something i really wanna see explored more in TTCC lore overtime is how Cogs. Inc affects the cogs themselves. the individual workers and the company are not one in the same, and i think thats smth that never gets discussed.
while i think the toons are obviously in the right for protecting their lands, i think there are many cases in some of the individual managers where it is clear that this is not a black and white, good and evil issue.
Misty is probably the most obvious case here, being that they dont even have any desire to fight the toons and instead wants to be friends with them. Misty is probably one of the most controversial characters due to this, being that fandom looooves to take morally grey/complex characters and devolve them to either "perfect innocent wittle angel" or "demonic demon from hell", completely erasing the original character's complexities and flaws. the things that makes them..them. the things that make them interesting. and it sucks to watch ppl erase characters like this. (I could do a full analysis on her and probably will but it would be some time i have to refresh myself a bit on her)
That "good vs evil" view that toontown originally built itself on was challenged by TTCC's manager cogs when they were given more depth. and a lot of people who loveee to see things in black and white dont like characters such as misty challenging their point of view. and its saddening.
i personally love to see this built and expanded upon. i LOVE that TTCC focuses on the individual cogs and makes them. well. individuals. rather than focusing on the big bad company as a whole. theres no doubt Cogs Inc is terrible. so imagine how terrible it is for the workers serving said company.
"they applied for the position" yea so like theres a fancy thing called rent. in a world of capitalism like this, cogs need jobs and money to support themselves. (some proof of this being an issue for the cogs is graham freaking out at the end of MOTM when his chances of getting the job are threatened and he says his "life is in jeopardy". NO ONE talks abt this btw.) i think once again this excuse drives from people focusing on the big bad company rather than the individuals. so lets talk about the individuals.
Mary Anna. She applied for the position because she believes toons are the issue, they are the ones polluting the waters and environment, and she has good intentions joining this company and trying to put a stop to them. How he came to this conclusion is unknown, but does Cogs Inc give a shit? No. they care abt hiring employees so they can make money and function as a business. so, knowing mary is wrong, they do nothing to change it and simply use her beliefs to their advantage to keep her hired and doing her job.
You know whats funny? Most of the fandom either flat out ignores him or makes him out to be a complete idiot for thinking toons pollute the environment. Mary may be wrong, but his intentions are proof that cogs are not just. blank slates. And people HATE thinking deeper than just black and white. So they hate cogs like Misty and Mary and put them down for challenging their view.
You could go on and on, case by case. TTCC PURPOSEFULLY builds on these characters so you AVOID that boring black and white view of "toons good, cogs bad". I think the situation is more like "toons good, Cogs Inc. bad".
Companies like this destroy both outsiders and the people within the company. And so far, TTCC has done a good job displaying that. and people choose to ignore it. and it saddens me.
104 notes
·
View notes
I mean, I don't think they shied away from portraying Rhaenyra in a bad light, they're just doing it slowly, she literally put a bunch of blood relatives from the smallfolk to be burned to death and is coming to see herself as tptwp, they'll certainly go deeper after Jace dies and Aegon disappears. As for Alicent, it was pretty obvious she was gonna betray team green and choose Rhaenyra/Helaena. She never wanted to forsake Rhaenyra and we see in the season is her being over her head in the war—she tries to turn back time, she sleeps with her teenage crush, she seeks absolution from her father (that's why I disagree with you she sees Otto as someone who pimped her out, she merely points out she followed him blindly, not that he abused her, he's still someone she loves and respects), she feels bitter towards her children and prays for Lucerys (not to make Rhaenyra look good, if that's the ga interpretation whatever, it's to show she's a kind person who despises violence) and, by the end, after seeing her daughter physically attacked by Aemond, the person who cut her power, she turns for Rhaenyra in an effort, perhaps naïve, to turn back time, "speaking from a distant dream", wanting to run away, and trusting Rhae because she risked her life going to the Sept and because she feels punished by the gods. It's fine if you didn't want it but it is good writing and people were already clocking this since she chose to put her kids at risk rather than kill Rhaenyra. As for being under subjugation, she was under Targ subjugation in KL under her misogynistics sons... Rhaenyra came before, was the first choice, first friend, first love. There's never complete freedom for any woman in Westeros, but she chose Rhaenyra out of her own desire and volition. I think some people just wanted to keep her life meaning and actions tied to her children and...
I did say that my problem with it wasn’t the choices made but how we got there… and I still believe that. It’s lazy writing at best, poor at worst imo
“I’m sorry but even as someone who has gone on record to say that I think the change they made to Rhaenicent was the best, I can’t just let poor execution slide. I don’t even think Alicent having little legion to Aemond or Aegon comes out of nowhere. She has constantly, to a fault, reaffirmed her trust in Rhaenyra.” - directly from my previous anon about how felt about s2
I’ve noticed this since the final ep was released, I hope this doesn’t come off mean bc I appreciate your opinion, but when people push back on the writing. You have a faction of being like “oh, you just don’t understand Alicent.” Nope, I get what they are going for. I just think it’s incorherent writing, and the quotes given by the writers themselves sort of only further prove that to me. People seem to act as if this plot is some sort of revelation or favor to Alicent as a character… when it is not. Not a fan of her arc, or lack thereof in s2 🤷🏽♀️.
6 notes
·
View notes
i have a possibly controversial opinion to say
obviously, some media is just copaganda, trying to make you view the police in a more positive light so you don't think about their wrongdoings
but you know how some media seems to be very anti police, until one character shows up and is a good cop?
people insist this is copaganda too, and they may be right. the idea of no good cops is real, bc the system itself is corrupt
however. i want to apply good faith reading for a second. at least to the independent creators who make these pieces of media. and say that maybe this is less a reflection of real life (as in, it's not that they think there are good cops irl), but rather what they HOPE real life was like
most of us are taught from a very young age to always trust the police and to go to cops when we're in need of help. as time goes on, however, many of us unlearn that sentiment, from observing cops' behavior and violence.
still, it makes sense for some people to hold onto hope that there are good cops. that if they ask for help, someone will give it to them. and they may not express it out loud - they may not even realize that hope is there at all - but it will be expressed in their art
i think the fictional trope of "one good cop in a corrupt system" (or the subtrope of it, "one good cop who's gonna fix the system from the inside") is not necessarily an antithesis to anti cop mentalities. i think it's more of an embodiment of a somewhat childish hope that some ppl have no choice but to cling to, because it's better than realizing no one can help you
now I'm not saying we shouldn't call this out or point out why it's harmful. but i do think that, again, at least with independent creators who could very easily read any comment you make about their art, we should try to apply this good faith reading here and there and be at least more gentle in our criticism of it.
19 notes
·
View notes
i've always found it odd that stone knows everything and yet their plan failed so hard. like there's no way in hell that was the optimal sequence of events to rescue the contestants. maybe they aren't as omniscient as they claim.
the way i see, they actually ARE as omniscient as they say they are!! the thing is, is that it seems that their ability to know future events isnt set in stone (pun not intended), because it also accounts for EVERY variation of events, every way a person could act, how stone THEMSELF acts (given that stone DID predict most things, down to who would be the best people to have eliminated first, that the lightning on the smokestack would kill liam and bryce, etc, but also, stone is shown having to check what others are doing, likely to gauge what possibilities are currently possible based on the environment, to check how things are developing). because he can see everything and every possibility, he can STEER things a certain way, but i dont think that actually enables them to get things towards the Best outcome. i think stone was also operating on the best possible outcomes, but that said outcomes are EXTREMELY hard to put into place exactly, and had to cast a wider net that allowed for the best possible chance of things at least mostly turning out okay, rather than anything highly specific that would ACTUALLY be the best outcome
stone themself can alter events, but he cant fully account for how others will act, because there are infinite possibilities. they just had to pick the best ones, and hope for the best. hell, we dont actually know IF liam this was what stone wanted. the note with the five on it kinda indicates that the outcome was mostly the same, but who knows if everything was how 100% how stone intended. there are hundreds of ways liam couldve interpretted the notes, stone just had to set him on a path where it was more likely that things would turn out okay (and i think statistically there WOULDVE been at least ONE course of events that wouldve turned out good for everyone, but while it exists, i dont think stone had the power to put it into action all on their own. they cannot account for others, only nudge people as best they can)
7 notes
·
View notes
25,24,19
I've already answered question 24 here :)
25. you can spend one day with a character of your choosing. who are they and what are you doing together? (does not necessarily need to be your #1 fave)
hmm maybe someone like Magnus? I feel like a day hanging out with him is guaranteed to be fun & memorable, doesn't really matter what we do. plus he's friends with so many people it probably wouldn't be just us so 👀 the more the merrier yeah?
19. tell me about your favourite sibling set and what you love about them.
Gideon and Gabriel Lightwood :) I love them both separately and their dynamic together. I think it's a lot more complicated than many siblings relationships just due to their upbringing & very different relationships they have with their father (& and mother in a way). They do love each other and care but that gets lost in the mess that is their family. Its just so interesting & there's a lot of storytelling potential there, especially with Tatiana in the mix (I'll always be a little bitter how none of it was really touched on in tlh tbh)
feel free to send me more
3 notes
·
View notes