more AO3 content tbh ♡♡♡

Happy Pride!

<3

so the thing about Steve’s mom is that she knew everything. Steve never stopped reaching out at any point between when his parents fully cut communication with him (1993) and when they finally contacted him again (when his dad was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in ‘09). Sure, Steve stopped calling after a while because they never picked up, but he wrote letters, he invited them to everything, he sent the kids’ school photos and holiday cards  – he sort of adopted the approach of “You aren’t in my life because you’re actively deciding not to be. I am leaving the door open; you are choosing to not step through it”.

Steve’s EQ is pretty high. He can see the nuance in the situation – the estrangement was mostly his dad’s doing, but he also knows that his mom chose to align with him instead of her son. She could have made a different choice.

Case in point – on one occasion, she actually did.

Back in ‘04, when Steve and Eddie had first moved into their house, Steve invited his parents to the housewarming party just like he invited them to everything even though he knew they wouldn’t show.

Lo and behold – his mom showed.

She met Eddie and Moe (three at the time) and Robbie (not quite one yet), and then she left and Steve didn’t hear from her again until five years later when she called to tell Steve about his father’s diagnosis.

After his father passed away, Steve worked with his mom to make sure she’s comfortable in the aftermath of everything. He helps her relocate closer to where he and his family live because by that point she's made it pretty clear that she wants to be in his life again.

As far as meeting Eddie and the girls – it goes fine. The thing about polite society is that it’s dripping in pleasantries. Steve’s mom is sweet as pie to Eddie, and she dotes on the kids, which, sure, Steve is happy about, but what he really wants is to have a conversation about the choices she'd made over the years and how they hurt him.

She’s not interested in that though, and while that’s the case, Steve keeps their relationship distant and surface-level, and he definitely keeps her at an arm’s reach from Eddie and the girls because he doesn’t want to allow his kids to start thinking that it’s fine for people to slot in and out of their lives whenever it’s convenient, and he doesn’t want Eddie to think he’d ever let slide the way she responded to finding out about their relationship.

(Even though Eddie forever maintains that, “Steve, the only thing your parents did to me was give me you. You’re the only one here they actually hurt” but, again, Steve is The Martyr of all time, so he has some trouble seeing that).

In the “hierarchy of grandmothers”, so to speak, Joyce 100% reigns supreme because she’s been around from the beginning and they’ve seen the maternal-like relationship she has with Steve their entire lives, which I think Steve’s mom definitely has an awareness of but, again, she can’t exactly bring it up without bringing up the way her actions caused the situation and without acknowledging that the reason Joyce and Steve have that kind of relationship is because of the choices she made.

[scintillyyy]

so like, obviously i dislike egregiously physically abusive drakes & find their actual canon dynamic with tim much more nuanced and interesting to me personally.

but, while i firmly don't think that jack ever got physical with tim in canon. he. hm. his brand of 90s parenting & propensity towards outbursts of physical anger (ripping the tv off the wall, shouting and getting in tim's face). well...i don't think it's completely off the mark to want to imagine or explore a jack who did hit tim and examine the fallout. like i'm always thinking that it could be done interestingly. to me. and i'll put the rest under a cut bc y'know. discussions of abuse and whatnot.

so like. thinking of what i would want to see in a story that explores this. like, i was thinking of where i would put the Incident & i think i've settled on after tim runs back to gotham from keystone that jack would lose his temper and strike tim across the face.

i think this is a good spot *because* it already is a spot where jack gets angry with tim in robin #66--now obviously the situation in canon gets resolved with a joyous "i hate keystone too" from jack bc jack listens to tim but if you wanted to transform him worse, you could pull in the refusal to hear tim out from the tv ripping incident & have him lose his temper and strike tim. like idk. i think there's room to explore his propensity for explosive anger.

before dinner jack does try to apologize but also he does kind of blame tim at the same time.

of course he would immediately feel bad about this & dana would probably intervene with a "jack!" and he would also kind of be shocked where he hit his son. he calms down and agrees they should stay in gotham. tim cannot believe his dad just hit him. dana feels awkward so excessively tries to smooth things over between them. they go out to eat. it is silent and awkward.

(if you're at all wondering why dana doesn't immediately leave jack: let's make one think clear, dana in canon has a high tolerance and acceptance of jack's bullshit so i actually genuinely don't think that jack hitting tim once in anger would be a dealbreaker for her--she'd be uncomfortable and scold him but also she prioritizes her relationship to jack moreso than her one to tim and tries to stay out of what she perceives as jack's lane of parenting tim so she'd probably be "excessive but not my kid" especially if she only perceived it as a one time mistake he was regretful about. also. adults sometimes don't perceive violence against teenagers for disrespect as as much of a bad thing as they should.)

and tim just does not know *what to think*. he kind of does his whole identity crisis thing where like. tim kind of deserved it, it was tim who got hit by his dad. robin would never. he would probably spend a lot of time minimizing his dad's fault to himself and Not Dealing With It.

and he doesn't want to deal with it because thank god, batman called them in to no man's land. so it's a relief to run away and not *have* to deal with it. he meets up with dick to sneak into NML and dick immediately clocks the facial bruise but also since i love terrible things i would like it if dick assumed initially that tim got it from a goon and was like "yeesh, you hide that from your dad okay" which makes tim stiffen up because he does NOT want to admit to dick that his dad is the one who did it and he brushes it off but of course dick can tell something strange is going on & files that away for later.

and then they're in no man's land and separated--tim goes with bruce and dick to infiltrate blackgate. before they leave dick tries to probe a little more but tim just doesn't want to admit it. so that's fun.

and bruce also asks about the bruise but tim's like whatever and bruce is busy so he's just like "hm" but also he's busy and they all get busy and the bruise fades and it gets put on the backburner but it does still bother dick but he's sick and then tim is sick and there's no chance to talk about it. but also tim wants to tell bruce & dick but at the same time he doesn't want to tell them at all. there's a lot of flitting around and almost broaching the subject here.

i imagine there's an angsty scene when tim is sick where bruce goes to wipe his forehead and tim flinches away and mutters something in his sleep which makes bruce a little concerned. and when he's better alfred is trying to be like you should tell your dad and tim keeps blowing it off and not wanting to because he doesn't want to have to think about it. so people are starting to notice he's being strange about something with his dad. there's discussions behind his back.

jack meanwhile thinks tim has run away because jack hit him and is worried about that. & finally tim reluctantly calls under bruce's stern eyes and says he ran away to no man's land. which sets off jack's temper again and jack yells at him & tim does Not look at bruce while he's busy trying to compartmentalize. anyways jack calls politicians to get his son out & sets off an immediately media firestorm & tim does not want to go and deal with it

at this point dick Knows something is up with tim and is really trying to badger it out of him. and when jack drake goes on national television to apologize to his son and says he knows he made Mistakes and he just wants tim to come home safely and tim has to finally tell everyone that he dad hit him. dick gets pissed, bruce gets pissed, tim tries to make excuses for his dad. we get a dick hug methinks.

of course, there is the matter of jack wants tim extracted. now, this doesn't make anyone happy--dick is firm that tim should stay with them. bruce doesn't want tim to go back but...y'know...gotham needs the media spotlight of his rescue.

this pisses off dick. i think we should transform canon further and pretend that alfred brought in the robin suit case just so dick can punch bruce into it for even considering sending tim back.

at this point i think tim would insist on going back himself. dick doesn't like it but since tim says he will he won't fight it. things are very tense as they prepare to send tim back but tim says he'll be fine. after all, they know now. dick makes him promise a million times that if jack tries anything at all, he's going to call them immediately.

so tim returns home & jack feels awful for lots of reasons & tim firmly tells him that it won't happen again. dana assures him it won't, and jack also says it won't. is he telling the truth. who knows. but jack's way of dealing with this is also deciding to send tim to boarding school.l because that solves the problem doesn't it. also he and dana spend more time doing things to try and keep him & tim separate so he doesn't explode on him. which at least makes it easy for tim to sneak back into NML to help out with end stuff.

tim gets mother henned a bit and dick is relieved tim is going to boarding school if it means he'll be away from jack. and bruce starts a file on that man. he's watching now. always watching. or something. i don't actually have a good ending for this.

[misscryptidart]

No but actually make me a WWDITS (union) writer because the relationship and social aspects of humans VS vampires is so fucking interesting.

Like, I know the meme of the Baron choose drama over violence in his confrontation with Guillermo, but the side conversation between the two, "vampire to vampire", immediately reads as a different level of intimacy and familiarity that the baron had not shown to Guillermo prior. The respect between the two, the frankness the Baron gives Guillermo, they are portrayed as equals. Perhaps not friends, but equals.

The relationship between familiar and vampire is also displayed in a new context. Nadja, as soon as she found out that Guillermo was turned, immediately began to correct Guillermo's behavior and teach him what little she could ("You can't treat your master like that. That connection is sacred. If he gets killed, you get killed. You treat him with respect."). Being a familiar is not only serving your master, but building that connection with your eventual sire. Its the time where the master is supposed to be preparing their familiar for the complex and nuanced life of vampirism, easing the transition for not only the new fledging but also the risk the sire is taking. To have another vampire, one who has not groomed and taken care of the familiar, turn them is a clear violation of the expectations of the master role. Nandor, by the social contracts of vampirism, was the one to "train" and "prepare" Guillermo for his introduction to the un-living. Derik took that connection and ruined it. No wonder he was so fucking pissed.

I think it lends itself well to the reality that vampires and humans are not equals. Humans live short lives and have a limited world experience, but they are dangerous and clever. Vampires have the gift of endless possibilities and power unlike any others, but they are reliant on the humans for food and must navigate a world that actively works against their nature. Of course they see humanity as "the others", ones who can't ever possibly understand what it means to be a vampire. Of course they are going to be incredibly cautious when allowing one into their world. The running gag of familiars never actually being turned makes a lot more sense when you put in the perspective that vampires are incredibly protective of themselves and those of their inner circle. It also explains why they are so willing to disregard or kill their familiars. They can't understand what it means to be a vampire. They will die anyways. Who cares?

The Staten Island Vampires stand out so distinctly because they choose to integrate themselves into human society earnestly, eager to explore and learn about their neighbors. Not in a malicious manner, such as a wolf in sheep's clothing, but as a genuine "Hey, I'm here. I want to experience this. I want to be apart of this."

Very rarely in vampire media, in my opinion, does it show the vampires attempting to live their lives interwoven with humanity like WWDITS does. Even Twilight, the most modern adaptation of a vampiric story, has the Cullen's act alien and disinterested in the world around them. But the Staten Island Vampires are involved! Laszlo hangs out with Sean with no intentions of feeding from him, Nandor goes to the gym and movies and actively seeks new friendships, Nadja connects with her roots and visits Little Antipaxos! They are people living in a world of other people, and the world feels so full because of that.

I love monsters and mythology and folklore and terrible little creatures so goddamn much

[nalyra-dreaming]

About DM, having read som theories and speculations of yours and others I would love to add some of my thoughts and hear what you and @virginiaisforvampires and @cbrownjc thinks - if you are interested :)

1. Armand clearly reacted to Louis offering Daniel the Dark Gift, and reacted even more strongly to Daniel basically saying “No, thanks”. On the surface it seems in the latter instance that he was just offended by Daniel’s verbal barb, but I’m sure this is actually clever obfuscation by the writer/director/actor, no?

2. Given 1) and the foreknowledge of DM, Daniel responding ”A cure for Parkinson’s” when Armand (as Rashid) asked if Danial has everything he needs could be an unfired Chekhov’s gun…?

3. What really is/will become Armand’s endgame? I actually believe that it is as it seems, that Louis is the driving force behind this second interview. And that Armand actually be still be somewhat angry/resentful following the (presumed) breakup of DM. I think you speculated that Daniel might have wanted to leave to live a life since Armand refused to make him a vampire? While Armand might have wanted to spend the rest od Daniel’s mortal life with him? This would explain the charade, it being a way for Armand to either try to stop Daniel’s memories from resurfacing (per his request?) as well as Armand’s attitude in season one (as he seems annoyed with Daniel at times). Daniel’s terminal illness might be changing Armand’s mind however (á la DM), as previously suggested. Honestly? A part of me want to see some sort of fucked up Dracula situation, where it becomes clear gradually in a terrifying manner to Daniel that he is trapped by this ‘monster’ who claims to know him better than he knows himself/knows what’s best for him. The latter seemingly being a version of the dynamic playing out between Armand and Louis currently.

4. How will Daniel feel about Armand following season two? I think Daniel’s view of life and of the vampires has been shown to be quite different than to back in the 70s. His view of Armand must surely also be influenced by hearing of Louis’ bloody history of him? As he will presumably get to know Armand chiefly from Louis’ story and be quite critical of him - even viewing him as quite sinister as he realizes and gets Louis to realize the part Armand has played in tampering with their memories and Claudia’s death. Of course Armand is participating in the interview so his perspective will also come to light, and Daniel seems according to the trailers at one point be talking to Armand one-on-one. So he’s open to listening. I believe that Daniel’s view of Armand will be quite negative - even following the return of his memories, at least initially. That putting these memories and feelings together with his current view of life and view of Armand will be anything but simple. I would guess at this point that the romantic nature of their relationship is something that will be revealed very late - maybe even be a cliffhanger for the next season (together with other stuff).

5. A more nuanced view of Armand. However it wouldn’t completely surprise me if Louis, and possibly Daniel, somewhat consensually agreed to have some of their memories tampered with. I think Louis on some level after Claudia’s death might, due to his intense grief, wanted to emotionally “run away” so to speak. And that this series basically began with him for some reason or another now feeling ready to confront the past. So Armand’s seeming malevolence as a mind-manipulator will potentially be tampered by these facts. However Daniel will now presumably together with Louis find out about the role Armand played in Claudia’s death. Daniel’s empathy for Claudia is somewhat limited though, understandably as he has the human perspective and does, quite rightly, not excuse her murderous ways. But he might dislike Armand due to the self-serving aspect of the trial? Or maybe not?

6. At this point, I don’t think Louis and Daniel have been in a serious romantic relationship. I wouldn’t be surprised if they hooked up or something similar but Louis seemed very genuine and definitive in welcoming Daniel as a friend he met once/or a few times years ago recording the tapes. If he was hiding a past history and/or romantic relationship from Daniel I think he would behaved differently. Of course he could also not remember, but I don’t think that’s the case here.

7. I guess what I’m most curious about is what kind of dynamic will take form between Daniel and Armand during and immediately following season two? I would love to hear your thoughts. Also the Dracula comparison was not my idea but something I’ve read somewhere here. So sorry for long post! Love your blog!

Hey!

Glad you like! <3

Sorry this took a moment (the answer is also a bit longer^^)

He did. And yes, it might contain obfuscation, but mostly… I think Armand was almost afraid that Daniel would accept the gift from Louis. Maybe Louis offered before, maybe he did not, but Armand surely didn’t. And… Armand loves Daniel. Ultimately Daniel will be his only fledgling. There is a level of possessiveness to that, of course, and also to the not-healed bite marks on Daniel’s throat, which more than likely did not just stem from Louis’ attack (because Armand would have needed to heal Daniel there at least a bit, and over the following 12 years he bit Daniel often). I think there are a lot of things at play. For the book readers it is a nice little easter egg on various levels (both Daniel’s and Armand’s past together and also Armand’s personal past being referenced), but also something more hinted at, something we have not been shown yet. Though, given the title of that music part (Alice is in her third trimester) a while back - maybe we will get to see it. Something must have happened to make Armand let Daniel go, and the repeated refusal in the books served to open a rift between them. I could easily see that happen here as well. That said, it would mean that we will get a LOT more DM in s2 than thought so far… and I’m not sure that will be the case. What I could easily see is Daniel reminiscing (or getting memories back) about the moment he “got his shit together” as he called it in s1 - but I do not think we will get all of what that entailed yet.

Most certainly :) I think he’s already getting it. Fareed is not there to play around after all^^.

I have speculated that the aforementioned rift that developed through Armand’s repeated refusal to turn Daniel will lead to Daniel seeking other … comforts. But I think it would actually need a big reason (like a baby…) to make him struggle for real - and I could see someone else then decide to end that struggle. Put an end to the hunt/relationship because it was not good for Daniel, ultimately, and because Armand could not be moved. As per Armand… I think Armand did acquiesce to Louis’ wishes to have Daniel redo the interview, and he likely was not happy about it. I mean, imagine how it would be to see the love of your life... and said love of your life does not remember you. Verbally throws things at you. It must be a wild mix of feelings for Armand, from annoyance over helpless love to utter devastation. No wonder he tried to literally hide from it. I do think Armand was already aware of Daniel’s sickness - the aforementioned medicine by Fareed he is getting - that had to be prepared. Planned, designed. Researched. Whatever it is they are giving him is not what they claim it to be (the side effects don’t match), and… given Daniel is not stupid he might hone in on that pretty soon. Now, in the books there is a pharmaceutical empire that is led by a powerful ancient vampire, Gregory, and he and Seth (who is Akasha’s son and Fareed’s lover/maker) are roughly on the same level. Seth, but mostly Fareed, builds whole research centers for the vampires. There is a LOT of potential for the show to hook into that, and I actually think both the more physical sex and the absent death sleep during the day are thanks to Fareed. If that will ever be spelled out? No idea, but the first is something Fareed already makes happen in the books and the second is something he plans to remove… so I do think that is connected. I think whoever is orchestrating behind the scenes (coughs prime minister coughs) wanted to help Daniel to live long enough to maybe reconcile Armand and Daniel. And for that Daniel needs his memories back. If that is Armand though… the show will tell :)

Well, I think it will be the same as in the book when the memories come back - Daniel will realize that he “loved this thing”, this monster, despite everything. Despite knowing what Armand has done. That is part of the horror, that the lover overshadows everything he knows, and that he is, in a way, helpless against that. Oh, I’m sure there will be a development of feeling, of course. But ultimately Daniel will realize that he loved Armand - absolutely, totally - and then eventually he will realize that he still does. And that will make him just as confused and vulnerable and hurt, and emotional as it makes Armand.

I can easily see Louis saying something like “I want the pain to stop” or something similar, and then Armand taking that as his cue to interfere. The thing is, Armand back then… is not the Armand in Dubai. DM happened in-between and it changed him. So when Armand likely “tinkered” with Louis’ mind back then it was more to serve himself - when he “tinkered” with Louis’ mind later on it was likely to help Louis. However he did and what that tinkering might entail. So yes, Daniel might challenge him on his part in it all, of course. I am counting on it, actually. Because Daniel is there to pull the truth out of Armand - that is (part of) why the interview is being redone. And of course that will shape Daniel’s view of him further - only the feelings won’t care for that view when they come back. Armand was quite the “villain” in the earlier books - that changed a bit with the later ones. But he is still a coven master, and Lestat calls him “ruthless” in the books. The show will present both Armands to us in direct confrontation - and I bet the emotions of the audience will be just as tumultuous as Armand’s and Louis’ and Daniel’s own are by this confrontation.

Oh, Daniel and Louis… probably got along really well and even intimately during those 12 years. I think Louis definitely has a personal connection to him, much more than in the book. It’s a weird relationship triangle they have there, and soon Lestat will be added to the mix - and I bet it will be revealed that Daniel has met Lestat before (as well).

I think after s2 Daniel will still be an old man, still be the interviewer, the chronicler. But remembering much, much more, and therefore challenging whoever else is on that couch then (I expect Lestat) a lot more as well. For example wrt episode 5. I would bet real money that we will get episode 5 in s3 from Lestat’s POV. Because by now I think there was nothing random, or unplanned about it. This show is a puzzle, and we have had only a few pieces. I think Armand and Daniel… will be very … raw with each other. Emotions are high, vulnerability as well. There will be intimate moments, but also rejection. Daniel’s view on eternity will change at some point, and probably rather rapidly with the memories coming back. There will be anger at the meddling. Daniel is no pushover. He will challenge them, and especially Armand. At some point he will realize that he does not need to ask - he can demand, to an extent at least. And that will change the dynamic once more.

It will be very, very interesting to watch^^.

[thevilqueen]

I think that Rook’s betrayal of Vil in Book 5 is particularly cruel and I think it truly layers their relationship into something complex and nuanced that I really like.

Rook and Vil bonded thanks to their shared love for theatre and cinema back when they had just met. We don’t have many details but we know that it culminated in Rook being so obsessed with Vil that he changed dorms to study beauty more closely. Rook is very passionate and he expresses his affection extravagantly. While he doesn’t do so exclusively with Vil, it is seemingly more intense with him.

Now Vil is a very popular person, he is used to being admired but there is no denying that Rook can hardly be rivalled by someone else at least as far as the game portrays it. So I think it’s safe to assume that Vil isn’t immune to it. After all, why wouldn’t he indulge in the idea of being someone’s number one? While it’s still far from fulfilling his longing for the spotlight, it must have felt nice being acknowledged in such a way. Rook and Vil have known each other for at least two years and in all this time despite Rook’s admiration and dedication to Neige he has never once mentioned it to Vil, fully aware that Vil and him worked together closely often.

This isn’t just a mere detail about Rook’s personal life either. Neige had a huge impact on his life. He is also known by Neige as a dedicated fan. Neige is seemingly very famous. In hordes of fans, for Rook to stand out to the point Neige would recognise him is no small feat. His obsession with Neige is time-consuming and serious. We don’t have an explanation as to why he hid the truth from Vil and we never will. As far as I’m concerned I believe Rook never had malicious intent hiding that fact. He’s known to be secretive and even Vil admits still being surprised by him.

Regardless, to find out so abruptly after overbloting and losing to Neige yet again couldn’t have been painless to Vil. Vil is someone who is known for having trust issues, keeping his walls high and repressing his feelings. So I find it terribly heartbreaking that the seemingly closest person to him who spent their time making him believe he was their ultimate obsession for two years reveals their true ultimate obsession all along was his long-term rival, not just him. That revelation wasn’t even initiated by Rook himself, meaning that if it had been up to him he would have kept hiding it.

To be clear, none of that diminishes their relationship as well as Rook’s importance to Vil. Rook visibly cares deeply for Vil and so does Vil for him. Vil also forgives him and handles it very maturely. Yet none of his feelings are truly addressed when this betrayal is so tightly linked to his deepest insecurity. Vil is never going to be Rook’s ultimate obsession as an artist. That’s Neige. It has been Neige for a long time. Furthermore, Vil’s flaw is his obsession with the desire to be number one. Rook directly feeds into Vil’s vice and there are several instances where he does which is why their relationship can be both good and bad for Vil.

At best Rook pushes him to new heights, challenges him to go further, to want more. At worst Rook reminds him of his shortcomings and encourages his bad habits. Rook is very much a double-edged sword to Vil which I think is very interesting.

[justthoughts1310]

Boruto's Love Interest is Mitsuki

So, in the last post, I made it clear why I believe that Mitsuki is in love with Boruto.

However in this post, I will explain why I believe Boruto is receptive to Mitsuki being his romantic partner.

My explanation will span across chapter 7 and 8, and it will compare and contrast them with each other.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Up until this point, Boruto has three confirmed love interests: Sarada, Sumire, and Mitsuki, but he has shown no romantic interest in any of them. Until, maybe now.

I want to start by contrasting Ch.7 with Ch.8.

In Chapter 7, Boruto realizes that Mitsuki has tracked him with a snake. At first, it appears that Boruto sticks around to confront MItsuki because he's far enough away from the village to go ape mode, and also because Mitsuki has closed in on him and now he cannot escape fast enough.

Chapter 7, confirmed that the prior was not the case. Boruto actually scolds Mitsuki for causing excessive environment damage, and Boruto keeps his attacks and skilled and percise as possible. All the while, Boruto fights cautiously in order to ensure that he neither hurts Mitsuki nor destroys the forest.

Chapter 8, confirms that the latter was also not the case. As soon as Boruto learns that Kawaki is coming, he automatically uses flying Thunder God Technique to teleport away. Delta and Kawaki can literally fly, and by the time they reach Boruto's location, Boruto is nowhere to be seen.

Both chapters are paired by the fact that Shikamaru warns Boruto about both Kawaki and Mitsuki pursuing him before they arrive.

Boruto had the option to teleport away in Ch. 7 and not deal with Mitsuki at all, but he (instead) stayed and had a conversation with him. He proved to Mitsuki that he could kill Mitsuki at anytime, but he refused to harm even one hair on Mitsuki's head.

In Boruto's fight with Mitsuki, he has two very prominent opportunities to escape, and he takes neither chance. This is even pointed out by Kishimoto, when Mitsuki asks Boruto why he does not simply escape when he has more than enough ability to do it?

Pair this with him evading Kawaki. When Boruto hears that Kawaki is coming, he doesn't even entertain a conversation with Kawaki.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, let's discuss language.

In Ch.7 Boruto saying something that I've never heard Boruto say before:

He explicitly declares himself to be Mitsuki's Sun.

When Mitsuki exhibits concern with regard to Kawaki, Boruto tells Mitsku not to worry, and that this is a simple quarrel between brothers.

Now, I point this out to say, because a lot of no nuance nellys continue to infer that Boruto and Mitsuki has a fraternal relationship, and THEY DON'T.

The Naruto and Boruto series have never shied away from using words like Brothers, Rivals, and Friends, and all of these words have deep meaning in the world of Naruto and Boruto. They all have symbolic level meaning.

Yet, Boruto never refers to Mitsuki as his brother, and Mitsuki never refers to Boruto as his Brother.

Now, one might say, that maybe neither of them know what it's like to be a brother or to have a brother. To which, I'd say that's absolutely ridiculous because both of them are brothers and have brothers.

Boruto's the brother of Himawari. Boruto's brother is Kawaki.

Mistuki's brother is his older clone: Log.

If Boruto and Mitsuki, had fraternal feelings for one another, I think it would be really obvious to each of them as individuals, since the two of them are both not only children. In fact, they are the only new generation characters in all of Boruto that actually have siblings (aside from their siblings Himawari, Kawaki, and Log of course).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boruto tells Mitsuki that he doesn't need a sun, that he can shine on his own, but he also says if you need a sun then come find me.

In some translations, he says "Come to my place anytime" (oooo sexual).

Anyway, my point is that, if Boruto ends up being as astute as Eida and Sarada in realizing that Mitsuki has romantic feelings for him. Boruto may have just said to Mituski, "Come though and I'll give you what you need *wink, wink*".

Lol, I'm joking but I'm not joking. I don't want to perscribe sexual intention to this so early on.

However, I do think Boruto is saying that if you still feel that you need me in this romantic and relational capacity (once you realize that it's me and not Kawaki), I will be here to receive that, accept that, and be what you need in regard to that to the best of my abilities.

------‐------------------------------------------------------------------

Just the way the story had already played out, I think there's a good chance that the character of Boruto is bisexual.

[greedandenby]

Jacob & Sam talking about queerness in IWTV.

A compilation of stuff they've said in interviews.

(Long post!)

A.V. Club

Q: The show is being hailed as unabashedly queer as compared to the film adaptation. Why was that important to both of you and the show’s creators?

SR: It’s what’s written in the book. We’re doing the book and it’s the way it’s supposed to be.

JA: It’s true to the story.

SR: It’s true to what Anne wanted and, yeah… it’s time.

JA: It would be rude not to.

SR: Yeah.

Comicbook

Q: How important was it for the two of you to get this aspect of the story (the queerness of the books) not only correct, but to tell the full breadth and aspect of this very unique relationship?

JA: (…) For one, we have to acknowledge that the books are very queer. I think that IWTV Louis is not talking about it, at least in terms of Lestat.

SR: Until you get to the second half of the book. By the second half of the book, Louis does sort of start to acknowledge that it was something more, which I think is such a cool… (…) I think the relationship, the way Louis describes it in the beginning is sort of like, is it subtext or has he acknowledged it or is he just angry with the way it worked out? But I really feel that as we go on, the text is the text. It’s very clear that they’re in love and that they’re in a romantic relationship. I don’t think we would be doing the Anne Rice universe or doing the Vampire Chronicles if that wasn’t the case. I think it would be something else. And it would be a waste of time for us too because the fun stuff comes from the complexities of the relationship and the dynamics and all the detail and nuance that they have. If we’re doing a “will they won’t they” or, like, subtle glances across the room then you spend all the time on that tension rather than the really complicated toxic dynamic that exists between the two of them.

JA: Yeah, and then also playing that off against that tension and the aftermath of some of those fights. It suddenly rebuilds this sexual and emotional tension. Like you said, you get to explore the breadth of a relationship. But yeah, they’re each other’s endgame, aren’t they? In the books, they always come home to each other. I think it’s telling that that seems to be the denouement or the end of a lot of the novels: Louis and Lestat being petty and in love.

Esquire

Q: The 1994 film adaptation of Interview With the Vampire shied away from depicting the romance between Lestat and Louis. Your adaptation is very explicit; at one point, we even see Lestat and Louis have sex while levitating. Rolin Jones described this series as “an excitable, aggressive, toxic, beautiful love story.” What did that mean to you, finally getting to tell the story in its full, explicit sensuality?

SR: I was very happy it was going that way, because it wouldn't be Interview With the Vampire if it didn't. It’s really important that we explored that, because a big part of their relationship is this intense connection. Anne Rice describes drinking each other's blood as incredibly erotic, almost like having sex. So how do you translate that on screen? I guess nude levitation translates quite well. I think it's really important that we don't shy away from it, because if we spend the whole season going, "Will they? Won't they?," we don't get to the really interesting parts of this complex relationship. Getting straight down to it means we can look at the dynamics of this pair—how they hurt each other and how they build each other up.

JA: With the levitating scene, we talked a lot about how you need those moments of joy and excitement and romance so it's not all about tortured Catholic guilt. We've seen vampire stories told that way before, and like Sam said, you then can't get into the messiness of their relationship. You have to really believe. You have to know that these two people are in love. Being in love is complicated and beautiful and messy.

IFC Center

Q: Sam, from the beginnings of the vampire traditions in literature and theatre, there’s often been a gay subtext. But for this adaptation, subtext becomes text.

SR: Yeah, I would say it’s not subtext, cause in Anne Rice it’s pretty damn clear. So it’s not subtext becomes text, it’s just text is now being text. And I think, fuckin’ yeah, it should be. If we’re going to do Anne Rice, we might as well do Anne Rice properly.

SR (about Lestat’s otherness): He’s come from some pretty intense experiences where he’s learned the history of vampires and things like that. And Lestat has come over from Europe to get away from the catechism of humanity and the way that’s kind of slapped on top of the vampires. That it’s all about self-flagellation in Christianity, Catholicism, that we’re all monsters and as a monster you have to serve Christ by being a servant of the Devil. You’re a monster: wake up and serve Christ. Which is what he’s discovered in his past. And Lestat thinks “That is garbage, and I’d much rather have a good time and I’d much rather celebrate myself.” Because he didn’t get a choice, he didn’t get to choose to become a vampire, he was forced into it. And I think we comment on it on the show, that all vampires are born out of trauma and that’s why people identify with them so well. Because they are traumatic, painful beings – often there’s sexual trauma in it as well. So he’s come to New Orleans to get out of that, to start his own new life, really. I think his bisexuality, his pansexuality has always been a part of that character when he was human, before he was a vampire, and I think that’s something he’s always embraced. It’s also something that’s quite heavily embraced in the vampire world as well, so it’s a nice space for that to work. And then once you become a very powerful being, the mess of humanity, all of these rules and things, they don’t matter.

io9

Q: Why are vampires associated with queerness?

SR: It’s being an outsider but also owning it, and owning a space. And they’re sexy and cool. They’re awesome.

JA: There’s definitely as well something about growing up marginalised, and sometimes (…) you feel like you relate to the monsters more when you grow up othered. You feel like “Oh, this is supposed to be scary but this creature’s being treated the same way that I’ve been treated sometimes”. There’s just something very welcoming and comforting about that and I think those ideas exist together.

SR: And they also live life by their own rules, define their own terms. It’s their own space, it’s not within any conformity. And actually, in our show, we do that a lot, like “Why are you so interested in this bullshit human existence?” I mean, there’s so much more than being confined to one thing or being told that you’re one thing by society.

Pride.com

Q: In this version, the queer subtext is out the door, it is fully textual. Why do you think that was important for this version?

SR: I mean, it’s funny when we talk about subtext because, like, I was a fan of the books previous to being a part of it, and I can see why, particularly in the first book, it could be considered subtext. But I feel like, especially from the second book or even the second half of the first book, it’s really text. And so I feel like it wouldn’t be Anne Rice’s IWTV or Anne Rice’s universe or Vampire Chronicles if that wasn’t properly dealt with and addressed. And as soon as you get through the fact that they’re in a romantic relationship and that they love each other very deeply, then you get to really look at what the hell this relationship was about, what are the nuance and the complexities of it, cause it’s not as straightforward.

ScreenRant at SDCC 2022

SR: I’m really excited for Anne Rice fans to actually get to see Louis and Lestat in a romantic relationship, and we’re not shying away from that in any way, shape or form at all, and don’t even bother… It’s straight up from the very beginning.

Q: Can’t say they’re besties?

SR: Never. No, it’s love at first sight.

JA: They actually kind of don’t like each other. They’re just very in love.

SR: Yeah, very in love. I mean, it’s love at first sight and Anne was very clear about that, for Lestat at least. Had to do a bit of wooing to get him there, but he gets there. So I’m excited for people to see that, because everyone deserves it.

TV Guide

SR: You can see these two monsters, these two men, kissing under Jesus Christ like they’re supposed to be and like they’re valued and important in the eyes of God, and they’re loved; or like they’re the antichrist and they’re here to burn that church down.

TV Insider

Q: Sam, Louis and Lestat’s romance is made explicitly clear in this version, and other than it being loyal to the book, why do you think that’s important for a modern series?

SR: I mean, it’s what exists in the world. Sometimes you hear people say that we’ve made the subtext text when actually we’ve just gone back to the text. It exists. So it’s important to honour that because that’s what was written and that’s why a lot of people love these stories. This love story exists and it’s a complicated love story and they’re complicated monsters who are in love. It would be a real shame if we didn’t honour that.