#and it's a shame not a lot of people got to see the original post...

[robinsnest2111]

reuploading the the spicy sketch post that got 🚩 with filters this time to see if it'll help?🤞

nothing too out there but still, please proceed at your own risk!

catboy mick and thicc thighs nikki <3

summer dress + 🚫🩲 mick inspired by a tumblr post <3

Princess nikki inspired by one of his insta stories 👉👈

[fierrochase-falafel]

My (very late) complicated take on Deadpool and Wolverine

So I watched Deadpool and Wolverine last week (I wrote this literally last year and just ended up...not posting it for some reason), as a somewhat casual Marvel fan who has somewhat followed the MCU, and I have some...hot takes? I think?

Firstly, a disclaimer, because I do not want to get flamed for this: I know plenty of people will disagree with me, and that's fine. You can think I'm overreacting or that I'm plain wrong on your own time, and if you really want me to reconsider any statements I make (although half of this is just feeling to be honest) then I am open to changing my mind based on other people's explanations. For context- I've not seen a Deadpool film before although I knew a bit about what he was like in the Spider-Man comics, and I was a fan of the X-Men '92 series (saw the first 2 seasons as we didn't have the DVDs for the rest) and all of X-Men evolution. I have read bits and pieces of a Wolverine encyclopedia, if that means anything, and I've looked into other reviews and done a bit of digging into other people''s responses to this film. Really I'm not here to comment on this as a Marvel fan but as a fan of media in general, and honestly just as a person with my own nitpicky reservations and who's a bit fed up with the MCU.

If I sound exceedingly harsh, please just click away. It's not worth getting into an argument over this, especially when I'm not a dedicated enough fan. Finally you can get to enjoy these films without having to listen to randos on the internet like me, and I can vent my petty frustrations seperately and we can all exist in peace.

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

Deadpool and Wolverine is hardly the worst film to come out of the MCU since Endgame, actually it really is one of the better ones if not the best one lately, but I really wanted to enjoy this film more than I did and I am trying to figure out why I didn't. Perhaps I am not the intended audience, or I am not familiar enough with Deadpool, and those are all fair points. I'm going to come at it from an angle that goes more into it though because this isn't *really* about Deadpool, this is about the MCU. That being said, let's get into it.

So...there is a point at which you realise something about the MCU as a whole if you hadn't before, and that is that it is a corporation. It's been hard not to realise that recently, with the volume of stuff it has been churning out no matter how subpar. While Deadpool and Wolverine is far more interesting than, say, Love and Thunder, I couldn't shake the feeling that despite this actually being more than a soulless mishmash, there's an underlying air I don't think I can unsee in the MCU that taints everything for me, and it's that there is nothing new to really say. There is no real diversity of opinion or line of thought- there are good guys who protect the world as it is, and bad guys who want to change it. For instance:

To me, an outsider of sorts, the TVA (basically functioning as the Time Police, although this is contentious) are shown to have a ridiculous amount of power that some guy Paradox can just build a time ripper that can end any timeline?? There are layers to this, but the bottom line is, no member of the TVA should be able to procure something like that and use it just because they feel like it, and quite frankly the unchecked power of the TVA as an organisation is unsettling and frightening. Then, Deadpool tries to fight this part of the TVA to stop them from killing his timeline, but then the real villain Cassandra Nova enters the fray with the intention to destroy every timeline because...she wants ominpotence? I don't know, these villain motivations aren't getting any stronger. And then Deadpool and Wolverine stop her, and Paradox gets arrested, and wow what a great ending! Except what feels missing...the lack of questioning or distrust surrounding the authority the TVA has, which was the root cause of this mess in the first place. But Marvel will never morally or philosophically question the extent of authority a system has over it's people or all of humanity, and will never really explore an avenue of changing what is flawed about the system. The problem, to them, isn't the power, but whether it's held by 'good' people. Paradox being arrested solves the conflict with the TVA, because his intentions were destructive and aimed to use his power for destructive purposes, but it wouldn't have mattered if he were a good guy now, would it?

This is the philosophy that pervades all of the MCU- power belongs with the good guys who protect the world from the bad guys. The issue is never the power itself, or the system that allows for such blatant misuses of it, because to question established systems (or actually address any of the pitfalls of American capitalism) doesn't reflect their needs as a corporation worth lots of money. When this was previously brought up in the form of the Sokovia accords (although "putting the powerful people under strict government regulations" doesn't strike me as utopic in any way either), correct me if I'm wrong but it had barely any consequences to future films. Infinity war happened, more fights where there is no human intervention whatsoever, and then the accords are just repealed off-screen. And this goes on to feel like a very unsustainable world, one where there's not much joy to be derived, as there is never really hope for changing the powers and systems that control our lives. The TVA can shred your timeline in an instant, supernatural fights can wipe out your cities at any moment, but nobody cares about the damage or will question it- your lives are in the hands of heroes who are 'good' and make funny quips I guess so you know you can trust them. Wolverine at the end of this film is told by a TVA member that his timeline cannot be restored as what happened made him the man he is now, and he's just seemingly fine with that and they go eat shawarma. A whole universe of deaths that he's been guilty about the whole film, that he's wanted to get back, but I don't feel like we get a proper resolution to his grief at all and they just become collateral damage to the plot in the end even after being shown how much he loved them. Everyone says thank you to the Time Police, trusting they know what's best and will do the right thing, and moves on as if this wasn't an unsettling encounter at all.

Now I know I might've gotten details about the TVA wrong, but I couldn't sit through all of Loki, okay? I was lost the minute we got to girl-Loki being symbolic of Loki's gender fluidity and also they kissed? Speaking of that though...another thing I found disappointing with Deadpool and Wolverine was the queerness aspect. Deadpool is, in the comics atleast, pansexual, and I know Ryan Reynolds said he was into exploring that, and trust me this film is filled with queer things being said. HOWEVER. There is a difference in the way straight romance and queer romance is portrayed in the film; that was clear to me when I left the cinema. There are plenty of jokes involving Deadpool making very homoerotic comments towards Wolverine, or talk of pegging the TVA officers, or even shouting out "the gays" in a speech, but it is not given anywhere NEAR the same weight as his attraction/love for Vanessa. And this wouldn't necessarily be an issue (after all, sexual attraction doesn't have to be serious) if it weren't that everything he said when going off on a tangent were gay, but everything he did seriously was straight. There was something distinctly noticeable about it, and honestly it felt like being queerbaited despite the fact I never even expected to hear about pegging in this film. To me, I care about creators committing to showing a main character man experiencing attraction to another man with the same weight and value given to it, verbally and non-verbally, jokingly and unironically, as you would to him experiencing attraction to a woman. Anyone could watch this and take all of these to be ironic gay jokes even if they aren't, and I don't think this counts as committed representation of a minority. Not that I was looking for it in this film, but to be shown the potential of being represented in some manner onscreen and then realising it wouldn't really be taken as seriously as any straight characters did quite hurt. Maybe that's just how Deadpool is, maybe I should never have wanted anything more substantial... The internet went crazy shipping Deadpool and Wolverine despite them never being taken for a serious potential couple, and I think that's what they wanted.

The thing is, I understand many aspects of why people liked this film, tying itself up. Wade Wilson wanted to matter, and by hyping himself up as Marvel Jesus and bringing back so many forgotten characters to the screen, he mattered by lifting them up and showing that they mattered too. Many of the jokes were funny, like the meta ones about Marvel's downfall and honestly I laughed at the pegging one too and some others (although I will say: Marvel making fun of how bad Marvel is lately does have a limit given you guys caused this downfall in the first place). And, to be fair, I'm sure the TVA thing has some explanations in Loki or upcoming plot points that might change everything compared to what I know. This movie was, in many ways, very fun. The fact that it had so much going for it is half of what left me feeling so dissatisfied, because despite epitomising many of the things Marvel are positively known for, I didn't really care or feel anything at the end at all. Bringing back various forgotten characters for a last hurrah is great and all but when it's all for a not very nuanced villain and when none of the heroes see anything wrong with the TVA and all of that...I don't know, it feels bleak. Watching these films I don't feel inspired or hopeful, I only feel bleak and apathetic, and I know I can just go watch other films (which is what I've been doing) but I don't understand why we all go back to the cinemas to watch the same nail being hammered into the ground with the next Marvel movie. Even when you have reason to expect difference, the underlying nature of it is the same. The only significant thing I see happening is even more characters being ushered into the already complicated Multiverse, often for cameos and jokes reliant on nostalgia and endless referential humour. Oh, and Marvel Studios getting more of a monopoly over superhero stories, that too.

The older X-men TV shows I watched and, even more recently, the Spiderverse films felt like they had so much more depth or commentary to them, so I know superhero media isn't doomed to be this way, not now or ever, so I hope we can take this as a sign to ask for more from our media in terms of storylines, queer characters, and messaging. Something new, something inspiring, and something that feels like it's made not just because it was a smart business decision. A lot of these things I recommend finding from smaller creators and lesser-known artists, but I feel as though we should start to look for this from Marvel too. I get I'm not a Marvel genius or an X-men genius, or even a Deadpool genius, so it isn't really my place, but I still think it's worth asking for more because if their profit lies with the realisations of our passion and with revolution, then that's where the company will go. As a reviewer, this is how I feel.

[conflictofthemind]

Take Me To Church-Gate

A few weeks back, I received a tip that Noah and Finn came into Atlanta for a couple of days to rehearse a scene alone together that never ended up being filmed. This was around the time of the convention that Finn ended up missing in early June (and we initially theorized was for the playground scenes).

I since received confirmation of not only this, but that the rehearsal in question was for a scene at the UD church set. The filming never went through because Noah got an eye infection / sty, so the shoot was rescheduled for early August. If you've seen me mentioning looking forward to August, this is what that was about.

The Eye Infection:

Let me link this post to begin with, barring the 'James' stuff who has proven to be false. I heard about the eye infection and my alarm bells rang immediately - I have a friend myself who wears contacts occasionally and whenever they get sties, they're always caused by the contacts. When has Noah worn contacts before in the show? When Will is being possessed by the mindflayer in Season 2.

The church is an interesting location, because it most definitely has to do with Henry as well. When the original countdown for TFS was being posted, there were images of a church - a location that may have been changed during development. The characters most likely go there as part of the continuing Henry investigation.

And we know Henry was exorcised at some point, but it failed. The sign going into the church is also a likely clue to this, referencing Mark 9:29 - a verse about a failed exorcism.

Conclusion for this part: Will very likely becomes possessed again while in this church. My source tells me they usually only do big rehearsals like this for scenes involving action, too.

My opinion is that Will was never fully exorcised either. I mean, he still has a clear connection to the mindflayer with all the tingles on his neck and the possible literal psychic connection he has to Vecna as well.

It's Byler, Too:

I suspect that Jamie has some part in the scene as well (given they scheduled it during his latest block on set), but the focus is on Will and Mike - being the only two other main characters on set at the time, and the only two rehearsing.

But going back to the church thing.... I wonder what kind of symbolism is created by bringing two gay characters who both have a lot of internalized shame into a location that is honestly the source of said shame? It's honestly not even symbolism. It might just be referenced in plain text. Looking back at that church sign:

"This kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer"

"This kind" really evokes the dehumanising language used by homophobes to refer to gay people. And the driven out by prayer part, well that really evokes conversion 'therapy' practices of praying the gay away. So what if this is where Will and Mike finally admit their love for each other, and kiss. And what if that is actually what's able to drive the 'demon' away - gay love.

Especially during the Satanic Panic arc we are sure to see come full circle with the reckoning of the Hellfire Club in Season 5.

An arc which Mike is surely at the centre of as well, being not only a Hellfire Member in the past, but being family to the new disappeared child in town.

And it's not like Mike's love is what's been shown to us time and time again as the way to break Will out of his mindflayer trance. Oh, wait.

Consider it incredibly fanfic-y, but it's on the table now. An action scene at the church involving Byler where Noah is wearing contacts - Will becoming possessed just like Henry again and being made to fight Mike as not only part of the plan to get all of the Wheelers, but also as something that would break Will's spirit permanently. They're all alone with nobody to help save Mike. But the plan is thwarted through the power of love, and in a place that represents a lot of shame for gay men (especially in the 80s) - they finally come together. And it is love that frees Will from his trance. Whether through a confession or true love's kiss. It would be so dramatic and atmospheric.

Additional evidence:

Jopper's Season 4 reunion and kiss inside the Russian church, of which this would be a parallel.

The whole idea of "we kissed, as though nothing could fall. And the shame was on the other side" from David Bowie's Heroes - the shame being in the actual church from the rightside up, but they're alone together on the other side / in the Upside Down.

It is also very likely that this scene is from Episode 5 or 6. I've asked and nobody seems to know which episode it is from, but following the logic of Episode 4 being when the characters enter in groups into the Upside Down, and here Byler are all alone, it is definitely after some time has passed and groups have split further. They're definitely not having any kind of confession in the first half of the season, so this timing sounds positive.

Multiple rehearsals. Noah contacting his acting coach recently for advice. Them even having to cancel an entire shoot because of a sty indicates close-up shots for sure.

Anyway. I'd really love to see people's thoughts on this. I feel like there's even more I could get into in follow-up posts, especially if other people chime in with their thoughts. I have been buzzing about this scene for weeks now. I want to start another gate for old time's sake, so please use #churchgate if you want to make your own posts about this!

[cultkinkcoven]

Let's say, if a person is really interested in researching Lucifer, what would be a perfect way to start? What topics to research, in which Gods to look into?

Also, let's say I am the person. I got really interested in Lucifer and His domains, but I don't feel connection with Him himself. I am really into understanding Him, though, in all His faces, angelic, infernal, greek, roman and any other possible way (also, because He is often connected to queer people and coming from conservative country and coming as queer person from there, I look for something to unlearn shame and being more comfortable with myself and others, I was hoping to find it in Him and/or Dionysos-Bacchus). I always got the feeling that to understand Him fully you need to had some kind of connection to Christianity, because I noticed that most of people turn to Him as for better option rather than christian God. I never had experience with Christianity, so I never felt any need to reject it to find something better. Thank you for your answer, you are great person and it feels awesome to read your blog.

Also, art? Holy shit that ones of the most beautiful things I saw. Keep it up. Your colours are pretty and pleasant to look at, anatomy is great and, as far as I can tell, you draw on phone/sensory tablet, not computer/laptop, and amount work you put in this is fascinating. You are great.

English is my second language, forgive any mistakes that were here.

I could literally yap about this all day but I'm going to try to stay pretty locked in and concise with this.

For the sake of simplicity and your own headache, I encourage you to think of Luciferian archetypes as masks that a deity may or may not be using based on context. I say this because 1. there are many different Lucifer, whether or not they are literally the exact same "guy" is unknowable, and you will give yourself a headache trying to concretely answer that question either way; and 2. because Lucifer approaches everyone differently. The Lucifer you interact with will depend highly on your beliefs, disciplines, and desires.

There are multiple ways wee can go about this, there is no perfect way. I would first employ you to ask yourself if:

You are looking to interact with a Lucifer that is aligned with Satan

You are looking to interact with a Lucifer that is pre or post biblical

The aspect of the Lucifer you're looking to interact with- Infernal, angelic, primordial, Venusian, phosphoric etc.

I'll break these down in order.

Is your Lucifer Satan? If yes, you're probably a theistic satanist and I would imagine that your Lucifer is largely based on the Christian archetype of Lucifer. Is this incorrect? Absolutely not, Lucifer most certainly does have a real archetype as the fallen angel described in Christianity. If you approach him with this understanding, you likely will get a response.

You will likely hear that Lucifer isn't actually the Christian devil, that his inclusion in the bible is a translational error. That is technically speaking, correct. The original intention of the biblical text was not in reference to an angel but rather the Babylonian king. HOWEVER,

Lucifer's mythos as a fallen angel, a ruler of hell, an adversary, as it had later gone on to largely influence Christianity is still very much valid in my opinion, and I very much believe that that Lucifer is alive.

If this is the Lucifer you're interested in, I'd recommend researching Lucifer Ha Satan, Lucifer the Dark Initiator, Lucifer the Adversary, Ruler of Thaumiel (if you're into the qliphoth), The anti-God, the Liberator (particularly from religious shackles.) This is in the realm of traditional satanism and inversion of religious authority and rituals. You'll see a lot of these rituals written backwards, end with "Nema" instead of "Amen". I myself am not a Satanist nor do I really worship Lucifer as the devil so I don't have that many book recs, but the works of Michael Ford explores the syncretism of Luciferian and Satanic ideology. I would also highly recommend "Lucifer A Devotional" by Kindra Ravenmoon, one of my favorite books I've ever bought even as a Luciferian. For mythos I highly highly highly cannot highly enough recommend reading "Paradise Lost" by John Milton.

If your Lucifer is not Satan, then move on to the next question, is your Lucifer pre or post biblical?

I would not say that one necessarily has to have any connection to Christianity to engage with Lucifer and Luciferianism. Lucifer’s inclusion in the Bible does not mean that the Bible is the first place we’ve ever seen the Lucifer archetype, you probably already know this.

Our most ancient understanding of a Lucifer archetype and energy is based on the Sumerian Inanna and Akkadian Ishtar. Inanna is the very first place we see a myth about the morning star rising to heaven and then falling to the underworld. Inanna was specifically a deity associated with transformation, resurrection, war, and rebellion hundreds of years before the bible or Abrahamic religion was conceived of. 

Attar (ʿAthtar) – Canaanite and South Arabian deity associated with the morning star. He was a warrior god of storms and fertility, often linked to both Baal (Hadad) and Ishtar/Inanna, and is considered an early influence on later depictions of the fallen Morning Star, Lucifer in Judeo-Christian tradition. Attar was the male counterpart of Astarte (Ishtar), the goddess of love, war, and Venus. He was often depicted as a failed usurper of the high god’s throne, much like the later Christian legend of Lucifer’s fall.

One of the most significant myths about Attar describes him attempting to take the throne of Baal after Baal’s death. Attar tries to rule from Mount Zaphon, the cosmic mountain of the gods. However, he is too weak to hold the throne. He is forced to descend and instead rules over the underworld and lower realms. This mirrors the later Biblical story of Lucifer, who:

Tries to exalt himself above God (Isaiah 14:12-15). Is cast down from heaven when he fails. The Isaiah 14 passage ("How you have fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of the Dawn!") likely draws on the older Attar myth and blends it with Canaanite theology to critique the king of Babylon. Interpretations argue on whether Attar chose to leave, or was too inadequate to lead. Attar’s story predates and likely influenced later depictions of Lucifer:

Both are Morning Star figures who attempt to ascend but are cast down. Both are associated with kingship, rebellion, and failure. Both end up ruling lower realms instead of heaven.

Attar, as a Venusian deity, fits into the larger Near Eastern tradition of the Morning Star as an unstable, liminal figure—sometimes divine, sometimes fallen, always in flux. This ambiguity and transformation later shaped the mythos of Lucifer, who inherited Attar’s Venusian identity, failed kingship, and descent. One very important aspect of Attar and Ishtar’s descent is the concept of survival after exile. Both have a catastrophic fall from grace only to emerge stronger than before- a spiritual resurrection. To learn more about this aspect of Lucifer you're going to want to explore Canaanite mythology.

In Greek mythology, Phosphorus (or Eosphoros, "Dawn-Bringer") was the personification of the Morning Star (Venus). His counterpart, Hesperus (Ἕσπερος, "Evening Star"), represented the same celestial body when it appeared at dusk. The cult of Phosphorus was small and fringe, both Eosphoros and Hesperus are very seldom mentioned in any surviving Greek texts.

Hesperus (Ἕσπερος) however is said to be the father of the Hesperides. The Hesperides, the daughters of Hesperus were nymphs who tended the golden apples of immortality in a garden at the western edge of the world- the direct opposite direction of Lucifer’s East. The golden apples guarded by the Hesperides mirror the Tree of Knowledge, with both representing divine wisdom that is forbidden yet desirable. The fruit was a gift from Gaia to Hera. The Hesperides were also guarded themselves by a 100 headed a serpent-like dragon named Ladon, who coiled around the tree, preventing mortals from stealing its golden fruit. In Christian mythology, the Garden of Eden also features a serpent entwined in a tree, tempting humanity with knowledge and self-awareness.

Phosphorus is highly syncretized with the Roman Lucifer, of course, and is distinctly different from a Satan archetype as the god of light bringing and enlightenment in a more literal way. Not demon nor angel, but a God himself, of transformation and resurrection. A sprit of the element of Air. The Gnostics interpret this idea in an interesting way, I highly recommend researching Gnostic Luciferianism for a blend between Christian ideas and older pagan concepts.

Prometheus is also a deeply Luciferian figure in Greek mythology.

To learn about the cult of Phosphorus and Luciferianism as it pertains to him in this aspect, I'd recommend reading "Lucifer Princeps" by Peter Grey, "The Order of Phosphorus" by Michael W. Ford, and the many works of the Temple of the Ascending Flame, and "Awakening Lucifer" by Asenath Mason & Bill Duvendack,

3. Aspect

I think this is the most important thing to consider. The aspect of Lucifer you invoke at any given time may change. You may wish to invoke a pre fall Helel/ Lucifer to bring pure heavenly light, in which case you would be referencing his angelic aspect, using his angelic enn: "Agios Es Lucifer Divum Et Vorsipelle"

If we want Lucifer the red dragon, the draconian fire, the phoenix, the serpent, the tempter, we may use his infernal enn: "Renich Tasa Uberaca Biasa Icar Lucifer

A more primordial or venusian Lucifer may blend into more Aphrodisian methods and manifestations.

Tldr. I recommend just pinpointing which face you're interested in and moving outwards from there. The ones that work work and the ones that don't don't.

Also THANK YOU SM aw omg I'm so happy you guys like my art :))

[adventures-in-mangaland]

More Dead Boy Detectives Fic Recs

Since my last fic rec post got a great response and I've read some excellent fic in the meantime, here is a new list with more recs!

The Case of Richard Rowland by RB (BlueflowersandWings)

Charles' dad hires the Dead Boy Detectives to solve his murder. It's. Traumatic. The writing and characterisation are excellent and heartbreaking and the case is intriguing. I have many theories! Cw for domestic abuse, child abuse and homophobia.

we all have a hunger (series) by Anonymous

I couldn't choose! They're both so good! The first is from Crystal's PoV as she tries to figure out what happened to Niko. It also features some wonderful Crystal & Edwin bonding, an absolutely gut-wrenching speech from the latter and The Sandman cameos. The second in the series is an Edwin-centric (so angsty!) case fic featuring Accidental Child Acquisition, greek gods, the Cat King and a happy ending. Superlative writing in both.

Terrible, Horrible, No Good and Very Bad by hibye

Feelings realisation as Charles pines for Edwin and tries not to show it because he has to be sure he's in love. Terrific, very funny writing and Charles is a precious himbo. Excellent payoff too.

Oh, Lonely Bones, Have You Forgotten? by DontOffendTheBees

Charles and Edwin investigate a mystery at St Hilarion's and discover a gut-wrenching secret. Compelling and brilliantly written.

I'll let you go if you kiss me goodbye by shadowquill17

Idiots in Love meets Friends with Benefits and Misunderstandings. Edwin breaking his own heart for no reason is very accurate and Charles gets a cool queer mentor.

the spooky thing about penis ouija by skadii

College AU! Everyone's alive and Charles and Edwin have been besties since middle school. This is another Oblivious!Charles fic; he's like a well-meaning golden retriever trampling Monty in his clueless wake. Also, the gang perform a seance and Edwin is a ghost-sceptic, which is hilarious.

after the insects have laid their claim by lolotr

Charles finds out that Edwin's body was never found and will not let that stand. Has a kind of gothic romanticism I really love and a nice in-universe explanation for the "Charles and Edwin can only feel each other" trope.

The author has written lots of other great fic, including a very cute librarian!Edwin and single dad!Charles human AU with bonus Crystal/Niko.

A Form of Genius by Neous (Greyality)

Charles shows off for Edwin. Crystal Suffers. Idk, it's just cute.

the taste in your mouth by greenaerie

When Esther hurts Charles, Edwin decides to take up the Cat King on his original offer. Interesting exploration of dubious consent, shame and guilt. The author is fairly sympathetic to the Cat King, while also exploring Edwin's complicated feelings, including the impact of his upbringing, general repression and, yes, coercion on his first time. It's not exactly explicit, but take care if those are tough themes for you!

The Manuscript of Real People by paraph

Slow burn Boarding School AU where they're both alive and it's also the 70s. And they were roommates! I have been longing for a fic like this. All the jock/nerd romance tropes, complicated by discussions of bullying and Charles' (perceived) proximity to Edwin's bullies. Edwin is an orphaned scholarship student, so it's also a kind of role reversal and touches on themes of class and poverty. Minor cw for sexual harassment as the Cat King/Thomas is also there (sorry catwin fans).

When We Walk Together We Tend to Walk Alone by UneducatedAuthor

Charles meets Death and gets to say goodbye to his mum. A sweet concept and it's nice to see Death of the Endless getting some love!

Marriage is a Payne by Ace_of_Turtles

Arranged Marriage and Omegaverse AU featuring the boys agreeing to get married to spite/escape their awful parents. Not explicit and fairly light on the a/b/o details, in case that's a squick for anyone.

job officially jobbed by vernesatlas

Charles decides the answer to the handjob question requires a practical demonstration. Very funny and well written and the title is excellent. All the kudos.

Try, Try Again by Asidian

Alterative ending to episode four. After the Night Nurse, Edwin makes a second attempt to comfort Charles. Heartwarming and sad.

The Risk and Rewards of Communication by Opossum_Subatomic

Another alternative ending to episode four featuring Edwin coming clean about the Cat King. So well written. I feel like this is going to be a fandom classic.

take your chances (win or lose her) by ObsessedWithFandom

Charles decides to check in on his mum. Some very sweet established relationship fluff followed by discussions of domestic abuse and family feels. The ending opened up some amazing possibilities for future fics! Highly recommended.

The same author has also written the ghost of the past that you live in, which is an excellent in-depth exploration of Charles' bisexual awakening and trauma-related repression.

Anyway, I'm going to try to make this a regular thing, so please send me more recs!

[carlyraejepsans]

UTY!Flowey, "lore" and how to criticize a fan prequel without being an insufferable pedantic, a guide by Biscia.

(for my muskless fellows, here's a transcript of my thread on Undertale Yellow that I posted on Twitter. enjoy!)

There's this really frustrating attitude in fan spaces i like to call "lorepilling" where people are substantially more concerned with encyclopedic knowledge of details & minutiae (so called "lore") in place of full-text thematic/narrative analysis as if the two are mutually interchangeable.

It's especially common in large franchises and story heavy videogames, and it's like... Are You Treating This Piece Of Art Like A Trivia Battle Or Are You Treating It Like A Story

This is coming from a person who is also deeply autistic about UTDR trivia btw, I'm just saying that when it comes to transformative *stories*, depending on the impact it has on character, themes, and narrative structure... lore is expendable.

Ultimately this is why most of the UTY criticism i see (on twitter specifically) falls flat. What does it matter if "lore" means Flowey couldn't chronologically be there when the justice human fell, as long as the game narratively justified his presence in the story in a compelling way?

The real criticism, in the end, is that it didn't.

He's a plot central, main cast character from the canon returning in a cast of mostly OCs and what does he have to show for it? An admittedly sick boss battle in 1/3 endings, sure but... not much else. He has no significant "presence" in the story, no tie, interaction, or even just... an opinion on the rest of the cast. Which is a huge miss when Flowey's meta role is to be Thee completionist player mirror. He's the OG lorepilled UT fan! He's an opinionated little shit!

This isn't to say that UTY *didn't* engage w/ his metanarrative. When me and @a-town-called-hometown first started playing the game (we were both skeptical of Flowey's inclusion), he immediately said "It would be really cool if they made it so this has been going on for a while and Clover has no idea". Which is precisely what the game did in the neutral ending, and what I will openly say was the most well written & well executed part of this game's story...

...a part we almost didn't see, because the pacifist ending disappointed us so much we lost all will to replay.

To put it in the words of my friend Mel @clowwwnbytes, there's a deafening hollowness to UTY Flowey's motivations & core principles where his guilt towards Chara—and resulting black and white thinking—should be. You're telling me Mr Kill-or-be-killed, "sacrificing yourself to do the right thing is stupid", would stand there after 1000s of failed attempts to make Clover survive, look on as they make the same mistake Asriel he did, and fondly call them friend? Cue the guitar, roll the credits?

He would lose it. Oh my god he would lose his goddamn mind, he would throw the nastiest temper tantrum in the world. Are you serious? How dare you. How DARE you. All this effort, all my patience, and you just let yourself DIE for a few worthless idiots? I should've let you ROT!

*clears throat* sorry got a bit too into character. as i was saying.

I can understand a UT prequel wanting to distance itself from the canon Chara storyline in order to form its own identity, but then turning around and choosing Insane About Chara The Character™ for a sidekick is... far from optimal. In the end, Flowey comes across as underutilized and inconsistent, with a whole lot of wasted potential.

This is an issue I have with UTY's character writing (original AND returning) and story structure as a whole. Lots of inconsistent character arcs, tonal dissonance, overuse of situational sadness... it's an amateurish work, after all, and you can feel it. There's no shame in that.

(Though, there ARE some issues that i take more seriously with its writing, especially when it comes to its two main female characters—Ceroba's lack of narrative agency and depth borders on misogynistic writing imo. But that's a topic for another day)

Over all, UTY was an incredible piece of collaborative transformative work, with gorgeous art and a genuinely incredible OST, which... would have benefited from more experienced writers. But hey, you can only ever learn by trying!

For all it could've been a better story, it certainly did not fail to entertain: both when my friend was playing it, and after in our many discussions of its writing, its faults and how it could've been improved (royal scientist!ceroba character fix you will always be famous. to ME!)

I'm sure this project served as an incredible source of experience for the developers: as individual creators AND as a team. I look forward to their future projects!

but also if i have to see another person say UTY is better than Undertale i might turn into The Jonker.

end of the essay! really couldn't stand any of the pedantic ""criticism"" I'd seen of this fangame so far, so i had to say my piece as someone more versed in analysis. happy to elaborate on anything in the replies or in my inbox!

[inawickedlittletown]

No Queerbaiting Here

A long time ago…I’m talking May of 2021, I wrote a meta post about queerbaiting. Essentially an essay. I wrote it right before the S4 finale of 9-1-1 aired because I was frustrated by Buddie fans calling Queerbait entirely like the boy that cried wolf. I still stand by it. Sort of. 

Now, even back then I was pretty clear about how 50/50 I was on Buddie ever going canon. (Maybe not in that post but certainly elsewhere) But, I shipped Buddie then and wrote a lot of fic and meta and participated in fandom. I never said it couldn’t happen…I just would never be bothered if it didn’t.

Where we stand now: It’s not going to happen. 

And where I stand now: fully immersed in Bucktommy. And what’s more, I am more than perfectly happy about Buck and Tommy staying together and going the long-run. Although I can still look at Buddie and think it’s a cute ship, I just don’t want it in canon. I would not be satisfied if the show went that way. But what’s more if Buck and Tommy don’t work out, that would be disappointing, but I’d be okay as long as they got to be happy. There is, after all, always fanfiction. 

So, I wanted to revisit this concept a bit now that Buck has been confirmed as Bisexual and now that he is in a relationship with a man. Not Eddie. Tommy. And somehow, some Buddie fans are still crying queerbait because their ship is not canon. That’s not how it works. Also…shipping works outside of canon, that’s the whole point of shipping. 

To reiterate from my original post on queerbaiting, here’s the definition from wikipedia:

“Queerbaiting is a marketing technique for fiction and entertainment in which creators hint at, but then do not actually depict, same-sex romance or other LGBTQ representation. They do so to attract a queer or straight ally audience with the suggestion of relationships or characters that appeal to them, while at the same time attempting to avoid alienating other consumers.” 

Here’s where I stand: Buddie was abandoned a long time ago. If it was ever a real possibility, we won’t ever know. What we do know is that Oliver was aware that at one point he had given them the go-ahead to make Buck Bi. Whether this was by putting Buck and Eddie together or having Buck realize this another way, we just don’t know that. We don’t have that information and nor will it probably ever be provided to us. Narratively, I know that a lot of fans figured the timing of it fit with S4 and that particular finale but we really just don’t know despite what happened in the finale.

I found that interesting looking back at my own post from back then and the discussion that followed where some fans felt that the way the finale went would determine if Buddie would be another queerbait ship. (I think most people agreed after the will scene that it wasn’t queerbait because it did leave a kernel of hope that Buddie might still happen). 

And yeah, I guess you could argue that the network deciding not to go the route of a queer storyline points to missed opportunity. That doesn’t then mean that any queerbaiting occurred or that any fans are owed anything just because something that was set up or that the writers were writing towards was then scrapped by the network. Is it a shame that it didn’t happen in whatever way they wanted to play it out, sure, but only because Buck would have been confirmed queer earlier. In the same vein isn’t it nice that we have a confirmed Bisexual Buck now? That the show managed to bring it back to that.

A Buck that is happy and free and that has realized something so monumental about himself? Isn’t it nice that all the queer coding that Buck as a character has received since the start of the show is actually finally not just queer coding but full on character development? That we can look back at the show and see all the things Buck did around other men for exactly what they were. 

When Tommy first returned to 9-1-1 in S7, I think a lot of us were excited by the spoilers about Buck and Tommy because of Bi Buck, but also because this was the thing that could lead to Buddie. 

And then…then Tommy was actually on my screen and I doubted it. I actually thought maybe the spoilers were wrong and this was about Eddie and Tommy? That episode flipped things in such an expertly way that by the time Tommy and Buck were sharing a kiss for the first time I was right there with Buck. On a second watch, it is all there. Buck was never jealous because his friend was ignoring him. He was jealous because his best friend had the attention of the guy whose attention he wanted for himself. The writing on that was perfect and no amount of twisting it can change what happened on screen. 

Buck was not jealous because of Eddie. Tommy was never interested in more than friendship with Eddie. And Buck and Tommy have nothing to do with Buddie. Tommy is not a stepping stone, a way for Buck to be ready to then embark on a relationship with Eddie. That’s both disrespectful to Tommy and Buck, but just not what the story being told on the show is doing. 

The storyline is monumental. Having a big strong guy, a firefighter, figure out his sexuality in his thirties is such good storytelling and add to that Tommy. Someone that we already know, who already works as a first responder, and who can show up and wow Buck in such a way that he realizes something about himself? This is what I’ve always wanted. Because guess what, Buck never questioned his sexuality before this. Not when he met Eddie and not when he met anyone else, not until Tommy. 

Going into the new season we know a few things and one of those is that Buck and Tommy are thriving. The media coverage talks about them as a solid couple, it talks about Buck having someone to turn to and complain to. It talks about how they are still in the getting to know each other phase and I love that for them. I love how they are being treated and described and I can’t wait to see what plays out for them and how much of the build up of their relationship we may get to actually see. 

Do you know what the media and the show never talked about outwardly like this? Buddie. Whenever it came up it was always brushed aside in a way that was respectful to fans and what they saw, but without ever confirming or hinting that the show would ever go there. They never queerbaited anyone with Buddie, what they have done is say “yeah…we know what you see” and then turned around and given us a Buck and Eddie friendship and Buck kissing Tommy, going on a date with Tommy, and thriving with Tommy. 

So, no queerbaiting here on the show where half of the major canon pairings are queer. It’s actually more like some fans baiting other fans with theories and headcanons that just don’t fit.

[burningcheese-merchant]

Got any theories, speculations, wishful thinking on how White Lily and Silent Salt’s Beast Yeast Episode could go?

It's hard to say. We know literally nothing about Silent Salt except his name and vice. I have ideas, but... are they really ideas? Or just fanciful daydreams? Wishful thinking is all I can really operate on right now, unfortunately.

Above absolutely all else, I want Silent Salt to be mute. I don't want to hear a single fucking sound from that man. Many people already do headcanon him as mute from what I've seen, and I'm 100% in that boat, as well. A mute character in this setting would be a very interesting concept to work with imo (like... How would he communicate? How would he sign when nobody actually has hands lol? You know?). But I think certain character traits that you don't often see in people irl and that majorly impact who they are as people (not just referring to disability, anything that might stand out a little extra or appear unconventional) can be fun to work with in storytelling, provided you actually know what you're doing with them. We already have a couple of characters who don't quite talk, like Sorbet Shark in cookie form and Candy Diver, but... that's not really the same. A character that is 100% mute, that literally does not and cannot speak, in a world and game like this where there is so much talking, would be a fun deviation from the norm.

As for him with White Lily, I think an interesting angle to explore would be Silent Salt actually not being as antagonistic towards her as the other Beasts are with their Ancients. Perhaps the slightest remnant of the original Light of Solidarity can shine through, even for just one moment, and allow him to almost... commiserate with this fellow lost soul. Because how different is White Lily from him, really? She succumbed to darkness, too. She's a Beast in all but name. Of course, he still wants his power back, and if he has to defeat/kill her, then so be it. But perhaps he doesn't find any joy or satisfaction in doing so, like his comrades did with their Ancients. He's not sad about it, but... I don't know. Maybe he finds White Lily to be a kindred spirit, at least in some small form. And maybe the smallest part of him thinks that all of this is just... such a shame. Such a big shame, indeed.

Idk if I articulated my thoughts very well there... I have a LOT of thoughts regarding Silent Salt and his (potential) character. I want to make a separate post talking about it, but I need to get them in order first. (I will say that if anything I've ascribed to him turns out to be canon in the future, I will be a very happy merchant and he will very quickly usurp Burning Spice as my favorite Beast lol)

[cy-cyborg]

It will never not be frustrating to me that amputees appear in fiction ALL. THE. TIME. and yet they're almost never acknowledged as such. The Cyberpunk genre is especially guilty of this: amputees and prosthetics becoming a normalised part of life are a defining part of the genre/aesthetic and yet no one even consults with any amputees about how we get represented there. Most writers in those genres don't even consider that giving your characters cybernetic arms and legs means they're an amputee.

CW: Ableism, dehumanisation

This makes it REALLY uncomfortable to engage with stories in the genre because another common aspect of cyberpunk is the idea of losing yourself and becoming something distinctly not-human anymore because you have too many cybernetic augmentations/implants. Shadowrun even has mechanics for this, which state if you get too many prosthetics, which is what cybernetics are 9 times out of 10, your character becomes a monster. These mechanics and discussions surrounding "how many robot bits make you not human anymore" are really, really uncomfortable when you remember this isn't something that's unique to a far-off future setting. Those people you're discussing the humanity of already exist. They're called amputees. If you reframe the question as "how many amputations can you have before you stop being a person" I hope you can see why an amputee like myself is not going to feel safe around you or in your fandoms.

And it's a shame, because I REALLY want to like Cyberpunk. I really, honestly do. I love the aesthetics, I love the idea of big corporations being the villains and the anti-capitalism at the heart of the genre, and I love the idea of prosthetics being not only destigmatised, but desirable. When written from a disability-inclusive lense, it honestly has the potential to be an incredibly uplifting and empowering genre. but as the genre stands right now, it's actively hostile to the very folks who are usually the stars of its stories: amputees, all because people just refuse to acknowledge us.

Cyberpunk isn't the only genre guilty of this, it's common all throughout sci-fi as a whole, but Cyberpunk is the only one where it starts becoming a serious issue due to its rampant dehumanisation of a real group of people. In other sci-fi settings, it's just kind of annoying and while it can be a form of erasure, it's not usually harmful, just...frustrating. Fantasy does it on occasion too, think pirates with a hook and a peg leg, but nowhere near as much.

If you, as an author or creator, use any of these words to describe a character or their tech in a sci-fi setting:

cybernetics/cybernetic enhancements

bionics

robot limbs

cyborgs

augmentations

You are probably writing an amputee. Please, at the very least, acknowledge it, and be mindful that those are real people who actually exist, not just a fantasy group you can speculate about.

edit:

I originally posted this article on my old Tumblr account and lot of people commented/reblogged to tell me that originally in cyberpunk, the "less human the more robot bits you have" only applied to people who opted for their limbs to be replaced by cybernetics, because it was seen as "renting out your body to corporations for money" but people who had to get cybernetics out of necessity weren't impacted. The thing is though, I really don't think that makes it better, for a few reasons. For one, where do you draw the line at "opting" to get a cybernetic prosthetic? This isn't a black and white thing, even in real life. Most amputations are done out of necessity, but there are situations where it's not the only option, just the best one. Talking from personal experience, I lost both my legs below the knee as a baby, that was a pretty clear cut case, I had a blood infection and gangrene and they had to act fast. But the infection caused lasting side effects and impacted my physical body's development and growth. By the time I got to my early 20's it was causing a lot of pain in my right leg, in my knee specifically, and when I got a bone infection in the end of that stump, I chose to have the whole thing amputated up to the knee. They only needed to take a few inches off the end of my stump, but I asked them to go higher, because of the ongoing issues in that knee, issues that would have been made worse by the shortening of the leg. I choose to remove the whole thing, knowing the joint was degrading and I probably would have lost it later in life anyway. Even if it was salvageable, it would mean much more surgery, and I've had enough of those. A boy I played wheelchair basketball with was born with a partially formed leg, it was half the size of his other leg and he wasn't able to use it al all, it was just dead weight, so he opted to get it amputated too for convenience and so he could use a prosthetic on that side. I worked with a girl who's hand didn't form properly in the womb, resulting in a normal palm, but tiny "finger nubs" (her words) with no bones inside. They weren't actively harming her usually, but she opted to get them and the top of her palm amputated after an incident at work where we were tying balloons and one of her nubs got stuck in the knot. She decided to get them amputated because it meant accidents like that would be less likely, and she could use a prosthetic more comfortably. All 3 of these are considered "optional" amputations, so would people like us be penalised in your setting? does it make sense that the technology in your setting can tell the difference, or that corporations would care about the how and why? Even stepping away from medical grey areas, if your character opts for a cybernetic arm because the corporations will financially reward her, and she's struggling to put food on the table without that help, is that really optional?

Don't get me wrong, I do think that idea could work but it would take a lot of work to do well, and most works I've seen don't do the work. Even if they did though, it doesn't change the fact that most modern uses of this trope don't mention that bit or actively ignore it. It doesn't matter in most cyberpunk works I've seen if the amputation was optional or out of necessity, they still are more prone to being seen as "less human" and in most of the sci-fi writing communities I've been part of, the authors are genuinely shocked when I ask them to remember "people with cybernetics are real people already, they're not some far-off-distant future fantasy group, they're just called amputees". Like it didn't even cross their minds. These are the people creating the works in this genre. Even if it wasn't the original intention of the genre, it's still an issue in the modern version of it. Edit 2: Elaborated a little more on why I don't think the "only people who choose it" argument works in the edit. Also, please stop telling me that old cyberpunk doesn't have this issue, I literally address that in the post lol.

[housewilson]

A MASTERLIST OF ALL THE BOOKS I COULD FIND IN TIM'S BOOKSHELVES

As someone who basically sees Tim Laughlin as my own version of Jesus Christ (I kind of wish I was lying but I have a 'beyond measure' tattoo branding my skin so perhaps I'm entirely serious), I simply needed to know what was on those shelves of his. And this was a hard task to achieve, believe me... but I got much farther than I initially thought I would.

(I've got so much to say about all of these books and how they might string together to create a deeper understanding of Tim as a character but I won't go into it here... maybe in a future post or video essay, who knows).

If you wish to help a girl out and attempt to figure out any of the other books I simply can not crack no matter how I look at the screenshots and mess with the adjustments... here's a folder full of 2k sized screenshots of those shelves.

Before I list the books one by one, I want to make a couple observations:

1) Almost all of the books I was able to pinpoint are non-fiction. The ones that aren't are children's books.

2) Topically, we see an interdisciplinary interest in:

History: from a book on a king in 4BC, to a survey of landholding in England in the 11th century.

Somewhat current historical events: books on World War I and II.

Western Philosophers: specially from the 16th to the 18th century.

Aesthetics: there's at least 2 books on the subject matter, but I couldn't find the second one, sadly.

Spirituality: not only christian/catholic; some of these books touch on Eastern practices such as Buddhism and Hinduism.

Fairy tales / children's books.

Psychology: specially in regards to mysticism and sexuality.

Science and scientific discovery/research.

3) A lot of the history, current events, and spirituality books are autobiographies/memoirs.

4) A lot of books (specially those on sciences and philosophy) tend to be more so anthologies or overviews on a subject matter rather than a book written by one specific author on one very concrete topic.

Overall, this all reflects very well an idea Jonathan Bailey himself expressed in a brilliant interview you can watch here if you haven't yet:

"Tim has buddhist flags in his 1980s flat in San Francisco, he has crystals, he is someone who is always seeking other ways to understand human experience. Which is probably tiring for him. Throughout the decades, he sort of appears as completely different people. At the crux of it there's this extreme grinding, contrasting, aggressive duality between feeling lovable and not feeling lovable. There's such shame in Tim. But it's the push and the pull which keeps him alive.”

This desire to understand human psychology, spirituality, and the ways of the universe through as many diverse lenses as possible, as well as a predilection for non-fiction, expresses very much to me that insatiable thirst for truth that defines his character so strongly.

OKAY, THAT BEING SAID. Here's the list in chronological order of publication.

PS. if you decided to click on any of the following titles it'd definitely not take you to a google drive link of the pdf file where you could download and read these books for yourself. Because that would be illegal and wrong.

Journeys through Bookland by Charles H. Sylvester (1901?) (1922 Edition)

I don't know which specific volume he owns, sorry, I tried my best but the number is not discernible (hell, the title barely is). If anyone wants the download link to these hmu because I'm not about to individually download all 10 right now.

10 volumes of poems, myths, Bible stories, fairy tales, and excerpts from children's novels, as well as a guide to the series. It has been lauded as ‘a new and original plan for reading, applied to the world’s best literature for children.’

Pilgrimage by Graham Seton Hutchison (1936)

This book provides a view of the battlefields of WW I through the eyes of the average fighting man. 

One curious thing about this book is that it's author, a British First World War army officer and military theorist, went on to become a fascist activist later in his life. Straight from Wikipedia:

"Seton Hutchison became a celebrated figure in military circles for his tactical innovations during the First World War but would later become associated with a series of fringe fascist movements which failed to capture much support even by the standards of the far right in Britain in the interbellum period." He made a contribution to First World War fiction with his espionage novel, The W Plan."

The Seven Storey Mountain by Thomas Merton (1948) 

The Seven Storey Mountain tells of the growing restlessness of a brilliant and passionate young man, who at the age of twenty-six, takes vows in one of the most demanding Catholic orders—the Trappist monks. At the Abbey of Gethsemani, "the four walls of my new freedom," Thomas Merton struggles to withdraw from the world, but only after he has fully immersed himself in it. At the abbey, he wrote this extraordinary testament, a unique spiritual autobiography that has been recognized as one of the most influential religious works of our time. Translated into more than twenty languages, it has touched millions of lives.

This book requires no introduction. It's the one he keeps the Fire Island's postcard in and the one we see him re-reading in episode 8 after Hawk brings it to the hospital with him at the end of episode 7.

Just a little detail I noticed:

Apparently he liked the book so much he visited Gethsemani, which was the home of its author all the way up till 1968.

For all we know, he might have even met its author!

Sexual Behavior in the Human Male by Alfred Charles Kinsey, Wardell B. Pomeroy (1948)

When published in 1948 this volume encountered a storm of condemnation and acclaim. It is, however, a milestone on the path toward a scientific approach to the understanding of human sexual behavior. Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey and his fellow researchers sought to accumulate an objective body of facts regarding sex. They employed first hand interviews to gather this data. This volume is based upon histories of approximately 5,300 males which were collected during a fifteen year period. This text describes the methodology, sampling, coding, interviewing, statistical analyses, and then examines factors and sources of sexual outlet.

Yes, Charles Kinsey is indeed behind the Kinsey scale that has done so much for the LGBTQ+ community.

Their Finest Hour (1949), The Grand Alliance (1950), and Closing the Ring (1951) by Winston Churchill

Winston Churchill's six-volume history of the cataclysm that swept the world remains the definitive history of the Second World War. Lucid, dramatic, remarkable both for its breadth and sweep and for its sense of personal involvement, it is universally acknowledged as a magnificent reconstruction and is an enduring, compelling work that led to his being awarded the Nobel Prize for literature in 1953. 

The European Philosophers from Descartes to Nietzsche by Monroe C. Beardsley (1960)

In so far as we reflect upon ourselves and our world, and what we are doing in it, says the editor of this anthology, we are all philosophers. And therefore we are very much concerned with what the twelve men represented in this book--the major philosophers on the Continent of Europe--have to say to us, to help us build our own philosophy, to think things out in our own way. For the issues that we face today are partly determined by the work of thinkers of earlier generations, and no other time is more important to the development of Western thought than is the 250-year period covered by this anthology. Monroe. C. Beardsley, Professor of Philosophy at Swarthmore College, has chosen major works, or large selections from them, by each man, with supplementary passages to amplify or clarify important points. These include: Descartes - Discourse on Method (Descartes), Thoughts (Pascal), The Nature of Evil (Spinoza), The Relation Between Soul and Body (Leibniz), The Social Construct (Rousseau), Critique of Pure Reason (Kant), The Vocation of Man (Fichte), Introducciton to the Philosophy of History (Hegel), The World as Will and Idea (Schopenhauer), A General View of Positivism (Comte), The Analysis of Sensations and the Relation of the Physical to the Psychical (Mach), Beyond Good and Evil (Nietzsche).

The New Intelligent Man's Guide to Science by Isaac Asimov (1965)

Asimov tells the stories behind the science: the men and women who made the important discoveries and how they did it. Ranging from Galilei, Achimedes, Newton and Einstein, he takes the most complex concepts and explains it in such a way that a first-time reader on the subject feels confident on his/her understanding. Assists today's readers in keeping abreast of all recent discoveries and advances in physics, the biological sciences, astronomy, computer technology, artificial intelligence, robotics, and other sciences.

The Heavenly City of the 18th Philosophers by Carl L. Becker (1932) (1962 reprint)

Here a distinguished American historian challenges the belief that the eighteenth century was essentially modern in its temper. In crystalline prose Carl Becker demonstrates that the period commonly described as the Age of Reason was, in fact, very far from that; that Voltaire, Hume, Diderot, and Locke were living in a medieval world, and that these philosophers “demolished the Heavenly City of St. Augustine only to rebuild it with more up-to-date materials.” In a new foreword, Johnson Kent Wright looks at the book’s continuing relevance within the context of current discussion about the Enlightenment.

I find the particular choice of adding this book very curious and on brand, since it explores the idea that philosophers of the Enlightenment very much resembled religious dogma/faith in their structure and purpose. Just... A+ of the props department to not just add any kind of book on philosophy anthology.

Herod The Great by Michael Grant (1971)

The Herod of popular tradition is the tyrannical King of Judaea who ordered the Massacre of the Innocents and died a terrible death in 4 BC as the judgment of God. But this biography paints a much more complex picture of this contemporary of Mark Antony, Cleopatra, and the Emperor Augustus. Herod devoted his life to the task of keeping the Jews prosperous and racially intact. To judge by the two disastrous Jewish rebellions that occurred within a hundred and fifty years of his death -- those the Jews called the First and Second Roman Wars -- he was not, in the long run, completely successful. For forty years Herod walked the most precarious of political tightropes. For he had to be enough of a Jew to retain control of his Jewish subjects, and enough of a pro-Roman to preserve the confidence of Rome, within whose territory his kingdom fell. For more than a quarter of a century he was one of the chief bulwarks of Augustus' empire in the east. He made Judaea a large and prosperous country. He founded cities and built public works on a scale never seen before: of these, recently excavated Masada is a spectacular example. And he did all this in spite of a continuous undercurrent of protest and underground resistance. The numerous illustrations presents portraits and coins, buildings and articles of everyday use, landscapes and fortresses, and subsequent generations' interpretations of the more famous events, actual and mythical, of Herod's career.

Readings in the Philosophy of Art and Aesthetics compiled by Milton Charles Nahm (1975)

A college level comprehensive anthology of essays written on the arts and the field of aesthetic philosophy.

The Mustard Seed: Discourses on the Sayings of Jesus Taken from the Gospel According to Thomas by Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh (1975)

This timely book explores the wisdom of the Gnostic Jesus, who challenges our preconceptions about the world and ourselves. Based on the Gospel of Thomas, the book recounts the missing years in Jesus’ life and his time in Egypt and India, learning from Egyptian secret societies, then Buddhist schools, then Hindu Vedanta. Each of Jesus' original sayings is the "seed" for a chapter of the book; each examines one aspect of life — birth, death, love, fear, anger, and more — counterpointed by Osho’s penetrating comments and responses to questions from his audience.

(You don't know how fulfilling it was to find some of these books and just sit there like "oh my god, yessss, he'd SO read that".)

A Third Testament by Malcolm Muggeridge (1976)

A modern pilgrim explores the spiritual wanderings of Augustine, Pascal, Blake, Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Bonhoeffer. A Third Testament brings to life seven men whose names are familiar enough, but whose iconoclastic spiritual wanderings make for unforgettable reading. Muggeridge's concise biographies are an accessible and manageable introduction to these spiritual giants who carried on the testament to the reality of God begun in the Old and New Testaments. - St. Augustine, a headstrong young hedonist and speechwriter who turned his back on money and prestige in order to serve Christ - Blaise Pascal, a brilliant mathematician who pursued scientific knowledge but warned people against thinking they could live without God - William Blake, a magnificent artist-poet who pled passionately for the life of the spirit and warned of the blight that materialism would usher in - Soren Kierkegaard, a renegade philosopher who spent most of his life at odds with the church, and insisted that every person must find his own way to God - Fyodor Dostoevsky, a debt-ridden writer and sometime prisoner who found, in the midst of squalor and political turmoil, the still small voice of God - Leo Tolstoy, a grand old novelist who swung between idealism and depression, loneliness and fame and a duel awareness of his sinfulness and God s grace - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a pastor whose writings and agonized involvement in a plot to kill Hitler cost him his life, but continue to inspire millions

Portraits: The photography of Carl Van Vechten (1978)

Can't find a file but you can borrow it from archive.com in the link provided.

During his career as a photographer, Carl Van Vechten’s subjects, many of whom were his friends and social acquaintances, included dancers, actors, writers, artists, activists, singers, costumiers, photographers, social critics, educators, journalists, and aesthetes. [...] As a promoter of literary talent and a critic of dance, theater, and opera, Carl Van Vechten was as interested in the cultural margin as he was in the day’s most acclaimed and successful people. His diverse subjects give a sense of both Carl Van Vechten’s interests and his considerable role in defining the cultural landscape of the twentieth century; among his many sitters one finds the leading lights of the Harlem Renaissance, the premier actors and writers of the American stage, the world’s greatest opera stars and ballerinas, the most important and influential writers of the day, among many others.

Report of the Shroud of Turin by John H Heller (1983)

Heller, while a man of science, was nevertheless a devout man (Southern Baptist). He viewed his task concerning The Shroud with great scepticism; there have been far too many hoaxes in the world of religion. The book describes in great detail the events leading up to the team's conviction that the Shroud was genuine; last - not least - being Heller and Adler's verification of "heme" (blood) and the inexplicable "burned image" of the crucified man. Although carbon dating indicates that the image is not 2000 years old and that the cloth is from the Middle Ages, there is not enough evidence to disprove Heller's assertion that the Shroud is indeed genuine.

Context for those who may not know (though I doubt it's necessary): The shroud of Turin "is a length of linen cloth that bears a faint image of the front and back of a man. It has been venerated for centuries, especially by members of the Catholic Church, as the actual burial shroud used to wrap the body of Jesus of Nazareth after his crucifixion, and upon which Jesus's bodily image is miraculously imprinted."

It is a very controversial subject matter and I definitely don't know that from going to an Opus Dei school since the day I was born till the day I graduated high school.

Mysticism, Psychology and Oedipus by Israel Regardie (1985)

I've tried my hardest but despite many Israel Regardie books being on the world wide web, I can't find a copy of this specific one.

Mysticism, Psychology and Oedipus, from the Small Gems series is one of these mysterious alchemys which Regardie and Spiegelman crafted for the serious student of mysticism. Mysticism, Psychology and Oedipus by Dr. Israel Regardie and his friend, world renowned Jungian Psychologist, J. Marvin Spiegelman, Ph.D. was created to reach the serious student at the intersecting paths of magic, mysticism and psychology. While each area of study overlaps they also maintain their own individual paths of truth. One of Regardie’s greatest gifts was his rare ability to combine these difficult and diverse subjects and make them understandable.

Domesday Book Through Nine Centuries by Elizabeth M. Hallam (1986)

In 1086 a great survey of landholding in England was carried out on the orders of William the Conqueror, and its results were recorded in the two volumes, which, within less than a century, were to acquire the name of Domesday, or the Book of Judgment 'because its decisions, like those of the last Judgment, are unalterable'. This detailed survey of the kingdom, unprecedented at that time in its scope, gives us an extraordinarily vivid impression of the life of the eleventh century.

The following two are a fuck up on the props department part because they were published after 1987 but we'll forgive them because they were not expecting for me to do all this to figure out the titles of these books, I'm sure:

The One Who Set Out to Study Fear by Peter Redgrove (1989)

This book barely exists physically, rest assured it does not exist online... LOL.

The author of The Wise Wound presents here a re-telling of Grimm's famous fairy tales, written in a manner and spirit more suited to the present day. Each story is rooted in the original, but cast in an energetic style that is both disrespectful and humorous. 

Essential Papers on Masochism by Margaret Ann Fitzpatrick Hanly (1995)

The contested psychoanalytic concept of masochism has served to open up pathways into less-explored regions of the human mind and behavior. Here, rituals of pain and sexual abusiveness prevail, and sometimes gruesome details of unconscious fantasies are constructed out of psychological pain, desperate need, and sexually excited, self- destructive violence. In this significant addition to the "Essential Papers in Psychoanalysis" series, Margaret Ann Fitzpatrick Hanly presents an anthology of the most outstanding writings in the psychoanalytic study of masochism. In bringing these essays together, Dr. Fitzpatrick Hanly expertly combines classic and contemporary theories by the most respected scholars in the field to create a varied and integrated volume. This collection features papers by S. Nacht, R. Loewenstein, Victor Smirnoff, Sigmund Freud, Jacques Laplanche, Robert Bak, Leonard Shengold, K. Novick, J. Novick, S. Coen, Margaret Brenman, Esther Menaker, S. Lorand, M. Balint, Bernhard Berliner, Charles Brenner, Helene Deutsch, Annie Reich, Marie Bonaparte, Jessica Benjamin, S.L. Olinick, Arnold Modell, Betty Joseph, and Janine Chasseguet-Smirgel.

Let's not forget another book we know has been present in his shelves at some point:

Look Homeward, Angel by Thomas Wolfe (1929)

It is Wolfe's first novel, and is considered a highly autobiographical American coming-of-age story. The character of Eugene Gant is generally believed to be a depiction of Wolfe himself. The novel briefly recounts Eugene's father's early life, but primarily covers the span of time from Eugene's birth in 1900 to his definitive departure from home at the age of 19. The setting is a fictionalization of his home town of Asheville, North Carolina, called Altamont in the novel.

And Ron Nyswaner mentioned in a podcast (might be this one? I'm not sure) that he scrapped from the script a line where Tim recommends this poem at some point:

He specially emphasized the line "If equal affection cannot be, Let the more loving one be me".

And lastly, if anyone wanted to know:

His copy of the bible is the Revised Standard Version by Thomas Nelson from either 1952 or 1953.

Because why the hell not figure out what specific translation of the holy bible a fictional character was basing his beliefs on — as if the set designers cared nearly as much as I do.

[olderthannetfic]

Until I read the comments on that one post I had no idea the Bechdel Test was a joke and wasn't supposed to be a serious measuring stick by which you gauged if something was feminist or not. Everywhere I'd ever heard it brought up, it was brought up as a very serious thing, and it was a failure of media if it didn't pass it. I remember the debate about Mako Mori from Pacific Rim and if she was a character you were "allowed" to like as a progressive person despite the fact that Pacific Rim doesn't pass the Bechdel Test, the discourse, the discussion of if the director was sexist for not writing in another woman for her to chat with about non-men related stuff, the camp of people trying to insist that having a fully realized character arc and being as developed as any of the male leads = good writing even if she doesn't talk to another girl...

And I've also had the remark about my writing not passing the test, just not to my face. I searched my fanfic's name once, curious to see if anyone was discussing it outside of tumblr and AO3, and found a Tiktok complaining about it not passing the Bechdel Test. The top comment was "motherfucker YOU don't pass the test but we still watch your ass". I cackled and moved on, but neither the commenter, poster, nor I had any awareness this wasn't Feminist Media Critique 101 theory and was, in fact, a goof.

Right now there's a segment of fandom debating if Blue Eye Samurai is feminist since when Mizu and Akemi talk, they do bring up men, since, y'know. Women aren't considered people with rights in their era in Japan and thus it's something they mention instead of only talking about being cool girlboss badasses who never bring up gender. If something doesn't pass the Bechdel Test, a smug segment of the internet high-fives itself and congratulates one another on being More Feminist Than Thou.

They then get really angry if you disagree, even though by this metric, Sleeping Beauty (the original animated one, where Aurora has only 16 lines of dialogue) is more feminist than Blue Eye Samurai.

--

*DYING*

Okay, so, nonnie....

Dykes to Watch Out For (1983-2008) was a long-running comic and major piece of lesbian media. I grew up buying compiled volumes at the bookstore. To be honest, that kind of 90s-ish lesbian culture isn't really my scene despite me being bi, but it was very nice to have this slice of life-y somewhat realistic, occasionally somewhat parody, look at the queer communities around me. It's up there with Tales of the City for me in terms of being a window into a particular culture and time and place.

If anybody is interested in queer history, in addition to looking up factual info, I think a read of the complete Dykes would give a really good overview of how people were thinking about things and what issues came up a lot. You'll see things like Barnes & Noble increasingly putting feminist bookstores out of business in the 90s, attitudes towards porn in lesbian circles—all kinds of cultural issues of the day.

I drifted away as I got later in my teens and found more genre fiction I cared about, but at one point, this comic was a very welcome antidote to the glurgey coming out stories that made up a lot of the more realistic media.

Anyway, here's the comic itself, reproduced in its entirety because I think it's important to actually understand the context.

This is from 1985, so the era of Rambo, Conan, and Death Wish, each of which you can see being made fun of here. It's based on Bechdel's friend Liz Wallace's actual rule for seeing movies.

That's it. That's the origin of this whole stupid test.

"LOL, fuck 80s action movies". That's it. That's the joke.

The fact that blockbusters still routinely fail to pass in the 2020s is shameful, but that was never the point of the strip.

[vaspider]

wrt post about discussing dieting in front of kids:

I'm sorry this is the piss on the poor website and people are massively misinterpreting your post, but can I say: I'm so glad you made it in the first place.

To the original topic, and to get a bit personal here, my mom did not shame me for my weight, but she did shame herself for her weight in front of me. The kind of mom always on a new diet. That shit gets so badly internalized for a lot of kids, myself included, so to see that post really makes me hope for a future where it happens less and less.

So thank you for making that post. I'm sure I'm not the only person who greatly appreciates it. Hope your notes clear up soon enough.

I didn't even make the post, that's what's so fucking wild! I just got annoyed when someone reblogged it from me and started trauma dumping on the post! That shit happens all the time on my posts, and when people take these really weird readings on your posts to dump weird shit everywhere, it bothers me! So I was like, "Hey bud wtf".

But thanks. I was just ... kind of embarrassed that someone reblogging from me was being a twerp. And I do think the post was important for exactly the reasons you say.

[irregularcollapse]

Hey, I'm so sorry to hear about how you feel about the mota fandom and what happened to you :/ I meant to send a message earlier but life got in the way. I hope you're feeling better now, and I can only tell you that your fics and writing are some of my favorite in the fandom. Just by reading your stories, I can tell the care that was put into choosing each word to best convey the story and the characters' feelings, and it is really somethinf I admire :) I hope I can be as good a writer as you someday ❤️ And for the mota fandom, I totally get what you and that anon said! If you'll allow me a bit of a rant, to me, the mota fandom is full of well-intentioned people but I found that one of its problems is that, as much as there is enthusiasm, it is going in circles. Many have said it and I've noticed it too, but some have a tendency to jump on other people's ideas without giving credit or even asking if it's okay to expand, and on more than one occasion I found one of my ideas in someone else's inbox just a week after I'd posted it which threw me off posting any kinds of hc or random ideas, I only post full fics now because I'm scared that people will see an idea/au that they like on my blog and decide to expand on it without my consent or even crediting me for the original idea :/ To me that sucks because what I love about creating is the interactions with people, but because of the seldom posting except for full fics I don't get much 😂 And I know I could post snippet or hc, but the overenthusiasm bordering on no fandom manners that I've noticed stops me from doing that. Also, as a writer, it is quite discouraging to see people constantly reccing the same 5/6 fics/authors. Don't get me wrong, those are GREAT fics and authors, but babes, there are over 1,000 works in the clegan tag on ao3, why are we constantly reccing the same fics as in summer 2024. It feels like people only read the fics with the highest hits count, and from an outsider's pov, you'd think there are only 10 writers in the mota fandom 😭 I don't if it's bc the mota fandom is new so there are a lots of people from tiktok/that weren't on tumblr/in fandom before but it truly feels like fandom manners are getting lost, despite the plethora of incredible creators in the mota fandom. So there's this opposition between the enthusiasm over new ideas that seems to die down as soon as a story is posted, except if if it's one of the big fics from the summer. Imo the actual recognition of fics doesn't follow the enthusiasm of ideas and hcs, which is a bit of a shame I think, and to be quite honest, it made me lose my motivation to write for mota bc it just feels like I'll post a fic, it'll get traction for maybe a day or two, and then it'll be forgotten somewhere when people sort ao3 by number of hits or kudos

Anyway that was quite long I'm sorry, you don't have to answer this at all, I just needed to get this off my chest, but I really hope you know that even if it may not feel that way, you are an amazing writer, who clearly loves your stories, the characters and the words you use, and that is translated to the ao3 page <3 You truly are one of the most talented fic writers this fandom has, and I'd support you and your stories in whatever fandom you may be in ❤️

I assure you, anon, that you're not the only person to feel this way! I've had quite a few private conversations with friends and mutuals about really similar experiences and observations, and how disheartened and uncomfortable it's making us feel.

I guess people don't say anything because they don't want to be seen as sowing discord or being mean. I know that there are going to be people who might see this and interpret it as me "fuelling fandom discourse" or "fandom wanking" or "being a cunt" but actually I'm just talking about how we treat creators in online spaces, and the way that people en masse have apparently forgotten that creators in fandoms are people.

I had another anon tell me that someone laid claim to one of their ideas in the tags of their headcanon post, and I don't think you're the only person whose idea has been stolen and passed to another writer. I'm really sorry that's happened to you, and you're so right to not feel like posting anything because of it! This is truly the kind of stuff that makes people not want to participate or put themselves out there. Sometimes it's even writers doing the stealing, blatantly and without credit. It makes me think that a lot of people haven't shared creative spaces before and don't know how to be polite.

I also 100% agree about the fic rec thing. It's really disheartening to see the same fics passed around over and over again, not only from a writer perspective but a reader perspective. Something that seems to have emerged in fandom spaces over the years is deifying certain authors of popular fics - fic authors being treated like celebrities, the concept of a "must-read fic", even people only reading fics and authors that are already seen as popular/successful. I get that some people don't want to spend time scraping ao3 for niche fics, that's super understandable, but that's also why it would be nice to see a bit more adventure and variety in fic rec lists!

There is a low-key competitive feeling which a few people have mentioned to me - the feeling that there are people who want to "win" fandom or be the most popular/most reccd/most recognised writer, or whatever it may be. I just feel like anything that makes people feel like they're better than others is... come si dice... not good. I think it's a shitty way to treat people you're sharing a creative space with, to view them as competition and commodity.

Writing for consumption or writing for audience approval isn't something I've ever done, but I feel like it's cropping up more and more in fandom spaces too - not just MOTA, either. That's sort of a different discussion, but I do feel it's related to the copying/stealing in a way as well.

Now I also have to apologise for this getting too long! I'm glad you got it off your chest, and please feel free to come off anon at any time, because you've got an ally in me (and others too, I assure you). I think that everything you've said here merits consideration from everyone, at the very very least! It's in the interest of pursuing a more inclusive, supportive fandom space.

Thanks heaps as well for saying nice stuff about my writing! I only ever want to tell stories, and to give people something to enjoy that has clearly been created with care and consideration. I write to express things I want to express, and so it means a lot to me when other people see what I'm trying to say and pick up what I'm putting down. Truly madly deeply, my most boundless thanks!!! ♥️♥️♥️

[tacitusk1llwhore]

Love this point so much. I find that in fandom spaces A LOT of the time female characters are dragged through the mud for no valid reason at all. When someone says “oh I don’t like (insert female character)” a lot of the time when asked why it boils down to “oh she’s a woman.” Don’t even get me started on the way men in the fandom treat and talk about Abigail “she nags John all the time.” Yeah…because he’s killing people and putting himself, her, and their CHILD in danger and before that was an entirely absent father. He needs nagged.

But in response to this sexism, people tend to come back hard on any criticism of female characters who have been victims of fandom culture, and a lot of the time, this turns into people boiling down very valid criticisms into misogyny and misogyny alone. It makes reading valid criticisms of these characters weird and makes you look for underlying messages of tones of misogyny. When I stated in my original post that I didn’t necessarily like Mary, I was a little worried that people would see that and assume I was going to go on a misogynistic rant or at least a rant with misogynistic undertones. I wasn’t, and my point at the end of the day was that the line of thought is hypocritical, and while I don’t believe she intended to harm or use Arthur, that was the outcome in the end, and she knew that.

Another person I see this with, not in RDR but in real life, is Taylor Swift. Has Taylor Swift been the victim of rampant and disgusting misogyny? Yes. Does that mean any and all criticisms of her are rooted in misogyny? No. But you see any time any criticism is brought up against her, it is framed as simple misogyny and nothing else.

Misogyny not only harms women in both real life and media but has now sort of taken the ability to talk about or criticize these female characters without people rushing to defend them. Rightfully so, we’ve seen so many arguments rooted in misogyny and not valid criticisms that it can make you defensive. I’ve been guilty of it myself. The amount of hate and trashing Mary got was entirely unwarranted, claiming her to be this selfish, manipulative mastermind who used Arthur because “that’s what women do.” Is a disservice to her complicated character.

She is a woman of the 1800s. She’s high society, meaning her whole life she was raised to be a mother, a wife, and a homemaker. Arthur could never give her the life she’s prepared for, not with the life he leads. Arthur would never leave his life for one like that at the time they were together. Mary is isolated; her mother is dead, and her brother and father are fairly useless at helping or supporting her. I don’t blame her for reaching out to Arthur the first time, but the second time I do, and it shows that even if unintentional, she used this lifestyle of his that she would never accept or adapt to further her own interests. I don’t think Mary is a mastermind manipulator or has any intention to use Arthur, but using Arthur was the outcome, and so it left a bitter taste in my mouth about her character.

I hate that misogyny has even now taken away the ability to talk about valid criticisms of women or women in media because we are all so used to having to jump to their defense because men love to hate women…just to hate them. There are so many complex female characters and it’s a shame that men and misogyny have ruined takes on them. We can’t have anything.

[ghooostbaby]

i've had this idea that since viktor seemed all but dead at the end of s1, and with what they said about the hexcore's ability to learn/adapt that really seems to connect to AI, that viktor after the hexcore transformation is really just the hexcore that has hijacked viktor's body and nervous system, and attempting to sort of exist as viktor experimentally, in neither a moral or immoral way, just sort of this curious being exploring life through viktor's consciousness and memories.

especially in last few years seeing how AI applications kind of adhered into human experience and tries to imitate our patterns and just… garbles them. and so much science fiction about what would happen if AI took control and tried to 'fix' human society, i thought it could be interesting that the hexcore is sort of rooting around in viktor's nervous system and encountering these desires to help others, to focus on the undercity, reliance on rationality and faith in progress, and then enthusiastically setting about that task in this garbled way. like if chatgpt decided to figure out world peace. it felt relevant to current issues and to me seems to fit viktor's behaviour after his transformation. it's like… he's a bad translation of himself. he could be the hexcore's imitation of himself as it interprets a version of viktor from all the material of his memories and impulses of his mind and body…

the show really does not explore any of the conflict between viktor and the hexcore consciousnesses ...even though it sets up that the hexcore has its own consciousness and there is some degree to which viktor isn't acting of his own free will... it seems like they really phoned in the last several episodes writing-wise. but it does seem that most of viktor's behaviour after merging with the hexcore is pretty much totally discontinuous with his behaviour before his transformation. (and it's incredibly annoying everytime i read a meta analyzing viktor like there's no distinction between his behaviour pre-hexcore transformation and post-hexcore transformation at all) there's loose connections but it's like he has the same traits on paper but in a completely distorted way. it just makes sense to me that this is another intelligent entity interpreting viktor and performing it for it's own learning.

i've seen some people say they dislike ideas like that because they want him to have agency. and yeah, i think it would be nice if he has agency (like maybe he's not dead but dormant and can emerge or is fighting the hexcore actions...) but also I don't think this is the story that arcane chose to tell. It's literally all about viktor having his agency taken away. (i was really mad about this when i first watched it and wanted a story where viktor got to make choices for himself.) even in s1 viktor is continually thwarted from being able to make the choices he wants, or he makes a choice and someone imposes something else on him (looking at you, jayce). they took a video game character who while perhaps less sympathetic, chose to adapt his body out of scientific interest, into someone who had a fatal illness, who was adapting his body in a last desperate effort to avoid death. and that caused a lot of harm and so made the last choice he is able to make, to accept his death, but even THAT is taken away from him. and in a way his actions after the hexcore transformation is this amazing revenge for the way he was subordinated to the wills of others so often, by flipping it on them.

its really a shame that the writers just ... didn't explore the actual story happening in the background because it's really interesting for the way hexcore!viktor takes the the values of progress and non-violence and moderation of piltover society to their extreme level, and they really don't like it. the values hexcore!viktor is basing things on is this garbled mix of insincere truisms from the piltover council about moderation and progress and original viktor's interest in helping the undercity and rationally solving problems and enjoying the company of jayce. it reminds me of AI making inedible recipes that very closely resemble food but aren't quite it, but applied to political/social conflict like oh you love these completely self-contradictory values of moderation? great! let's do that to the level where the violence inherent in your moderation becomes undeniable! you'll love it! but then again, arcane has no idea the story it's actually telling and this is why the ending is so depressing to me - the so-called desired outcome is the return to moderate conformity (rescued from hexcore!viktor's severe conformity) instead of moving to transformation, and upholding old self-contradictory ideas of moderation that caused all the problems in the first place. and after a brief rebellion that exposes the cruelty and nonsense at the logic of piltover society, viktor is once again safely contained and subjugated to normalcy by jayce's deeply condescending speech (when did he ever show he thought he was broken?) ... and it's jayce who is this saviour of viktor who was incapable of making the 'right' choice. to my mind it feels almost like in the speech jayce is turning viktor from someone who atleast gained the power to fuck everything up into a victim that can be managed and controlled again. which just makes me fucking sad

[intuitive-revelations]

Retrospective notes and what to keep an eye on after The Legend of Ruby Sunday

I started writing this while watching through a second time. While my thoughts were still a bit random and out of order, I've edited them into something that makes a bit more sense to read through.

Susan:

A little bit weird at first that Ruby asks why the Doctor doesn't recognise his own granddaughter, given that she doesn't know about regeneration yet and Susan Twist is clearly not mixed race. After thinking for a second, I realised she probably just immediately reconciled this as an adoption scenario, especially with her own family and history.

I've posted seperately about my feelings on the retcon of Susan's origins, but I am still surprised we're going this direction. I also find the wording a little bit questionable, as the Doctor makes it sound like he hasn't had children before, when he 100% did.

A Susan misdirect being linked to the word TARDIS is excellent though, given that she claimed to have come up with the word. (People freak out about what this means for her origins, but I don't see why it can't just be that she's responsible for the English acronym translation convention, which then passed on to all of human history thanks to the Doctor's travels.)

We didn't get Susan this time round, but such a massive red herring implies that RTD is planning to build up to such a thing for real, right? I assume we'll also be talking more about her next episode / in Tales of the TARDIS.

I also mentioned this in my live notes, but I quite like the Doctor's justification for not going back to Susan. It makes sense on its own, but takes on a whole new meaning in light of what happens in Big Finish (even if you do need to slightly nudge the meaning to make sense, and admittedly it still clashes with her participation in the Time War).

The Time Window and Misdirections:

Slightly put off at 'time window' being used as terminology for UNIT's tech when that's been used for actual time portals in-universe before.

Liked all the mentions of chronons though. Need to combine that and "N-dimensional time" into an actual pseudoscientific theory of time physics in Doctor Who with artron energy etc.

The Time Window is also totally how we get the Memory TARDIS, right? I'm guessing that's why the Doctor sent Ruby there, so she can escape into it (though I don't know what that will look like given Tales of the TARDIS surely won't be essential viewing). I wonder if that means the Doctor we'll see in that won't be the real one?

Super sneaky making the time window the 'secret from the Third Doctor era' that is revealed that was teased. Not a lie, but really teases something different to what we got.

Actually, in general kinda mixed feelings about the sheer level of misdirection is this story. You've got the above, all the focus on Susan, maybe the 'Beast', literally playing the Saxon theme (The Master Vainglorious). Seemingly also the thing about where people were stood on Christmas Eve… though I am going to check to see if there's something about the TARDIS / Sutekh. That being said, I'm guessing we're coming back to this, as the pointing isn't really explained yet.

RTD also said the script opened "INT. COFFEE BAR, USA - DAY, 1947" but we clearly never got such a scene. :/

On the other hand, all the playing around and subversion with anagrams was a lot of fun. Very much riffing off of DW tropes. Very funny also that UNIT would immediately pick up on the S Triad thing, given their and the Doctor's history with the Master's own aliases.

Sutekh and the Pantheon

Super intrigued by everything regarding the Pantheon in this episode. So we've got members:

Sutekh: God of Death. The Oldest One / The One Who Waits, the Mother and Father and Other of them all. The Toymaker: God of Games. The Trickster: God of Traps. Maestro: God of Music Reprobate: God of Spite. The Mara: God of Beasts. The Three-Fold Deity of Malice, Mischief, and Misery. Gods of Skin, Shame, Secrets Incensor: Gold of Disaster Incensor's Children - Doubt and Dread. Harbinger(s)

I'm probably too EU-brained, but it feels crazy putting entities like the Toymaker and the Trickster below Sutekh? They're both Eternal/Guardian level, while Sutekh is just an Osiran, powerful but ultimately ephermal. How is he 'the oldest' and the 'mother/father/other' of them all? I guess age could be partially put down to Sutekh's fate in Pyramids of Mars, but actually originating before them doesn't really make sense. I guess he could be an incarnation of a much older being, a bit like the Doctor could be?

However, I also doubt Harbinger is entirely reliable. She's clearly hyping up Sutekh's dominion, so him being the 'god of gods' may not mean much in terms of their origin.

Speaking of which... a lot of allusions to the Devil here, as I mentioned above. Chidozie finds himself in 'hell' and Carla literally calls the shape in the Time Window "the Beast". The security camera is also 66m away (funnily enough, around 73 yards). Add in Gabriel Woolf also playing the Beast in series 2, and you really do have to wonder if there's a connection. If Sutekh and the other Gods really do see him as the same entity as the Beast, then maybe he really could be the oldest of them all.

Side note: "Mother, Father and Other of them all" is great. Connecting the word 'Other' to parentage is also interesting, given we've been talking about Susan...

Going back to the Pantheon - I am now 100% convinced, after theorising before, that we've been meeting members of the Pantheon of Discord.

While there are family connections between some of them, I doubt they really are all related. They're way too distinct for that. But as a loose coalition of malicious god-like beings across the multiverse, it works. Weirdly, it is also reminiscent of some plotlines from the Tenth Doctor Titan Comics. It also feels like the direct opposite of the 'Accord' from the Leftbridge-Stewart series, which was seemingly another coalition of more benevolent deities, including the Azure Guardian. I wonder if they oppose each other?

Some of the namedrops are super interesting too. As I mentioned in my live blog, the Three-Fold deity must be connected to the Six-Fold God, even if just an imitation. Some of the names (eg. Doubt and Dread), being directly named for concepts and emotions, also brings to mind the Menti Celesti.

I also strongly suspect we're going to meet the Trickster again. RTD even foreshadowed as much when he illustrated Now We Are Six Hundred.

Big question is... when did Sutekh become connected to the TARDIS? The latest it could have happened is Wild Blue Yonder, and that would be the simplest explanation... but dialogue implies he's been attached and waiting for longer.

Again, mentioned this in my live notes, but the connection of Sutekh hiding in the "Howling Void" and appearing on UNIT scanners with contradictory information like the Dalek Void ship is an excellent connection. Especially, again, with the possible Hell connection:

RAJESH: And what's the Void? DOCTOR: The space between dimensions. There's all sorts of realities around us, different dimensions, billions of parallel universes all stacked up against each other. The Void is the space in between, containing absolutely nothing. Imagine that. Nothing. No light, no dark, no up, no down, no life, no time. Without end. My people called it the Void. The Eternals call it the Howling. But some people call it Hell.

Does this imply he attached himself to the TARDIS while it traveled through the Void? If so... when was that? Again Wild Blue Yonder is a good candidate, as the TARDIS literally reaches the edge of the universe (at least in some sort of spacetime geometry), but this could technically harken back as far as Journey's End, when the TARDIS last visited Pete's World.

A bit of me is intrigued by the description of Sutekh "whispering, delighting and seducing" the TARDIS, but nothing else indicates the TARDIS was willingly carrying him. Again another sign that Harbinger's speech may not reliable.

Remaining Mysteries

No offence to the people who were all in on the theory, of course, but I'm pretty sure the 'TV' theory is nothing. Especially after this episode. I feel like people latched onto the promo shot for this episode which looked like a TV set and confirmation bias took on from there. That being said, I am ready to eat my words if it somehow comes back to that next week!

(TBF, the TV theory obviously does have some relevance to DW in general, what with the Weeping Angels, Doctor Who exisiting in-universe, fourth wall breaks etc. I just don't think it ever had anything to do with this story.)

So Mrs Flood is confirmed to be something alien or supernatural, after the ambiguity with the Christmas 4th wall break. Simplest answer is that she's also serving Sutekh / the Pantheon, but IDK... she seems different.

Still need to know what's up with Ruby's mum too. Annoyingly, the episode makes it kinda ambiguous if she was pointing at the past Doctor (as per the flashback earlier this series) or at the present one. If the prior, I assume she was actually pointing at the TARDIS / Sutekh?

That damn "worlds with orange skies" line. It's probably nothing, right? But why did we focus on it, complete with musical sting. RTD knows that's significant. Hell, it's specifically significant to Susan, with her talking about Gallifrey in The Sensorites, and Ten recalling it in Gridlock.

Also, unless the soundtrack was lying to us, which it doesn't usually (though I guess isn't unprecendented, with the Weeping Angel theme being used in Day of the Doctor when Osgood realises the statues are disguised Zygons), maybe a Master reveal coming up some point in the future? How though, I have no idea.