#This is quite tangential

[nathaniel-underwood-is-an-intj]

Looong rant about chapter 16 Ptolemy's Gate and how being passive can add to the cycle of ab*se.

oof so I just read when Nat goes to see Ms Lutyens and I can't help but be absolutely furious at her??

I know that's maybe a little bit unfair given she's frightened of him as a magician and is obviously angry when she finds out the department he's responsible for, but honestly it kinda brings up the problem with inadvertent bystanders to child ab*se in my mind.

And I'm definitely not blaming her solely for who Nat becomes but it makes me think of all those people in huge child ab*se cases who give interviews to press about all the things they noticed that were wrong but they just...never do anything?

She stood up for him against Lovelace, and when Nat thanked her- "I wanted to say that I know you were trying to save me, and-"

''Yes, and I'm sorry I didn't" Like girl be for real did you really think that alone would undo the years of indoctrination and abuse he's already suffered and prevent years worth of the same in the years to come? And she won't take responsibility - "My job is with children, not the adults they become" and again while it seems harsh to blame her for who Nat becomes, it's so much easier to pass the blame to people who are more directly responsible rather than acknowledging you also play a part.

I think it hurts so much more because it's her specifically- Nat goes to her in sheer desperation, it almost seems like a goodbye- he wants to thank her, tries to set her up in a job that will pay well and struggles to communicate he's trying to help. At this point he thinks Bartimaeus has been summoned by another magician and his birth name will be revealed. He's sure he's about to die and if not he'll be stood on trial and lose everything.

He goes to her because she represents the peaceful moments from his childhood when he got away from his master. He's scared and feeling lost and really it's call for help; but he doesn't ask for anything he just wants to make her feel proud of him- he's looking for that validation that he's been chasing since childhood.

And that shows he still does have that little bit of childhood innocence in him; he thinks she will be proud, thinks she'll see him as the same little boy in the garden gazing up at his teacher in adoration. He can't quite grasp why she's separated the man stood before her from that little boy. Because in that moment the child inside Nathaniel is seeking comfort AND THAT'S WHY it makes me so angry. She's completely given up on him when he's at his lowest ebb, because she doesn't want to be associated with the magician he's become. As if it isn't a massive step in the right direction that he saught her out in the first place- what other magican would bother? I wonder if that's why she reacted so strongly to seeing him again? Before that moment she could go about her life wondering if /pretending her attempt to protect him was enough, and now she realises it wasn't, of course it wasn't, and the image she had of Nathaniel's childhood innocence is completely ruined in her mind.

Or was her contempt for him even grater than Nat realised? She was naturally disgusted by the rhetoric he'd started to repeat from a young age, and gently tried to correct him although she was clearly angry- was she just resigned to the fact that there is little else she could do to change his future? I always thought- couldn't she have looked for him? The Underwood house fire was in the papers and they mentioned the apprentice was being searched for. Did she ever worry about him? Surely something must have been in the papers since- an announcement of new ministers, ANYTHING! Look at how much research Kitty did to find out about Bartimaeus and Ptolemy. I just don't think Rosanna Lutyens cared enough, realistically Nathaniel wasn't hard to find- but he was no longer her responsibility so she could turn a blind eye.

And sadly it's not just her- I know everyone loves Martha Underwood including Nat; but I think her submissiveness to her husband has a negative effect on Nathaniel as well. In AOS when Nat is locked in his room for ages after setting the mites loose, and is forbidden to have any contact with anyone and she won't talk with him. I know she's been told by Mr. Underwood she can't, but it still boils my blood. She's an adult and going along with ignoring Nathaniel because her husband told her to...I can't even begin to imagine the psychological damage that would do to a 10 year old child. (It could be argued she's frightened of the consequences if her husband finds out she's disobeyed him which is fair, he could always be watching through magic- but this is Arthur Underwood we're talking about. He's lazy, oblivious and weak I doubt he'd expend all that energy each day to check up on her.)

And It's even more painful that Nathaniel is often described as fiercely loyal to her and I think to Ms Lutyens as well- he doesn't expect to be treated well by Arthur Underwood but he loved Mrs Underwood and Ms Lutyens so much he started to view them through a rose-coloured lense. He never feels betrayed by either of them, even though they absolutely let him down, because the pedestal he's put them on is too high AND THAT ABSOLUTELY DESTROYS ME.

Would things with Nathaniel have been any different if Mrs Underwood hadn't died? I don't really think so. Do you think she'd see Nathaniel's temper at 14 years old and be reminded of Arthur Underwood? He was awful, absolutely awful to Nat and to her; but he was under so much stress in an underfunded departement, where pressure was being put on him by superiors to accomplish far more than they knew him to be capable of, and he took it out on the easiest target. Nathaniel ends up in exactly the same place and he starts to take it out on the only person around him- Bartimaeus. Would he snap at Mrs Underwood all the time if she were still there? Because he's learnt that behaviour from his father figure, and subconsciously learnt from his mother figure that she'll put up with it. He learnt from the woman he loved so deeply, that if you don't resist, people will walk all over you. So you have to maintain control even if it ends up hurting people you care about because no one will step in to stop the suffering no matter how much you love them, no matter how much you want them too.

It's easy to blame Arthur Underwood and Simon Lovelace and the magicians that actively hurt Nathaniel but I just feel like it's a bit disingenuous not to acknowledge the role of those doing passive harm. It's really mean to say it but even Bartimaeus plays a role- he knows Nat is clinging on to him because he can't 'bring himself to break this last connection' (to his childhood) but instead of bringing it up properly he 'taunts' Nathaniel- a boy who has been taunted for his weakness by his master for years. And even in AOS when Nathaniel tells Bartimaeus he was beaten for the mites incident Bart just kinda shrugs it off. Like I get it, why should Bartimaeus do anything, he's suffered way worse due to the system so he doesn't owe Nat anything right? But from Nat's point of view this is the first and only time he's mentioned to anyone what has happened to him and nothing changes. It's like another lesson learnt: telling someone about it doesn't help. Another nail in the coffin.

And I like all these characters, I feel bad for them. They're all victims of the system, I think the chapter with Ms Lutyens is just the straw that broke the camel's back for me. All of those little opportunities that are insignificant to the narrative over all; the commoners have it worse, Nathaniel is in a privileged position in society, exerting control over others. He's very morally grey, crossing over into objectively bad person territory but I love him with my whole heart and all of those insignificant moments would have been massive to him whether he was conscious of it or not.

And it goes all the way back to the beginning with Nat's parents giving him up to the magicians at 5 years old. I can't get the image of that little boy sat crying all alone in the government building. And he's not going somewhere safer, or somewhere he'll be happier and more loved. Giving your child over to a total stranger, oh he'll be totally fine won't he? He'll grow up to be a magician and far richer than you'll ever be, he'll be happy and comfortable and be grateful he got to grow up in luxury. There's no way a stranger you've never met, who the majority of society is terrified of would ever hurt a vulnerable little kid right? And if they do? Well you aren't responsible anymore, how could you know? What could you possibly do against the magician taking care of him?

Every little thing is another grain of sand tipping the scale. Did anyone else have to analyse An Inspector Calls in school? It feels like that to me- those BIG moments and all the little moments in between that add onto the pile.

And it goes on to cause problems in wider society too- ab*se is so normalised to the magicians, they casually ask Underwood if he hits Nathaniel like it's nothing. Because to them it is nothing, they've all grown up in the same circumstances and are repeating what they've learnt as children. I can't help but feel a little sorry for them all, especially when they aren't looked at through the black and white lense of 'argh these people are the evil arseholes look at how they treat everyone around them, screw these guys.' When we see those little glimpses of humanity like Simon's anxiety with the amulet; looking to his master and father figure Schyler for reassurance, and what's sad is that Nat is "reminded...of his own master's cold impatience" It's clear Simon looks up to his master, wants to make him proud and loves him. But it seems like Schyler has just trained Simon up so he can get power through him later on. I love the little hints of similarities between Simon and Nathaniel; the anxious mannerisms like fiddling with his hair that Nathaniel starts to develop, the way their master's talk to them. Even though they're actively working against each other in AOS and Simon is placed firmly in the baddies category and Nat in the goodies category at this point in the series; these things always hinted to me they had similar childhoods, how was Simon treated? When he had the imp beat Nat into unconsciousness, was it because he'd had the same punishment used against him? Did he know the magicians in the room would do nothing to stop him because no one stopped it from happening to him? Did he ever have a teacher stand up for him only for it to change nothing in the end because all the negative influences were so much stronger? Is the reason he loves Schyler like a dad because he's almost developed Stockholm syndrome? It looks like love because he's never known anything else.

And Arthur Underwood- who doesn't think his upbringing, and being taken away from his family ever did him any harm- doesn't realise the harm done is that he doesn't even know another way of raising Nathaniel, because he was never shown another way. His childhood may also have been filled with people who hurt him and the people that didn't do enough to intervene.

There are so many psychology studies that show children copy everything they see the adults in their life doing. Nathaniel copies the magicians behaviour towards spirits and on a subconscious level I think he copies all the submissive people in his life. How many times does he end up upset and frustrated with the fact he seems to be going nowhere and how many times does he just hope things will be different rather than taking postive action.

I dislike the actions the magicians end up taking but I also find them fascinating to analyse. I tend to prefer villains in media because they're usually slightly more complex individuals and I love to think about how they ended up that way. They can all be seen as victims of their circumstances in a way, despite all the power and privilege they have had terrible and traumatic childhoods, and if the commoners had no valuable worldy possessions at least they had a sense of togetherness; of love and understanding and selflessness. I wonder if the magicians hated them at least partly because of that. Because out in the sea of faces of the commoners talking about nothing important, doing nothing great and noble- could be the parents that abandoned them. And when your life is on the line daily because of working with spirits, and your colleagues want to stab you in the back, sometimes not being responsible for anything important looks good. But you can't leave your life as a magician, it would be too difficult; you have nowhere to go, no real friends, no one who really loves you. So it's better to stay and be a submissive bystander in your own life because it's so much easier.

Doing nothing is doing something- being passive can be just as harmful.

[chamerionwrites]

"An ancient English law made it a crime to witness a murder or discover a corpse and not raise a 'hue and cry.' But we live in a world of corpses, and only about some of them is there a hue and cry."

--Adam Hochschild, King Leopold's Ghost

[nerdinsandals]

Last year I made a few graphic shirts for Conway and the Dawn one seemed to be the favorite by far, so I turned it into an actual design!

Now you too can get Conway's favorite shirt and profess your love for your favorite Coordinator! Also available as prints, badges, stickers, and more~ 💙

Coincidentally, all designs will be ON SALE (30% off!) on Redbubble starting today, August 14, until August 20! So take it as a Conway Day discount. 👀

[Redbubble] [TeePublic]

[ofdarklands]

04 - Rain Bird

The Rain Bird was known by coastal Native Americans as the bringer of life, as it brought abundance to the coasts by watering their plants, thus giving food and water to the animals they hunted. It controls everything from the sky and is father of the sky children. The Rain Bird is one of the most common designs on Pueblo pottery made by, for example, the Hopi and Zuni.

There wasn't much info to be found for this one, so I mostly based myself on this zia pottery piece. Not that sure it actually represents a rainbird, but I was rather charmed by it anyway.

old phone photo version under the cut:

[lesbiankoby]

au where instead of outlook running into sabo first in high town its one of the maids of the household he grew up with in town center who bursts into tears because she thought he got murdered at five and he was always a pretty sweet kid and after confirming that he's being looked after mostly she's like Young Master Sabo You Need To Quit Wearing That Fucking Symbol Pardon My Language.

[the-one-who-lambs]

Me: I don't know if my ideas are worth sharing, I'm losing engagement from my readerbase these past few months so I must be doing something wrong, I don't think I've really accomplished anything as a writer.

Some person in my AO3 comments hyped as FUCK for the Risen Lamb/Fallen God rewrite:

[mihai-florescu]

Its the small joys in life (academic papers that describe the term "waifu" for a greater point theyre trying to make)

[ottiliere]

i am absolutely obsessed with your alpha dave because you just hit that itch for me when it comes to the idea of guardians being the worst version of what their kid version could become. i've always wondered that, if the alpha guardians had the same concept the beta guardians did, how would they be-- especially dave, cause the striders relationships with their guardians are always so like. volatile? just the idea of dave growing up with no one to give him proper attention or care or love, (1/2)

and instead of bettering himself he just turns to the constant attention and eyes of the public when he becomes famous, because he NEEDS attention, he needs people to want him and crave him and look up to him and shit. and alpha dave just going down this spiral of doing more and more wack shit to get the public's attention, doing hard drugs with nasty circles he shouldn't be getting himself in, cause he's constantly chasing after the euphoria of people "loving" him. thats all thank you for listening to me go on and on like a maniac. tldr alpha dave being the worst version of who dave can be is an idea i am absolutely obsessed with partially due to your interpretations of him. ur art and ideas are stellar about the striders (2/2)

oh my god I love you. yes this very much how i envision alpha dave to be and it really falls into my stringent devotion to the concept of "universal karma" i.e. where beta dirk strider was so aloof and in his own head alpha dave strider must exist as an extreme direct inverse of that. needy, demanding, overbearing. this man, much like beta dirk, was not built to be a guardian. I think he kind of sucks super bad and it's so awesome. i could go on and on and on about this but I already have another ask in my drafts about him that’s hit 1k words with no end in sight and who knows when that’ll be ready. thank you for your kind observations. picture me smiling at you right now.

[the-eldritch-it-gay]

Have you shared Majexatli's guardian? Based on how you described druid dreams, if Majexatli's guardian could've been an animal, would they have been, and if so, what kind?

I don't think I have shared Majexatli's guardian! To Majexatli he is annoyingly handsome which is also incredibly suspicious.

I definitely can imagine him taking animal form to be less Instantly Suspicious and Threatening. While a druidic dream would be surprising to Majexatli, given how little they consider themselves a proper druid and how infrequently they'd have experienced druidic dreams in their life, they might have not suspected anything at first and written it off as being related to them using their druidic powers more since the Nautiloid. (Prior to it, they would only ever really wildshape, and while they would stay in wildshape for long periods, the frequency of them using the ability to wildshape wasn't high).

If the Dream Visitor did take animal form, I imagine the form he would go with would be a rothé (of any variety, a brown rothé or a deep rothé), because I think it would be easy enough to probe their mind and find that rothés are one of Majexatli's favorite animals and the one they are awed by and respect the most. I believe brown rothé are native to North Faerûn but can be found thoughout much of Faerûn, and I imagine that during Majexatli's wanderings and their time with the druids they spent most of their life somewhere between the area north of the Chionthar river, and probably not much more north than Waterdeep. Which is a pretty large area (a direct line from Waterdeep to Baldurs Gate is a bit over 500 miles), but 20 years is plenty of time to get to wander far and wide, especially when you can wildshape.

That's a slight tangent, but this is to say that I imagine rothé could be found most places they roamed so perhaps it was almost a comforting constant. So if the Dream Visitor did use an animal form, it would have been a rothé, in that it would be something Majexatli would not be surprised to see in a druidic dream and would be a form they would feel the most at ease with.

[tsugarubecker]

The Duffer Brothers basically confirming my thoughts on El’s season 5 narrative arc being about Max, so true 🥰

[wilder-and-lighter]

Bi women and queer nb people can still identify as butch even if they are dating a cis man.

You know why?

1) Because it's THEIR identity.

2) You do not know if they have a polyamorous relationship or monogamous, AND it isn't your business.

3) Most people, myself included, don't stop being attracted to other people just because they're in a relationship. In fact, it's healthy to acknowledge that you're attracted to someone. Whether that's celebrities, quietly pointing out another hot person on the street, etc. As long as you're communicating with your partner and not crossing their boundaries or betraying their trust, that's actually a great thing to do in a relationship!

4) Also, on the matter of if other people consider someone butch, just remember that you are not everyone. Just because you don't think this person is "butch enough" does not mean everyone else will share your opinion. In fact, even if you and a few other people don't view this person as butch, that does not mean they cannot use the word butch.

In my circumstance, I am active in queer groups of my own age groups where in multiple instances I have been called "butch" by several people. The person who told me I shouldn't call myself butch is not present in those groups. And they don't have to be.

Most people in the community that I've interacted with about this agree that as long as you yourself identify as a butch, at least some other people identify you as a butch, and the groups of people you are attracted to include non-men, then congrats, you're butch!

[estradasphere]

👀

[the-physicality]

.

[mr-e-nigma]

Bruce Campbell Lobster Johnson…

[brown-little-robin]

get loved, nerd

hello.

commentary in the tags. it is slightly negative, so please feel free to simply scroll on if that's not for you!

[characteroulette]

A dumb, dumb joke I thought up of Apollo licking Luke both while wolf and outside of wolf hahaha.

(more wolf under cut)

Truly the most chaotic duo.

And a bonus two of Luke developing a crush maybe.