#but its genuinely such an interesting thing to think about in terms of tommy's character

[eddiegettingshot]

different newer anon that mentioned theyre on season 5 here!! im a writer (author aspirations, but still) and i took tv analysis classes in college. im on s6 now but ive watched season 7 in its entirety already so i feel compelled to say that i think buddie will be endgame. season 7 especially has been insane in regards to that especially in terms of the deliberate choices they’re making. scene blocking, framing, wardrobe choices,

the scenes with maddie and eddie in 705 sealed it for me. you dont write “if you have something you need to tell eddie you will when you’re ready” or “this doesnt change anything between us” unless you’re planning for that. otherwise that’s actually just really terrible writing and considering some of the absolutely wonderful work we’ve seen here (im side eyeing the current eddie arc dw) i find that hard to believe to be the case. everything is so deliberate and goes into telling the overall story. it also just feels like the natural place the narrative is going anyway

its a possibility though dont get me wrong! but from my short time here is clear that tim minear knows that the audience would pitch a FIT if they got baited based on the karaoke stuff and has said before he doesn’t want to bait the audience.

its also clear to me that they were trying to go there in s4-5 at some point and knowing fox didn’t let them makes so much sense. considering abc allowed it within 4 episodes on their new network im thinking we might see something come season 8 (i do think we may see a moment or two in the final episodes of the season but considering its shorter who knows)

honestly the part i can’t stop thinking about is the terrible writing… because like i truly genuinely will not be able to actually believe buddie is happening until i see it confirmed in the text, so when i watch the show i’m not necessarily like this supposed to be a Hint, i’m fully willing to believe i’m just being baited. and my thing is that, IF it’s not leading anywhere, then it seems like excessively bad storytelling to write a relationship where there’s so much ambiguity that literally EVERYTHING about the couple is up for debate - because narratively, it is! the bcktommy relationship is being written like they’re laying down buddie threads that can be picked up later, which is objectively doing THEIR STORY a disservice! it literally boggles my mind that people spend so much time getting angry at other people for being Delusional and talking around eddie’s existence when instead they should be like why tf is so much of this being written so that it can be interpreted that way? it’s a relationship! it’s very easy actually to write two people as being unequivocally interested in one another! i literally dislike these two characters together (BECAUSE of some of the narrative choices obviously) and i’m sitting here like, if it’s not to make buddie happen, then what the hell is this storytelling? like even just thinking about 7x04, maybe WE know that tim said oh buck was into tommy all along because we read interviews, but if you JUST watch the show and only consider the text, it’s unclear all the way to the kiss - BUCK LITERALLY SAYS “YEAH I GUESS”??? not even a solid yes? it’s just so crazy to me like if i were actually into this ship i’d be throwing a fit and complaining incessantly about one half of it getting the love interest treatment lol

[rutadales]

Do you not think cDream is the villain? Sorry this is not at all meant to be agressive or anything, I just have trouble understanding that interpretation. I’m genuinely interested in what you think bc I’m not as well versed in lore as many dsmp fans but from what I’ve seen, cDream is a pretty unequivocally bad person. I think few of the characters aren’t to be fair, but though cDream is more complex than the common interpretations, he doesnt necessarily seem to be morally better? Again, don’t mean to sound rude or anything!! Just kinda trying to understand :)

So this question kinda expands into several branching off points for me, but I'll try to keep it simple and break it down into sections as best I can. this is going to get long

So do I think c!Dream is a villain? Depends on what definition you're using first of all but also in what context, in which storyline, and from whose perspective you're consuming the story from. A strength of SMPs as storytelling devices is that the concrete plot and hard facts of the story are often pretty fluid; what happened when, who was there, who saw what, and who is a villain or a hero is all dependent on which stream you chose to tune into at the time. But as much as this is a strength, it's also a detriment. Entire character beats and motivations can be missed or obfuscated by simply not tuning into a creators stream. A big example of this is how many people missed the Staged Finale reveal, anyone who didn't watch Punz stream will still be operating under the belief that everything Dream did in the disc finale was his true nature, and not an act. Completely changes how to interpret those characters and the entire finale as a scene.

The nature of stream based storytelling is audiences are consuming completely different stories, simultaneously, and there's no hard copy of this story. It's not a book you can go pick up at Barnes and Noble or a movie you can stream on Netflix. To get caught up and engage with the fiction you either have to go back and rewatch hundreds of hours of live content (with dead space and parts that have been completely ret-conned), watch recaps edited by third parties who are at liberty to cut out anything they deem irrelevant to the story, or get it exclusively word of mouth by the audience. A character being more loved by the audience now means that character's narration is given higher value in contrast to other characters. Even supposedly non-biased sources, like the fan wiki, meant to lay out bare bone facts of the story are riddled with un-sourced fan interpretations of the media. Look here

Now, reading a characters unreliable narration as reliable isn't a failing as it is more just engaging with the media as intended. The intent of utilizing unreliable narrators is often to "trick" the audience or to showcase how that character sees the world. Its fine and is used is a lot of different mediums, I'm actually a huge fan. Love me some bitches who just lie. The thing is, due to everything I've laid out above, having a character who is unreliable, like c!Tommy often is, in this medium means fans who only consume the content via world of mouth are getting an unreliable narration without the context that its unreliable. This completely changes entire swaths of the fiction and more, to our point, who is the villain.

A really, kind of neat phenomena in the fandom is how fans bought into c!Wilbur's lies about L'manberg the same way the characters he was manipulating did. Fans became part of the narrative in a strange way. Which is actually a perfect example for how other characters shape the narrative around Dream, both within the fiction and within the fans trying to engage with it.

With that in mind, I don't even read the dsmp as a story with "villains" or "heros", its a story with a lot of different perspectives that clash with each other. Those terms don't really lend themselves to the kind of questions I'm asking about the story.

I think the question you're really asking is "Do you think c!Dream is a good person". You bring up being "unequivocally bad" and moral a couple different times, which to me flags as a question about fictional morality. Because the question of who is a villain in the dream smp is completely dependent on who you watch, which streams you've watched, and whosever narration you decided to subscribe to-- and is why I find the label villain in dsmp analysis fairly mute. It's kinda a pointless exercise to try and determine who earns that label and who doesn't. Not the kind of analysis I'm interested in.

But to answer the question I think you imply here, no I don't think c!Dream is a good person. I don't think anyone on the smp is. Maybe Michael? Well he tried to break into a prison for information, so by some moral standards, absolutely not! I'd certainly agree with you that Dream is more complex than common interpretation would lead us to believe, but that complexity does lend itself to morality in some cases.

Is Dream wrong to want to prevent his home from being split up into countries and thus filled with conflict? Is it worse to threaten, torment, and assault someone because you're pathologically obsessed with them or because you have a larger goal in mind and find those actions beneficial to the goal at hand?

To me, that's it's just pointless hole to get sucked into. I am personally uninterested in ideas of a character possessing or gaining moral purity and much more interested in characters learning to move on from the harm they've caused. C!Dream is interesting to me, not because he's a good person, but because hes a complex one. TL;DR: I am uninterested in using villain as a term within the context of dsmp and find the discussions of the moral goodness of characters reductive.

If you have any other questions feel free to shoot me an ask! I actually quite enjoy breaking down how I think about characters and media and am always open to (friendly) discussions on the matter. <3

[doomsdaydicecascader]

hey, could you go into more detail with what you mean with ‘being precious’ with characters. im curious and i like your writing a lot <3

i think it's difficult to express without it reading as just "mary sue" critique, you know. tvtropes bullshit. but it is kind of a thing that occupies the same space. and atop that, it's a thing that's a little bit difficult to express without context but i think there are three pretty meaningful examples of a character being made worse by the author from which you are smart enough to discern what i mean

the thing which ties them together is this: you are meant to come out of their story with an affection for the character that rivals the author's care for them - the author wants you to feel as much for this character as they do, but is afraid of portraying the character in flawed or even grounded ways, when the character's flaws or ways in which they are a grounded character tend to be what makes them relateable or worth caring about.

example number one is albus dumbledore. the end of harry potter is genuinely one of the worst things i've ever read, even before the terf shit, and this is best expressed through the way characters around him act - he is always right, except when he's wrong, but the ways in which he's wrong are okay because the character archetype that he turns out to be in the last book before he dies is "guy who makes the hard decisions because nobody else will", winston churchill guy. and naturally, jk rowling adores him so much that she made him the protagonist of her flop three-movie pentology even though there was a better protagonist right there with newt. he is a character who is thoroughly adored by the author in a way that ruins the story.

example number two is johnny, from the room. tommy wiseau is by no means a great artist, but i think a lot of people resent analyzing the room as art because it is so obviously bad and i think that takes away from its most compelling fact. johnny is characterized as too good for this world, as though the world itself was closing in on him, ready to take him out. his future wife is cheating with his best friend, lying about him being an abuser to her friends, his boss doesnt give him his promotion for no reason, his mother in law would put aside her cancer diagnosis to further tear apart her daughters marriage, and through this, johnny does nothing wrong. he was always too good for this sinful world. he is a character who is thoroughly adored by the author in a way that ruins the story.

example number three, as mentioned in that last ask, is lin manuel miranda's portrayal of alexander hamilton, which kind of combines the both of the previous examples. throughout hamilton, alexander hamilton is repeatedly portrayed as a tortured artist, a guy who writes like he's running out of time, a guy whose writing is so powerful that he could have meaningfully changed the world, if he were not also, a dipshit idiot who got shot in a duel. and hamilton is interesting, because the story itself bends over backwards to imagine new outs for him. when his wife, who is so upset by his actions that she exempts herself from being in the writings from which hamilton was based, something i am to believe is made up whole cloth for hamilton, the story itself goes out of its way to say "what if the stuff that his wife destroyed would have redeemed him" when the answer is, probably not, he was a shithead, but lin manuel miranda can't help but ask, "what if hamilton was actually just like me fr, a misunderstood dude who just wanted to make great art", he is a character who is thoroughly adored by the author in a way that ruins the story.

i dont really want to use the term "mary sue" or whatever because it is pretty loaded, and honestly, if the story you're telling justifies this feeling, i tend to really enjoy characters who really are just flawless, characters who the authors love and want you to love too. but theyre character studies - half blood prince and deathly hallows are almost entirely about dumbledore and his relationship to the cast, and it's the worst shit i've ever read. the room would be so unbelievably forgettable without johnny. and hamilton is hamilton.

and its the kind of thing i found myself prone to doing too - that kind of feverish, "he would not fucking say that" behavior about a character who would definitely, absolutely do that. i felt this way for a while about jane in post-canon, and i still kind of think post-canon jane deserved a better arc, to make a tragedy out of her existence, but that is a desire i have because i care a lot about jane crocker, you know?

[bisexualmultifandommess]

Today’s character is Steve Harrington!

Steve:

Since Steve grew up in the 70s and is currently in the 80s, he’s grown up in a time when labels for sexualities existed but weren’t commonly known especially since there’s no internet and he lives in a small town. He has also grown up in a era where lgbt wasn’t as accepted as it it is now.

Steve isn’t the most knowledgeable when it comes to Queer terms and only really started learning more about it after Robin came out to him. Before learning more he assumed that you either liked girls or boys which scared him a little when he started noticing that he was occasionally interested in men.

The first boy Steve ever had a crush on was Tommy. He remembered that when he was twelve they had a sleepover and whenever Tommy would nudge him or grab him while they were playing outside he would feel nervous but in a good way like he had butterflies. At the time this scared him a little and he convinced himself it wasn’t happening. He did, however, still remain friends with Tommy until their friendship broke apart in 1983. Steve never found out out that Tommy had feelings for him too because he eventually moved on from him.

Steve kissed a boy while on vacation once when he was around fourteen because they’d spent a lot of time together since their families were vacationing near each other and Steve had developed a small crush on him. He hadn’t realised it was a crush until they’d spent time together near a lake while exploring and both had kissed our of curiosity in a moment of piece while resting after swimming. The kiss was nice and it made Steve feel almost free but he also felt nervous. He didn’t bring it up once he was back in Hawkins since his parents wouldn’t accept it and he had no one else to talk to.

Steve was attracted to Billy though it was purely his looks because he found his personality awful. He felt nervous around Billy in both ways but always tried to remain snarky around him and act like he wasn’t bothered.

After learning about Robin he found that he learnt more about sexualities and was able to learn and understand what bisexuality is. He tried explaining one day to Robin that he wasn’t gay because he had genuinely loved Nancy and had even crushed on Robin before finding out she was gay and Robin had to explain that it was okay to like both men and women. This helped Steve a lot in accepting himself as he now knew a lot more.

Steve isn’t ready to come out yet to anyone but Robin because she’ll understand the most out of everyone but he still takes time to learn more on it not just for himself but to support Robin. Both of them once Steve starts feeling more comfortable talking about his sexuality talk about their crushes and who they find attractive.

Steve’s type is very much people with long and wavy hair. He also likes strong minded people, which is why he wasn’t surprised but still a little annoyed when he developed feelings for Eddie Munson. Although Eddie shares a lot of traits with most of his past crushes, Steve still finds him a little confusing and has an unrelated jealously about Dustin preferring him. Once he gets over that he starts seeing more positive things about Eddie.

Steve has had crushes on Tommy, Nancy, Robin, Billy, Eddie and many others.

Another Headcanon

This headcanon can go along with the other headcanons but I also see it on its own being the one that would most fit canon if they had ever decided to give Steve a lgbt storyline

Asexual - Steve has spent most of his teen years thinking that sex and his looks are very important to remain popular. He’s slept with a few women and gone on a few dates but never felt like any of it felt right. I think that Steve being asexual would fit him because I believe that he would be someone who does feel sexual attraction but not very often but in his teen years convinced himself that sex was the only important part of a relationship but it isn’t. His friends help him understand that he doesn’t need to have sex to have a fulfilling relationship and that if it’s something he wants he can but he doesn’t have much sexual desire.

This last one is more to fit canon and I mostly headcanon the ones above however I think being asexual fits Steve a lot and you can be asexual and bisexual.

[bonesandthebees]

kinda missed the train bc time zones but i just want to say that people angry at tommy for finding and using wilburs name (and comparing it to deadnaming? what? this is obviously so different) just cant appreciate the beauty of your writing

you write messy human characters in situations with questionable moral rights and wrongs, even if this was their first bones fic did they just forget the part where wil tried to kill tommy?

you write from one pov and work so amazingly with the unreliable narator prospects its so cool to read and so interesting to brainrot about

you write a lot of metaphors which is just something im obsessed with, especially the way youre so consistent with them, just like in stars with the sea and pillar, you continously describe wilburs most inner emotions as a bird in a cage and how the bird perks up at hearing the name wilbur while wilburs monologue is against it shows what was beaten into him and how he "wilbur" actually feels about it

also i know that a lot of people expected (and some wanted) a name reveal in the form of wilbur trusting tommy enough to tell him himself (i also expected this ngl) but looking at it, it feels so much out of character for glass!wil at least for a long while, hes nowhere near the amount of trust or even of knowing how much his training for the pythia was to be bale to tell anyone his name and in the situation hes in, kidnapped and in a group of people with completely different religion, i dont think theres space for him to get to that mental space in a completely healthy and right way

tommy finding out on his own and starting to use it on the other hand is just so much like glass!tommy, bc you can see how hes doing it bc he believes it wil help wilbur bc he knows how wrong it is that he was forced to foresay his own name, but also not telling the other deathlings bc he knows that the best way would be for wilbur to tell them himself

honestly im so glad it went like this bc it feels so justificating and deserving from characterisation and storytelling point, not throwing away all the built up trauma and messy relationships and all the mistakes that were made just for some quick and cheap comfort

instead of quick cheap hurt/comfort or angst you get a precisely and amazingly crafted deep and thought out story with deep and full chartacters that feel so human and its THE BEST THING EVER I LOVE YOUR WRITING SO MUCH BEE

and im sorry some people cant appreciate it and cant shut up about not being able to do so

lmao you get it i write messy human characters and also wilbur literally tried to kill tommy. this wasn't a breech of trust or anything they didn't have any trust beforehand.

kldsjfkld aaa you're so sweet though!! I'm so glad you like the one pov thing. It's genuinely my favorite way to write long stories now because it makes things so much more interesting to me. unreliable narrator is impossible to avoid when you only have a single pov going on and that's the fun part!!

so so happy you like the metaphors too. I definitely worry sometimes I'm overusing them, but I also like the consistency and the way it gives me a space to explain wilbur's emotions in a way that avoids just saying "he felt sad" or something. it makes it more interesting to describe and can be used in a lot of different ways so it's very fun for me

you see you get it!! there was no way he was gonna reach that place in a healthy way, at least not anytime soon. I know that everyone was expecting the soft reveal moment of wilbur telling tommy his name himself, but that's exactly why I didn't go with it. because subverting that expectation makes things a lot more interesting in terms of how it'll develop from there. it just makes the most sense with the characterization and everything to me so tysm <33

this made me smile a whole lot to read :D

[plutonicbees]

this bit from lords of empyre: emperor hulkling is great, especially when you read tommy's background talk

[thequackcity]

Quackity and Schlatt’s Relationship - More Complicated Then You Think

(this is all /rp and about the characters from the dream smp! pls assume i have the dignity not to write analysis of youtubers)

recently there was a bit of discourse surrounding the relationship between Quackity and Schlatt floating around on tumblr. tho i never saw the original post that sparked the conversation, i did see a few posts that were inspired by it mentioning how they disliked that the original post implied that Quackity and Schlatt were mutually abusive and/or equally bad for each other 

since i never saw the original post, i can't be sure if that's what the op meant to imply. it's not really my place to speak about a post that i never got the chance to read. BUT the conversation that was caused by the post in question did get me thinking about how this fandom treats the relationship between Quackity and Schlatt and how little nuance there is in discussions about it

now before i say anything else, i want to make a few things clear:

i don't think Quackity and Schlatt’s relationship is mutually abusive. no need to worry about hearing that from this post

i don't look down on ppl who have different interpretations of their relationship

there will be potentially triggering content in this analysis. i will place a quick warning whenever i think one is needed!

their relationship is romantic in canon and therefore i’ll be treating it as romantic

alright now that we’ve gotten all of that out of the way, we can finally get on with the analysis! i apologize for how long this is gonna be

part 1: let's talk relationship!

i think we can all agree that Quackity and Schlatt’s relationship was not exactly a healthy one. tho it didn't start out that way, it certainly turned into what could be read as abusive or toxic (i personally read their relationship as being abusive in its later half due to evidence provided by the text, but i understand if others prefer to view it as just toxic instead)

but what happened that led to their partnership ending so badly? what caused all of this mess?

well, it was a lot of things. but we will get to that later. let's talk relationship first!

from the very beginning, Quackity and Schlatt’s relationship was pretty one-sided. tho they both clearly liked each other as friends/partners in crime both before and after the election (yes they did interact before the election!) Quackity was also interested in Schlatt romantically- something that Schlatt wasn't fully committed to

as we all know from the infamous date stream and from a few other moments, Quackity and Schlatt enjoyed playfully flirting with each other- tho it was pretty obvious that Quackity was more serious about it then Schlatt was even tho Schlatt considered Quackity to be very attractive

in my opinion, Quackity is someone who wants a long term relationship, while Schlatt is more interested in flings. this can be seen in Schlatt refusing to marry Quackity and rejecting most of his advances while Quackity tried his best to convince him to feel otherwise. Tommy put it best: Quackity is just one of Schlatt’s many bitches U_U

to Quackity, the romantic aspect of their relationship was very important. because Schlatt never actually shot him down or told him that he didn't feel the same way, Quackity took that to mean that they were truly in love. Schlatt on the other hand wasn't very invested in the romantic side of things but clearly valued Quackity’s looks and his support as an ally against Pogtopia so he never fully rejected Quackity’s advances

this might not seem like too big of a deal considering the other things that happened between them, but i think it shows part of the nature of their relationship. there is a lot of miscommunication and, on Schlatt’s end, manipulation of emotions. love is a strong motivator for loyalty and Schlatt is a smart guy who would know how to use that to his advantage

but that isn't to say that Schlatt didn't ever care about Quackity!

Schlatt is a complicated guy and figuring out when he's actually being genuine can be pretty difficult. but i think there are some moments that point to Schlatt genuinely caring about Quackity

when he was alive, Schlatt was pretty paranoid. not as paranoid as Wilbur, but certainly up there. but there were never any times where he truly questioned Quackity’s loyalties after his first day as president. Schlatt also seemed truly upset that Quackity betrayed him, bringing up their status as partners in crime while ranting about how much it hurt him and singling Quackity out while talking about how he had been abandoned during his time of need

Schlatt also spent a lot of time sulking after Quackity betrayed him and whining to Ponk about needing a new bitch. this is in contrast to how angry he was after Tubbo betrayed him- both during and after the execution

there is also the situation with the Big Man Gym 

after being dead for a while, Schlatt contacted Quackity despite them leaving off on bad terms and asked for him to visit him in his cave gym. when Quackity showed up, Schlatt talked about how he valued their relationship and the good times they had together. tho this can easily be seen as emotional manipulation, Schlatt’s a lot smarter than he seems and- if he doesnt have memory issues due to being a ghost- would know that Quackity’s opinion of him was in the dump at the time of his death and most likely wouldn't have improved since then. Fundy has a higher opinion of Schlatt than Quackity does and is someone who obviously craves validation. but Schlatt went to Quackity first anyway and trusted him to help revive him

i think that this is all good evidence that points towards Schlatt truly caring about Quackity as much as someone like Schlatt can care about anyone- or at least valuing him as a companion

i also think that it is pretty common knowledge that Quackity cared about Schlatt- and possibly still does- but i will go over a bit of evidence that i haven’t already mentioned before we move on to the next part

Quackity tried multiple times to impress Schlatt (like when he lied about knowing how to play chess), would attempt to help Schlatt when he was drowning in water, sadly said that they could have had something together while Schlatt was dying in the caravan, and implied that he wouldn’t have left if Schlatt hadn’t taken down the white house. Quackity also willingly went to the Big Man Gym after being summoned there by Schlatt and wanted to revive him long before the revive book became part of the story

part 2: what made it fall apart?

everything i've said so far has been pretty interesting (hopefully) but it doesn't really answer the original question: what went wrong to turn Schlatt and Quackity’s mainly positive partnership sour?

well it comes down to two things in my opinion: their incompatible desires for political power and Schlatt’s deteriorating mental state

Quackity wanted political power from the beginning and wasn't afraid to be open about his desires. he pooled his votes with Schlatt because Schlatt offered him the position of vice president, something Wilbur and Tommy weren’t willing to give to him. tho Quackity obviously cared about L’Manburg and wanted to see good things for it, he also desired power and was willing to team up with someone he didn't fully agree with to get said power

at 32:40 in this video, Quackity talks about how in politics everyone uses everyone so it's alright if Schlatt is using him. he then talks about how he doesn't want to be a man with no power and how he understands that Schlatt’s main goal is also gaining/keeping power. Quackity also shows a bit of his naughty evil side by saying if he overthrows Schlatt then the fun ends too early! 

(side note: these two are pretty evenly matched in intelligence and manipulativeness, i love it!) 

it's a bit of a fandom misconception that Quackity was a love sick yes man during the Manburg era. tho Quackity did want to please Schlatt and was in love with him, he didn't shy away from standing up to or disagreeing with Schlatt when he believed it was needed

at around 26:12 of this video, Quackity and Schlatt meet together in private and Quackity tells Schlatt off for playing down his role in the power structure of Manburg. since this was very early in Schlatt’s reign, Quackity shows no fear towards him and confidently tells him not to treat him like that

Quackity also broke Niki out of jail after regretting letting her be put there in the first place, tried to convince Schlatt to not execute Tubbo, jumped in front of Fundy when Schlatt tried to attack him, tried to stop Schlatt from tearing down buildings, and attempted to protect the white house he built from being destroyed by Schlatt. these are not behaviors of a pure yes man but of someone who, despite fear, has the confidence to speak up for himself even when disrespected by someone in authority

Quackity has always been someone who wanted power and someone who was never a yes man to authority. this contradicts with how Schlatt believed Quackity should act as vice president. in Schlatt’s opinion, Quackity’s one job is to sit around looking pretty while Schlatt does all of the important things and holds all of the power. Schlatt was a big fan of promoting people to worthless positions of authority and its pretty obvious that he considered vice president to be similar to the fake positions he gave Fundy and Tubbo 

in the end, this was a big part of what destroyed their relationship. like it or not, Quackity’s a power hungry guy and always has been. he didn't like that Schlatt constantly shoved him aside and refused to listen to him

now onto the nasty bit...Schlatt’s mental state

cw for mentions of alcoholism, mental deterioration, and abusive behavior  

before i say anything more, i just want to say that i don't think having issues with alcoholism makes someone a bad person. i personally have some issues with such things so it would be pretty stupid of me to say being an alcoholic makes you a bad person. alcoholism does negatively affect your cognitive functions tho and, combined with other health issues, can cause some of the very serious mental problems that Schlatt clearly struggles with

throughout the Manburg era, Schlatt’s mental state rapidly deteriorated. he went from a pretty normal- if eccentric- guy who had a drinking problem, to someone who was delirious most of the time. it's a sharp and noticeable decline that caused a lot of pain for Quackity due to Schlatt often taking his excess aggression out on him by yelling at him and/or belittling him. tho Schlatt often belittled Quackity before he went fully off of the deep end, it was never as aggressive as it was when he was in this delirious state of mind

it was during one of Schlatt’s most aggressive and delirious moments that he tore down the white house despite Quackity’s protests. as we all know, this caused Quackity to snap and kill Schlatt (it's more complicated than that but we will get back to that). as mentioned previously, Quackity implied that he would have stayed with Schlatt if the white house hadn’t been destroyed

in my opinion, these two things combined are the biggest reasons why Quackity and Schlatt’s relationship fell apart. their differing desires for power were not compatible and Schlatt’s awful behavior while his mental state declined caused a rift between them that couldn't be fixed

part 3: how toxic was it really?

cw for emotional and physical abuse 

as i said all the way back in part one, Quackity and Schlatt’s relationship was not healthy. i have provided many examples in the other two parts that shine a light onto why it wasn't healthy, but i didn't show the entire picture

there are many moments that show exactly how Schlatt treated Quackity when he was acting at his worst and none of them are pretty. tho Schlatt was never truly aggressive with his insults until he started to go off of the deep end, that doesn't mean that what he said wasn't negatively affecting Quackity

Schlatt would belittle, insult, and mock Quackity for his appearance not being up to his standards, for his opinions, and for being emotional in ways that Schlatt disapproved of like crying. tho Schlatt would often brush off Quackity’s reactions towards this cruel behavior, it's very clear that Schlatt’s treatment of him has stuck with Quackity in many ways

Quackity is very sensitive about his appearance and it seems to be because of how badly Schlatt hurt his self esteem during their time together. Schlatt tied Quackity’s worth to his appearance and then would claim he wasn't meeting his standards of attractiveness. we can tell that this has stuck with Quackity because of his sensitivity towards people bringing up the scar on his face (something that greatly alters his physical appearance) and he still reacts very badly when Schlatt calls him the mocking nickname flatty patty

speaking of flatty patty- that stupid insult shockingly has a lot of weight in Quackity’s relationship with Schlatt. tho its something the audience is meant to laugh at, the nickname also shows just how little Schlatt respects Quackity because he's constantly throwing it around just to make Quackity upset. Schlatt’s last words are flatty patty all because he wanted to get in one last dig at his ex and ruin Quackity’s day even further 

Schlatt tends to do a lot of things that are intended to make Quackity upset. tearing down the room Quackity made for him in the white house is the biggest example of this- especially since Schlatt mentions how it will upset Quackity while he does it. you can see this moment at around 19:10 of this video

and now let's get into the elephant in the room when it comes to these two: Quackity was scared of Schlatt. tho we never really see Schlatt hit or attack Quackity physically outside of their confrontation at the white house or their confrontation in the caravan, these clips imply that Quackity was at the very least scared of Schlatt physically harming him in some way 

as for actually physically harming him, Schlatt hits Quackity multiple times with a pickaxe and with his fists during their white house fight. Quackity hits Schlatt a couple times too, tho these are all primarily defensive blows since he is trying to protect himself and his property. he also chases after Quackity with a bow after Quackity’s plan to trick him into signing Manburg over to the Pogtopians fails and hits him multiple times during the caravan confrontation

all of this evidence shows that Schlatt was an abusive (or at least toxic) partner towards Quackity and someone who greatly affected him in many ways

tho Quackity did a few questionable things throughout his relationship with Schlatt (such as trying to get Schlatt to have sex with him despite Schlatt not being interested as shown in the later half of this video) and did some downright morally wrong things during his time as vice president of Manburg, no one deserves the pain of an abusive relationship- even a person who has done bad things

as a brief side note before we move on because i know people will bring it up if i skip over it, Quackity did- and most likely still does- want to literally possess Glatt. he brought up reviving Schlatt and using him as a political pawn after Schlatt’s funeral and during their conversation at the Big Man Gym Quackity talked about owning Glatt and having him work at Las Nevadas with no pay

this is unsettling behavior to say the least but this essay isnt about the aftermath of their relationship so much as it is about their relationship when it was actually happening. maybe i will make another post talking more about how Quackity’s relationship with Schlatt affected him even after Schlatt’s death and/or about Quackity’s relationship with Glatt

part 4: final thoughts

i’m not exactly sure why the nuances in Schlatt and Quackity’s relationship get lost when it comes to the fandom, but it’s pretty disappointing to see. hopefully this essay can help people take a closer look at canon and maybe even help them find something interesting that they’d want to explore!

tho the point of this essay is to clear up any misconceptions and hopefully add some nuance to the conversations surrounding Schlatt and Quackity’s relationship, i also wrote it in hopes of showing people how fascinating these two partners in crime were back in the Manburg days. i didn’t cover everything but i think i did a pretty good job for my first analysis post in the dsmp fandom

also since you read to the end, i must say thank you! it really does means a lot to me that you did. i hope you enjoyed and maybe even learned something. this post can be used as a resource if anyone wants to use it as such

here’s a tiny devil Quackity for your troubles <3

[overthinkingfandom]

Cards on the Table - Breaking down the tactics in L'manburg Independence

/rp /dsmp

Much has been said in the fandom about L'manburg's independence. It is, after all, arguably the most important moment in DSMP's history, as the rest of the story wouldn't have existed without it. 

In light of the recent anniversary of it, yes I know I’m late, I wanted to throw my hat in the ring and add something to the discussion surrounding it. However, as the morality of the situation has been discussed to death I'll be taking a slightly different approach to it. 

Due to the nature of the DSMP's medium, the story has many unique quirks. One of those quirks is how realistic the tactics used in the story's portrayal of politics are. The independence conflict is a great example of it. While on the surface things seem to be rather simplistic in nature, there's a lot more going on that’s less obvious.

Both Wilbur and Dream are brilliant politicians who get to show both their strengths and weaknesses in dealing with an equally skilled opponent in this encounter. There’s actually quite a bit to go into, despite their interactions being so short.

When most people think about the L'manburg's independence, they think about the moment the declaration has been written up and the subsequent declaration of war. While this moment is certainly iconic, it's not really all that impactful in the grand scheme of things. Both declarations are the culmination of decisions that have been made beforehand. It's the moment when those decisions were made that really influenced things.

Conveniently, Wilbur and Dream only hold a single conversation about L'manburg before the declarations are drawn up, so we don’t need to look far in order to figure out where those decisions were formed. 

Wilbur has been working on L’manburg, collecting materials and building the wall surrounding it, for almost an hour when he spots Dream lurking. “Get [Dream] into the VC, I need to talk with him. He’s the leader of the other nation, I think we need to have a congress.” (52:44)

Dream: “Hello?”

Wilbur: “Hello Dream. Welcome to our great nation of L’manburg.”

Dream: “L’manburg?”

Wilbur: “Yes. We are seceding from Dream SMP. This is our own server now. This area, just this part [between the walls of L’manburg], is our server.”

Wilbur doesn’t waste any time before getting right down to business and talking about the matter at hand. However, the way he speaks about it here and in the rest of the conversation is fairly interesting. Wilbur is talking about L’manburg as if it’s something which already exists. They are seceding. This is their land. This conversation is merely a courtesy to give Dream a formal notice of their separation.

Yet, a bit later Wilbur shows he knows they need Dream’s acknowledgement in order for L’manburg to be its own entity. Independence is not a concrete thing that can just be taken or created on one person’s whim, after all. It only exists when the people with power agree it exists. 

Wilbur: “Dream, basically all we want from you is just acknowledgement that we are an independent nation now. That’s all we need.” (56:20)

So if Wilbur knows they aren’t independent yet, why is he talking like that? 

It’s because he’s using a salesman technique called an Assumptive Close. Instead of posing it as a question and putting the choice of agreeing or disagreeing in Dream’s hands, Wilbur acts as if it’s already true and leaves the burden of challenging his claims on Dream’s shoulders. He even moves on to ask secondary questions on how Dream feels about having embassies in his land (and notably he frames it as a question, unlike how he frames the topic of L’manburg’s independence) as if L’manburg is already a political entity. 

Wilbur: “Dream, I’ve got a proposition for you. How do you feel about having Tommy’s land being an embassy? Like it’s an enclave in your own land.” (59:01)

Wilbur’s use of this technique has an interesting side effect in that it signals to Dream Wilbur is taking a non-compromising position in this negotiation. In essence saying “L’manburg is independent, take it or leave it.” 

A non-compromising position is the game theory term for when someone goes, "I'm going to do that, this is going to happen and nothing can dissuade me from this course of action." It's a strong tactic which forces everyone to react to that person's position, reducing the others' options into a binary of either accepting that position or rejecting it. 

This is a very common tactic and various manifestations of it can be seen all over history and media. From Martin Luther who refused to recant or compromise with his famous words of “Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise” to groups who cultivate a "with us or against us" mentality to heroic characters who say they would die before giving in to whatever Evil the story focuses on.

This is the situation Dream is facing here. He can either accept Wilbur's assertion that L'manburg is an independent entity by either encouraging them or even doing nothing, or he can reject Wilbur's assertion by acting against it.

As we all know, he ended up choosing the second option but what were his considerations for doing so?

For that we would need to know what his goal was here, something we don't really get a sense of from his conversation with Wilbur. However, he ends up stating what it was in a later conversation with Skeppy. 

(Emphasis added by me and wasn’t part of the original dialogue.)

“Everyone can build wherever they want. [L’manburg] just decided to say that they get to determine where they can build and we can’t and we said well no, you can’t do that. And that’s what the whole war was over.” (31:44)

“[L’manburg] can’t tell us that we can’t go in their land. That’s all we wanted to say. That they’re not independent, they are a part of the Dream Team SMP. They’re just a delusional, small part." (34:26)

Dream lies a lot, so just because he says something doesn't mean it's necessarily true. However, this seems to be genuine. Dream has no problem telling Skeppy “we burned down their houses and blew up the whole land.” (32:36) later on in the conversation, so we can rule out that he's trying to paint himself in a better light, and there aren't really any other reasons for him to lie to Skeppy here about this. 

When looking at Dream's options with his goal we can see the choice is pretty much a no-brainer. 

Accepting is a total lose scenario for him. Not only will it fail to fulfill his goals, it would actively encourage the sort of behavior he doesn't want to happen, as Wilbur would set a precedent that so long as someone insisted hard enough and implied Dream is a bad person he would fold in negotiations and give them what they want.

Rejecting gets him far closer to his goal of railing against L’manburg’s exclusion. Going to war means he has to invest much more effort and resources into his reaction than if he just accepted as well as deal with the risks any war has, however the sheer difference in ability between Dream's side and Wilbur's side make the risk minimal. 

Going to a war he’s pretty sure he can win VS encouraging the sort of thing he disapproves of, isn’t really a hard choice.

This is actually the result of a mistake on Wilbur's part. CC!Wilbur called his character naive (37:49) and he's not wrong. Wilbur has a tendency to act as he wishes and not take into account that people might disagree or retaliate. We see it with him saying they could just ignore the Americans (1:51:17) or during the elections when he told Quackity his scheme and got blindsided by Quackity deciding to run against him. 

Historically, non-compromising positions worked best when the person who used it made sure rejection would be more costly than acceptance in one way or the other. In essence, narrowing down the options for others even more and leaving them only with acceptance. 

Wilbur may have managed to wipe off the table all other options and put pressure on Dream to accept with his use of Assumptive Close, but he didn't do anything to prevent Dream from rejecting. In fact, it seems like Wilbur didn't even consider it as a valid possibility as he outright dismissed it when Dream brought it up as an option.

Dream: “What happens if the rest of the server decides to take over your land?”

Wilbur: “They can’t. It’s literally not how servers- Dream you’re supposed to be smart man, that’s not how servers work. You can’t just take over another person’s server.” (54:33)

But, you may be asking, if it was better for Dream to go to war against L'manburg rather than grant them independence, why did he end up giving into their desire for independence in the war? Wouldn't it have been better if he just saved everyone the trouble and gave it to them when they asked for it the first time? Or maybe Dream’s obsession with Tommy and his discs is just that strong?

We can find the answer to all those questions at Punz’ video where he shows the behind the scenes of the independence war, including some of the planning which went into it from the Dream Team’s side of the war. Specifically, this quote:

Dream: “[The L’manburgians] are never gonna give up. So then in the end the resolution will probably just be, we won but they can think whatever they want, we’re just going to ignore them because they’re essentially like- You want to think you’re independent? You’re not, you’re still part of the SMP, but if you want to think you’re independent, you can.” (9:04)

“They’re never gonna give up.”

Whether it’s true or not doesn’t matter, as this is what Dream thinks and so this is what dictates his actions. Perhaps he’s overestimating his opponents here, or maybe he’s talking about how even if L’manburg is defeated this time they would try again for independence in the future. In either case, it’s clear Dream thinks the best case scenario for him - completely preventing people from fighting for L'manburg's independence - is impossible. 

So, he tries for the second best case. If he can’t prevent L’manburg, he’s going to allow it but only under Dream’s terms. That’s what his “they can think whatever they want” line is all about. He intends on giving them token independence here, something which would satisfy them but wouldn't pose a real threat. Which is exactly what he ends up offering them during the bow duel.

Dream: “Let me just clarify: if you win, we grant L’Manburg independence.”

Tommy: “Alright.”

Dream: “But we recognize it still as a part of the Dream Team SMP.”

Wilbur: “That’s fine, that’s a fine condition.” (40:54)

The token independence thing didn’t work out so well for him. L'manburg quickly grew to be seen as an entity separate from Greater Dream SMP by everyone, and so Dream was forced to concede and treat it as one as well. 

However, despite this part of his plan failing, overall the independence war was a glowing success for Dream. 

By giving L'manburg independence after winning the war, Dream sent a very clear message. L'manburg only gets to be independent so long as they stay on Dream's good side. If they don't adhere to the terms Dream sets out for them? He can and will kick their asses, as the war so aptly demonstrated.

This message is received loud and clear. During his entire presidency Wilbur went out of his way to treat Dream with respect and try not to piss him off. Something he clearly demonstrates a number of times, like when he asked if he should call Dream “king Dream” (59:08) or during the railway skirmish (24:16).

In fact, it can be argued that this message lasted all the way up to Tubbo's presidency. Unlike Quackity, who was perfectly fine with starting a fight with Dream, Tubbo knew first hand what a war against Dream looks like. He knew that they could not win a war against him, especially in their weakened state at the time, and that influenced his decision. 

As Dream once said: "L'manburg can be independent but it can't be free."

[shoezuki]

ok so like i been Thinkin a lot on that stream techno had today and i may be Thinkin Too Much cuz i was doing psychology while watching but im going to say Words Now

the entire idea and Plot of tommy going from only interacting/being manipulated by dream to only interacting with techno is a Lot. theres a lot here. and i am feasting like a fucking king on the potential of it and what this could all Mean

I think we’re building up the idea of how techno and dream differ and how they house both similarities and extreme differences in their ideals. 

So if we considered how Tommy’s arcs have changed theres a very, VERY clear juxtaposition between the exile arc to.... raccoon arc? whatever the fuck is goin on

Tommy Was manipulated, isolated, and gaslit by dream. that was the only guy he really had interacted with and that was Intentional entirely. Its very obvious this will have and currently has an affect on tommy. 

Now, he’s with technoblade. theres a lot of shit that can be read in this simply as considered right now. I feel we’re clearly supposed to at least somehow compare dream and technoblade because their positions are somewhat similar concerning how they are interacting with tommy. 

Tommy can only really interact with techno, only techno really has the ability to see him (although ranboo, ghostbur, and phil could see him but theres obvious difficulties in their case), and how tommy regards technoblade is.... complicated. like how he regards dream at the moment.

but theres some really, really important and clear differences in this that i think will show a lot about techno’s character and what’s to come

first of all, there’s a question of why techno is seemingly ‘letting’ tommy live with him. No joke, i’ve discussed this a LOT in the technocord and it’s made me realize it from a different perspective since many of those people in there are from Before techno joined the smp.

so, there’s no clear ‘rational’ reason why techno would benefit from teaming with tommy. there’s some arguments that could be made; tommy’s position with people and especially tubbo, using tommy as a bargaining chip with dream, and something else i cant remember. but the technocord hardcore ppl feel tommy is a liability in the long term. techno doesn’t really have much to gain beyond a distraction. the idea of using tommy in order to convince him he’s getting the disks and then to destroy lmanberg is kinda.... its jus more trouble to techno. In fact, it wouldve been defendable for techno to kick him out; he stole his stuff, and we saw how he reacted to his cows being killed, his previous base being pillaged. You’d have thought techno wouldve been angrier.

but like. that aside. there’s little reason for techno to open up to tommy. and thats the point.

there’s no necessity on techno’s part. he doesnt need tommy. he could kick him out easily. but he won’t. 

I imagine technoblade sees the trauma and hardship tommy went through and he sympathizes with him. Its been made clear that techno doesnt know the full extent of what happened, but he doesnt need to. he knows enough. 

Now, back to the happenings of the last stream,

it wasnt plot heavy at all. (mostly because techno’s fuckign glasses are held together with SCOTCH TAPE the guy couldnt even fucking use ducttape i hate that) but there were a Few interesting things, including the Plot Stream a bit;

the ‘box’ techno made with the idea of hiding tommy from dream. (perhaps a joke but it still shows something i feel)

how he’s been giving tommy a Lot of stuff. he hasnt Genuinely been upset at his golden apples being taken; in fact, techno gave him more food in protest of him eating all the gapples instead of.... demanding them back

went mining in the nether with the intention of getting tommy better stuff

he replaced the log he accidentally stripped. extremely funny considering he got the wrong type of wood but he tried

expending more resources on tommy with invisibility potions so that he wasnt in danger of being seen

Repeatedly would assure tommy that dream Is Not His Friend.

at the idea of tommy being ‘banned’ from the nether and being attacked in lmanberg, techno laughed at the idea of him being ‘attacked’ and killed even when tommy worried that he’d die for the Last Time

implicated that techno WOULD defend him. and the idea of someone killing Either him or tommy was funny because of that

okay so slight comparison to dream; techno is instead GIVING tommy resources instead of blowing them up, he’s obviously intent on protecting him in some way, and he assures tommy that dream is No Good (rather than how dream was telling tommy no one cared about him)

But there’s one instance that was really, really important to me

the control room had a very bad impact on tommy. most likely a panic attack (the shaking, heavy breathing, scattered speech/thought is something i know so intimately lmao) and techno’s reaction to it was extremely interesting. 

first, techno said he was ‘freaking out for no reason’ which could be a) techno is horrific at emotions and vulnerability lmao and b) to Him, it Is nothing. he has no clue what tommy had been through. 

He repeatedly asked what was wrong. what had happened in that room. He pressed Slightly. but as soon as tommy said he didnt want to talk about that, techno instantly backed off and said its alright. specifically, he said:

“It’s fine, no one recovers in a day tommy. Healing is a long process, it’s fine.”

that shit hit me like a freight train. Mostly i didnt expect anything to come from this stream like that but FUCK LMAO.

The biggest thing is, i think technoblade is going to help tommy heal from the dream shit and get back on his feet. 

but also, even though im not entirely sure i need to see more, tommy will get techno to be more caring. We know philza is the only one techno is really close to, and ghostbur as well. both of which either weren’t involved in betraying techno, or doesnt remember it. i see it pointed out that techno is going at tubbo and his government rather than dream, but i think it makes sense. 

dream technically hasnt challenged techno’s ideals or what he wants; while tubbo stole from him, used him as a weapon, and reinstated a government despite everything techno was saying. 

Tommy took part in betraying him, thats without a doubt. but tommy was also screwed over by the government in place. so techno empathizes with him. maybe they dont fully trust each other, but thats a work in progress. and it will progress to technoblade trusting tommy despite their past, and realizing that dream is in a position of power over Everyone. 

tl:dr: tommy is going to heal with techno’s help and full come to terms with/realize what dream did to him, and techno is going to realize he CAN trust people and that dream has been the one pulling the strings all along

[zeta-in-de-walls]

Hey, so I think my fondness for Tommy’s style of lore might’ve made it a touch harder to enjoy Techno’s style of SMP content. I’m feeling like its a preference thing anyway... it’s hard to articulate the issue but I’m gonna try. xD

Techno’s latest stream didn’t feel immersive enough basically.

i think some people have complained about Techno’s tendency to joke and break the fourth wall even in tense moments but as a fan of Tommy ‘there’s a reason I gave up my discs and you spent £200 on Etsy for a suit’ Innit, I can’t say cracking self-aware jokes is a problem in itself. But I feel as if Techno’s stream lacked gravity for me, failing to create tension and uncertainty in scenes which needed them.

While Tommy jokes a lot, it feels like part of his character and his character’s use of humour as a shield when he feels scared means it can still help to display his character’s feelings so it doesn’t break immersion for me but helps to give him more character. Tommy’s character is openly vulnerable enough that I feel like the audience can always read into his feelings and the motivations behind his actions.

With Techno, I struggle more to read him. I find myself uncertain if his humour is part of his character or if its really the CC joking. To what extent is his humour a way to cope with stressful situations and hide his inner turmoil? Or is it more a way of showing he is relatively composed, able to joke about because he still feels in control of the situation.

I feel like there’s two ways to read this latest stream and I find myself slightly dissatisfied with both. Either the prison was a trap he was not prepared for and he’s out of his depth and is genuinely distressed. Or he’s not that worried because he had a plan all along and the developments were not outside his expectations. (Note that he doesn’t need to know exactly what might happen or be certain of everything, what’s important is that he is confident in a way to escape thus he’s still in control.)

Either option would be fine with me in terms of story and Techno’s arc. (I think him being genuinely out of his depth would be slightly preferred for me as I think it’d be cool but it also suits him to be ready for anything) What dissatisfies me is instead the execution. I’m not confident in my reading.

Techno’s performance - the way he joked around and gave indications of a plan - lead me to prefer the reading that he does indeed have a plan. The issue is then the structure of the stream. It felt like it was all leading up to a twist where Techno gets trapped in and things go wrong. If Techno has a plan, I would prefer he share it more with the audience, share that he’s suspicious, that he is really looking into thinks, that he’s here to gather information no matter what. I dislike it when the audience is more in the dark than the viewpoint character. Also, even if he has a plan, he can still show lots of doubt and worry and hope that his worst expectations won’t be realised. I want to really get into his head. Again, that’s probably my preference towards Tommy ‘chat if I was the traitor I’d tell you!’ Innit who very very rarely hides stuff from his audience. We get surprised along with his character when things go wrong.

I’m sure one might think it could spoil things, knowing to expect things to go wrong and the twist might be less thrilling. But the trade-off for really leaning into sharing what Techno’s thinking is more than worth it. Assuming Techno’s plan means relying on his friends to save him means that Techno is putting himself in a position of extreme vulnerability and is entirely dependent on someone else helping him. He’s never done anything like this before and it would be a big step for Techno who finds is hard to trust people because he’s been betrayed before. Surely if betrayals hurt him so much, he would struggle to come up with this sort of plan? I would love to dig into that more. This would really demonstrate what a huge sacrifice it is trying to help Dream. It’s just really, really interesting. But I’m not really given anything to work with here, I haven’t seen Techno display any conflict about this plan or what a big thing it would be to trust his friends. If there was a period between being betrayed and learning to trust others again, it happened off-screen. Which means its all theory, not canon.  

And if it was the other option - that Techno was genuinely caught off guard with the audience, then I’d really expect a little more expression of vulnerability. Just a little more panic and alarm to sell me on this being unexpected. Maybe some regret, some anger, there’s a lot he’d feel and I’d like it if more of it was displayed. It doesn’t need to be super extreme and jokes are still fine, but I would want to feel like he’s joking to hide his distress. (And gosh you know I’d really love to see his character display vulnerability - it would be such great development. My issue with Techno having a plan is that it means he’s not really being defeated and experiencing a low-moment here - which is something I’d love to see.)

[xoruffitup]

Annette: The AD Devotee Review

So I saw Annette on its premiere night in Cannes and I’m still trying to process and make sense of those 2.5 hours of utter insanity. I have no idea where to begin and this is likely going to become an unholy length by the time I’m finished, so I apologize in advance. But BOY I’ve got a lot to parse through!!

Let’s start here: Adam’s made plenty of weird movies. The Dead Don’t Die? The Man Who Killed Don Quixote? There are definitely Terry Gilliam-esque elements of the unapologetically absurd and fantastical in Annette, but NOTHING comes close to this film. To put it bluntly, nothing I write in this post can prepare you for the eccentric phantasmagoria you’re about to sit through.

While the melodies conveying the story – at times lovely and haunting, at times whimsical, occasionally blunt and simple – add a unique sense of the surreal, the fact that it’s all presented in song somehow supplies the medium for this bizarre concoction of disparate elements and outlandish storytelling to all coalesce into a single genre-defying, disbelief-suspending whole. That’s certainly not to say there weren’t a few times when I quietly chortled to myself and mouthed “what the fuck” from behind my mask when things took an exceeding turn to the outrageous. This movie needs to be permitted a bit of leeway in terms of quality judgments, and traditional indicators certainly won’t apply. I would say part of its appeal (and ultimately its success) stems from its lack of interest in appealing to traditional arbiters of film structure and viewing experience. The movie lingers in studies of discomfiture (I’ll return to this theme); it presents all its absurdities with brazen pride rather than temperance; and its end is abrupt and utterly jarring. Yet somehow, at the end of it, I realized I’d been white-knuckling that rollercoaster ride the whole way through and loved every last twist and turn.

A note on the structure of this post before I dive in: I’ve written out a synopsis of the whole film (for those spoiler-hungry people) and stashed it down at the bottom of this post, so no one trying to avoid spoilers has to scroll through. If you want to read, go ahead and skip down to that before reading the discussion/analysis. If I have to reference a specific plot point, I’ll label it “Spoiler #___” and those who don’t mind being spoiled can check the correlating numbers in my synopsis to see which part I’m referencing. Otherwise, my discussion will be spoiler-free! I do detail certain individual scenes, but hid anything that would give away key developments and/or the ending.

To start, I’ll cut to what I’m sure many of you are here for: THE MUSICAL SEX SCENES. You want detailed descriptions? Well let’s fucking go because these scenes have been living in my head rent-free!!

The first (yes, there are two. Idk whether to thank Mr. Carax or suggest he get his sanity checked??) happens towards the end of “We Love Each Other So Much.” Henry carries Ann to the bed with her feet dangling several inches off the floor while she has her arms wrapped around his shoulders. (I maybe whimpered a tiny bit.) As they continue to sing, you first see Ann spread on her back on the bed, panting a little BUT STILL SINGING while Henry’s head is down between her thighs. The camera angle is from above Ann’s head, so you can clearly see down her body and exactly what’s going on. He lifts his head to croon a line, then puts his mouth right back to work. 

And THEN they fuck – still fucking singing! They’re on their sides with Henry behind her, and yes there is visible thrusting. Yes, the thrusting definitely picks up speed and force as the song reaches its crescendo. Yes, it was indeed EXTREMELY sensual once you got over the initial shock of what you’re watching. Ann kept her breasts covered with her own hands while Henry went down on her, but now his hands are covering them and kneading while they’re fucking and just….. It’s a hard, blazing hot R rating. I also remember his giant hand coming up to turn her head so he can kiss her and ladkjfaskfjlskfj. Bring your smelling salts. I don’t recommend sitting between two older ladies while you’re watching – KINDA RUINED THE BLATANT, SMOKING HOT ADAM PORN FOR ME. Good god, choose your viewing buddy wisely!

The second scene comes sort of out of nowhere – I can’t actually recall which song it was during, but it pops up while Ann is pregnant. Henry is again eating her out and there’s not as much overt singing this time, but he has his giant hands splayed over her pregnant belly while he’s going to town and whew, WHEW TURN ON THE AIR CONDITIONING PLEASE. DID THE THEATER INCREASE IN TEMPERATURE BY 10 DEGREES, YOU’RE DAMN RIGHT IT DID.

Whew. I think you’ll be better primed to ~enjoy~ those scenes when you know they’re coming, otherwise it’s just so shocking that by the time you’ve processed “Look at Adam eating pussy with reckless abandon” it’s halfway over already. God speed, my fellow rats, it’s truly something to witness!!

Okay. Right. Ahem. Moving right on along….

I’ll kick off this discussion with the formal structure of the film. It’s honestly impossible to classify. I have the questionable fortune of having been taken to many a strange avant-garde operas and art exhibitions by my parents when I was younger, and the strongest parallel I found to this movie was melodramatic opera stagings full of flamboyant flourishes, austere set pieces, and prolonged numbers where the characters wallow at length in their respective miseries. This movie has all the elevated drama, spectacle, and self-aggrandizement belonging to any self-professed rock opera. Think psychedelic rock opera films a la The Who’s Tommy, Hair, Phantom of the Paradise, and hell, even Rocky Horror. Yes, this film really is THAT weird.

But Annette is also in large part a vibrant, absurdist performance piece. The film is intriguingly book-ended by two scenes where the lines blur between actor and character; and your own role blurs between passive viewer and interactive audience. The first scene has the cast walking through the streets of LA (I think?), singing “So May We Start?” directly to the camera in a self-aware prologue, smashing the fourth wall from the beginning and setting up the audience to play a direct role in the viewing experience. Though the cast then disburse and take up their respective roles, the sense of being directly performed to is reinforced throughout the film. This continues most concretely through Henry’s multiple stand-up comedy performances.

Though he performs to an audience in the film rather than directly to live viewers, these scenes are so lengthy, vulgar, and excessive that his solo performance act becomes an integral part of defining his character and conveying his arc as the film progresses. These scenes start to make the film itself feel like a one-man show. The whole shtick of Henry McHenry’s “Ape of God” show is its perverse irreverence and swaggering machismo. Over the span of what must be a five minute plus scene, Henry hacks up phlegm, pretends to choke himself with his microphone cord, prances across the stage with his bathrobe flapping about, simulates being shot, sprinkles many a misanthropic, charmless monologues in between, and ends by throwing off his robe and mooning the audience before he leaves the stage. (Yes, you see Adam’s ass within the film’s first twenty minutes, and we’re just warming up from there.) His one-man performances demonstrate his egocentrism, penchant for lowbrow and often offensive humor, and the fact that this character has thus far profited from indulging in and acting out his base vulgarities.

While never demonstrating any abundance of good taste, his shows teeter firmly towards the grotesque and unsanctionable as his marriage and mental health deteriorate. This is what I’m referring to when I described the film as a study in discomfiture. As he deteriorates, the later iterations of his stand-up show become utterly unsettling and at times revolting. The film could show mercy and stop at one to two minutes of his more deranged antics, but instead subjects you to a protracted display of just how insane this man might possibly be. In Adam’s hands, these excessive, indulgent performance scenes take on disturbing but intriguing ambiguity, as you again wonder where the performance ends and the real man begins. When Henry confesses to a crime during his show and launces into an elaborate, passionate reenactment on stage, you shift uncomfortably in your seat wondering how much of it might just be true. Wondering just how much of an animal this man truly is.

Watching this film as an Adam fan, these scenes are unparalleled displays of his range and prowess. He’s in turns amusing and revolting; intolerable and pathetic; but always, always riveting. I couldn’t help thinking to myself that for the casual, non Adam-obsessed viewer, the effect of these scenes might stop at crass and unappealing. But in terms of the sheer range and power of acting on display? These scenes are a damn marvel. Through these scenes alone, his performance largely imbues the film with its wild, primal, and vaguely menacing atmosphere.

His stand-up scenes were, to me, some of the most intense of the film – sometimes downright difficult to endure. But they’re only a microcosm of the R A N G E he exhibits throughout the film’s entirety. Let’s talk about how he’s animalistic, menacing, and genuinely unsettling to watch (Leos Carax described him as “feline” at some point, and I 100% see it); and then with a mere subtle twitch of his expression, sheen of his eyes, or slump of his shoulders, he’s suddenly a lost, broken thing.  

Henry McHenry is truly to be reviled. Twitter might as well spare their breath and announce he’s already cancelled. He towers above the rest of the cast with intimidating, predatory physicality; he is prone to indulgence in his vices; and he constantly seems at risk of releasing some wild, uncontrollable madness lingering just beneath his surface. But as we all well know, Adam has an unerring talent for lending pathos to even the most objectively condemnable characters.

In a repeated refrain during his first comedy show, the audience keeps asking him, “Why did you become a comedian?” He dodges the question or gives sarcastic answers, until finally circling back to the true answer later in the film. It was something to the effect of: “To disarm people. It’s the only way I can tell the truth without it killing me.” Even for all their sick spectacle, there are also moments in his stand-up shows of disarming vulnerability and (seeming) honesty. In a similar moment of personal exposition, he confesses his temptation and “sympathy for the abyss.” (This phrase is hands down my favorite of the film.) He repeatedly refers to his struggle against “the abyss” and, at the same time, his perceived helplessness against it. “There’s so little I can do, there’s so little I can do,” he sings repeatedly throughout the film - usually just after doing something horrific.

Had he been played by anyone else, the first full look of him warming up before his show - hopping in place and punching the air like some wannabe boxer, interspersing puffs of his cigarette with chowing down on a banana – would have been enough for me to swear him off. His archetype is something of a cliché at this point – a brusque, boorish man who can’t stomach or preserve the love of others due to his own self-loathing. There were multiple points when it was only Adam’s face beneath the character that kept my heart cracked open to him. But sure enough, he wedged his fingers into that tiny crack and pried it wide open. The film’s final few scenes show him at his chin-wobbling best as he crumbles apart in small, mournful subtleties.

(General, semi-spoiler ahead as to the tone of the film’s ending – skip this paragraph if you’d rather avoid.) For a film that professes not to take itself very seriously (how else am I supposed to interpret the freaky puppet baby?), it delivers a harsh, unforgiving ending to its main character. And sure enough, despite how much I might have wanted to distance myself and believe it was only what he deserved, I found myself right there with him, sharing his pain. It is solely testament to Adam’s tireless dedication to breathing both gritty realism and stubborn beauty into his characters that Henry sank a hook into some piece of my sympathy.

Not only does Adam have to be the only actor capable of imbuing Henry with humanity despite his manifold wrongs, he also has to be the only actor capable of the wide-ranging transformations demanded of the role. He starts the movie with long hair and his full refrigerator brick house physique. His physicality and size are actively leveraged to engender a sense of disquiet and unpredictability through his presence. He appears in turns tormented and tormentor. There were moments when I found myself thinking of Conan the Barbarian, simply because his physical presence radiates such wild, primal energy (especially next to tiny, dainty Marion and especially with that long hair). Cannot emphasize enough: The raw sex appeal is off the goddamn charts and had me – a veteran fangirl of 3+ years - shook to my damn core.

The film’s progression then ages him – his hair cut shorter and his face and physique gradually becoming more gaunt. By the film’s end, he has facial prosthetics to make him seem even more stark and borderline sickly – a mirror of his growing internal torment. From a muscular, swaggering powerhouse, he pales and shrinks to a shell of a man, unraveling as his face becomes nearly deformed by time and guilt. He is in turns beautiful and grotesque; sensual and repulsive. I know of no other actor whose face (and its accompanying capacity for expressiveness) could lend itself to such stunning versatility.

Quick note here that he was given a reddish-brown birthmark on the right side of his face for this film?? It becomes more prominent once his hair is shorter in the film’s second half. I’m guessing it was Leos’ idea to make his face even more distinctive and riveting? If so, joke’s on you, Mr. Carax, because we’re always riveted. ☺

I mentioned way up at the beginning that the film is bookended by two scenes where the lines blur between actor and character, and between reality and performance. This comes full circle at the film’s end, with Henry’s final spoken words (this doesn’t give any plot away but skip to the next paragraph if you would rather avoid!) being “Stop watching me.” That’s it. The show is over. He has told his last joke, played out his final act, and now he’s done living his life as a source of cheap, unprincipled laughs and thrills for spectators. The curtain closes with a resounding silence.

Now, I definitely won’t have a section where I talk (of course) about the Ben Solo parallels. He’s haunted by an “abyss” aka darkness inside of him? Bad things happened when he finally gave in and stared into that darkness he knew lived within him? As a result of those tragedies, (SPOILER – Skip to next paragraph to avoid) he then finds himself alone and with no one to love or be loved by? NO I’M DEFINITELY NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT AT ALL, I’M JUST FINE HERE UNDER MY MOUNTAINS OF TISSUES.

Let’s talk about the music! The film definitely clocks in closer to a rock opera than musical, because almost the entire thing is conveyed through ongoing song, rather than self-contained musical numbers appearing here and there. This actually helps the film’s continuity and pacing, by keeping the characters perpetually in this suspended state of absurdity, always propelled along by some beat or melody. Whenever the film seems on the precipice of tipping all the way into the bleak and dark, the next whimsical tune kicks in to reel us all blessedly back. For example, after (SPOILER #1) happens, there’s a hard cut to the bright police station where several officers gather around Henry, bopping about and chattering on the beat “Questions! We have a few questions!”

Adam integrates his singing into his performance in such a way that it seems organic. I realized after the film that I never consciously considered the quality of his singing along the way. For all that I talked about the film maintaining the atmosphere of a fourth wall-defying performance piece, Adam’s singing is so fully immersed in the embodiment of his character that you almost forget he’s singing. Rather, this is simply how Henry McHenry exists. His stand-up scenes are the only ones in the film that do frequently transition back and forth between speaking and singing, but it’s seamlessly par for the course in Henry’s bizarre, dour show. He breaks into his standard “Now laugh!” number with uninterrupted sarcasm and contempt. There were certainly a few soft, poignant moments when his voice warbled in a tender vibrato you couldn’t help noticing – but otherwise, the singing was simply an extension of that full-body persona he manages to convey with such apparent ease and naturalism.

On the music itself: I’ll admit that the brief clip of “We Love Each Other So Much” we got a few weeks ago made me a tad nervous. It seemed so cheesy and ridiculous? But okay, you really can’t take anything from this movie out of context. Otherwise it is, indeed, utterly ridiculous. Not that none of it is ever ridiculous in context either, but I’m giving you assurances right now that it WORKS. Once you’re in the flow of constant singing and weirdness abound, the songs sweep you right along. Some of the songs lack a distinctive hook or melody and are moreso rhythmic vehicles for storytelling, but it’s now a day later and I still have three of the songs circulating pleasantly in my head. “We Love Each Other So Much” was actually the stand out for me and is now my favorite of the soundtrack. It’s reprised a few times later in the film, growing increasingly melancholy each time it is echoed, and it hits your heart a bit harder each time. The final song sung during (SPOILER #2), though without a distinctive melody to lodge in my head, undoubtedly left me far more moved than a spoken version of this scene would have. Adam’s singing is so painfully desperate and earnest here, and he takes the medium fully under his command.

Finally, it does have to be said that parts of this film veer fully towards the ridiculous and laughable. The initial baby version of the Annette puppet-doll was nothing short of horrifying to me. Annette gets more center-stage screen time in the film’s second half, which gives itself over to a few special effects sequences which look to be flying out at you straight from 2000 Windows Movie Maker. The scariest part is that it all seems intentional. The quality special effects appear when necessary (along with some unusual and captivating time lapse shots), which means the film’s most outrageous moments are fully in line with its guiding spirit. Its extravagant self-indulgence nearly borders on camp.

...And with that, I’ve covered the majority of the frantic notes I took for further reflection immediately after viewing. It’s now been a few days, and I’m looking forward to rewatching this movie when I can hopefully take it in a bit more fully. This time, I won’t just be struggling to keep up with the madness on screen. My concluding thoughts at this point: Is it my favorite Adam movie? Certainly not. Is it the most unforgettable? Aside from my holy text, The Last Jedi, likely yes. It really is the sort of thing you have to see twice to even believe it. And all in all, I say again that Adam truly carried this movie, and he fully inhabits even its highest, most ludicrous aspirations. He’s downright abhorrent in this film, and that’s exactly what makes him such a fucking legend.

I plan to make a separate post in the coming days about my experience at Cannes and the Annette red carpet, since a few people have asked! I can’t even express how damn good it feels to be globetrotting for Adam-related experiences again. <3

Thanks so much for reading! Feel free to ask me any further questions at all here or on Twitter! :)

*SYNOPSIS INCLUDED BELOW. DO NOT READ FURTHER IF AVOIDING SPOILERS!*

Synopsis: Comedian Henry McHenry and opera singer Ann Defrasnoux are both at the pinnacle of their respective success when they fall in love and marry. The marriage is happy and passionate for a time, leading to the birth of their (puppet) daughter, Annette. But tabloids and much of the world believe the crude, brutish Henry is a poor match for refined, idolized Ann. Ann and Henry themselves both begin to feel that something is amiss – Henry gradually losing his touch for his comedy craft, claiming that being in love is making him ill. He repeatedly and sardonically references how Ann’s opera career involves her “singing and dying” every night, to the point that he sees visions of her “dead” body on the stage. Meanwhile, Ann has a nightmare of multiple women accusing Henry of abusive and violent behavior towards them, and she begins growing wary in his presence. (He never acts abusively towards her, unless you count that scene when he tickles her feet and licks her toes while she’s telling him to stop??? Yeah I know, WILD.)

The growing sense of unease, that they’re both teetering on the brink of disaster, culminates in the most deranged of Henry’s stand-up comedy performances, when he gives a vivid reenactment of killing his wife by “tickling her to death.” The performance is so maudlin and unsettling that you wonder whether he’s not making it up at all, and the audience strongly rebukes him. (This is the “What is your problem?!” scene with tiddies out. The full version includes Adam storming across the stage, furiously singing/yelling, “What the FUCK is your problem?!”) But when Henry arrives home that night, drunk and raucous, Ann and Annette are both unharmed.

The couple take a trip on their boat, bringing Annette with them. The boat gets caught in a storm, and Henry drunkenly insists that he and Ann waltz in the storm. She protests that it’s too dangerous and begs him to see sense. (SPOILER #1) The boat lurches when Henry spins her, and Ann falls overboard to her death. Henry rescues Annette from the sinking boat and rows them both to shore. He promptly falls unconscious, and a ghost of Ann appears, proclaiming her intention to haunt Henry through Annette. Annette (still a toddler at this point and yes, still a wooden puppet) then develops a miraculous gift for singing, and Henry decides to take her on tour with performances around the world. He enlists the help of his “conductor friend,” who had been Ann’s accompanist and secretly had an affair with her before she met Henry.

Henry slides further into drunken debauchery as the tour progresses, while the Conductor looks after Annette and the two grow close. Once the tour concludes, the Conductor suggests to Henry that Annette might be his own daughter – revealing his prior affair with Ann. Terrified by the idea of anyone finding out and the possibility of losing his daughter, Henry drowns the Conductor in the pool behind his and Ann’s house. Annette sees the whole thing happen from her bedroom window.

Henry plans one last show for Annette, to be held in a massive stadium at the equivalent of the Super Bowl. But when Annette takes the stage, she refuses to sing. Instead, she speaks and accuses Henry of murder. (“Daddy kills people,” are the actual words – not that that was creepy to hear as this puppet’s first spoken words or anything.)

Henry stands trial, during which he sees an apparition of Ann from when they first met. They sing their regret that they can’t return to the happiness they once shared, until the apparition is replaced by Ann’s vengeful spirit, who promises to haunt Henry in prison. After his sentencing (it’s not clear what the sentence was, but Henry definitely isn’t going free), Annette is brought to see him once in prison. Speaking fully for the first time, she declares she can’t forgive her parents for using her: Henry for exploiting her voice for profit and Ann for presumably using her to take vengeance on Henry. (Yes, this is why she was an inanimate doll moving on strings up to this point – there was some meaning in that strange, strange artistic choice. She was the puppet of her parents’ respective egotisms.) The puppet of Annette is abruptly replaced by a real girl in this scene, finally enabling two-sided interaction and a long-missed genuine connection between her and Henry, which made this quite the emotional catharsis. (SPOILER #2) It concludes with Annette still unwilling to forgive or forget what her parents have done, and swearing never to sing again. She says Henry now has “no one to love.” He appeals, “Can’t I love you, Annette?” She replies, “No, not really.” Henry embraces her one last time before a guard takes her away and Henry is left alone.

…..Yes, that is the end. It left me with major emotional whiplash, after the whole film up to this point kept pulling itself back from the total bleak and dark by starting up a new toe-tapping, mildly silly tune every few minutes. But this last scene instead ends on a brutal note of harsh, unforgiving silence.

BUT! Make sure you stick around through the credits, when you see the cast walking through a forest together. (This is counterpart to the film’s opening, when you see the cast walking through LA singing “So May We Start?” directly to the audience) Definitely pay attention to catch Adam chasing/playing with the little girl actress who plays Annette! That imparts a much nicer feeling to leave the theater with. :’)

[melo-efcarist]

you can just enjoy villains you know that right. no need to jump hoops to justify and try to make them better than they are. morally black characters are not a bad thing, theyre not flat or uninteresting. in fact i could argue morally black characters are even more interesting than morally gray.

i like c! dream because hes a villain, an unapologetic one at that. i want to see him to do more and i also want him to suffer bc hes a horrible person who in no way deserves forgiveness from any of the countless people hes hurt. the only ‘redemption’ he should get is him leaving the server and as far away from everyone as humanly possible.

as for the torture. its a shitty plot line from an objective standpoint simply cause its been going on to long and has had no effect on the narrative other than causing undeserving sympathy for him. im not condeming the prison as a whole bc it gives us amazing sam lore and also tommy losing his last life was an amazing scene, probably one of my favorite dream scenes tbh

i mean what im trying to say is. dream is a villain. and you can enjoy that. morals of your favorite character do not reflect your own

Anon, I'm not denying the fact that he's a villain or that he did shitty actions if that's where you're getting at. Also, have you ever considered that you might be wrong about me and how I view C!Dream? Like, I was a c!dream anti as well, until I actually saw his character in a better light.

The prison arc is a setup for something much more, I reckon, but that's just a small little theory I have inside my head. Like, you're allowed to enjoy his character like that if you want to, but I do find my view on C!Dream more enjoyable now than back in February when I was an anti.

Your little side comment about the prison and torture is something that I (obviously) do not and would not agree with for very much obvious reasons. We do not share the same take on his character. However, you could ask about my view on that another time because it's pretty long, I think, I don't know, brain organization is difficult I just have lots of thoughts about him and the prison.

Morals of my favorite character do in fact not reflect my own, and I understand that. I'm not an idiot; this isn't my first fandom. I don't go out of my way to justify or excuse any actions any character does, and only provide reasoning to it.

The terms "unapologetic" and "irredeemable" when applied to a person - whether fictional or real - is just laughable to me. Call it futile optimism, but people can change. They always can. There are irredeemable actions but that's different from people. I made a post talking about this I'm pretty sure but I'm too lazy to link it.

If you're left here asking "But why? Why would they ever think he's a morally grey character?" Because that's just how I view people in general, everyone's fucked up but you can always make a grey lighter with some white (basic color theory, really). If there's a person that is actually genuinely morally black, then that person can still change, no matter what. It would be hard and incredibly difficult but that person is a person, and people can still change. I'm a pretty hopeful person, you could say.

Like take C!Wilbur for example, or even C!Sam, C!Wilbur's hurt a lot of people, and according to C!Fundy, a shitty father. C!Sam literally gave C!Quackity enchanted netherite tools to hurt C!Dream and said to "Make sure you(Quackity) do it right." The pain that they've caused can't be made up for, but they can still improve as a person because that's just how people are. They make mistakes. They make choices that they think they have to. They make decisions that they think are the best but in reality, aren't.

The last 2 sentences are very much seen in C!Dream as CC!Dream confirmed that C!Dream has that "ends justify the means" mindset which is definitely not okay. Redemption (in writing) is the process of becoming better as a person. It's the process of realizing that you've made a mistake, or a lot of mistakes, and that it's time to change for the better.

C!Dream doesn't want to become better, not now at least. Well, obviously, he doesn't, how the hell would putting him in a prison do that?

A side note, wanting a character to be redeemed is not a bad thing. Like that's literally just a person wanting a character to be less bad. I genuinely don't get why people are so against it when redemption is literally nothing but good. Genuinely, what are the cons here?

A side side note, to say that a person being literally tortured is undeserving of sympathy is uh, is kinda dehumanizing not gonna lie. He's not a monster or an animal that has no weaknesses or emotions. He can still be hurt. "Unnecessary sympathy" sounds a tad bit better, but even then it still sounds kinda iffy. People give sympathy not because it's deserved or earned, but because it's a natural emotion that some people get for some other people. I get that you don't feel sorry for him and all (which is valid), but let other people feel sorry for him at least. Man, I was planning for this to be one of my shorter posts but it ended up just not being that short. I think I worded it all pretty well, I kinda just said the stuff on my mind unfiltered. Anyway,

TL;DR - I still feel sympathy for C!Dream, people can change, and that's what gives me hope in him (hope for everyone really). If you don't like that, then I suggest blocking me instead because well, yeah.

[dreamsmp-au-ideas]

I was going to actually post this before asks closed (didn’t get the chance), but Teddy Bear Anon, you are one of my favorite people and a magnificent creature. You get my vibe. 

About Bad canonically being Sapnap’s dad I feel like that has so much extra angst potential when we consider the rest of the found family. Like. Sapnap, Tommy, and Fundy all have dads who started with the best of intentions but for one reason or another ended up slowly becoming a danger to them. I imagine Tommy and Fundy one day showing up with a cake and telling Sapnap “We regretfully welcome you to the shit dad club” and Sapnap is torn between being upset still and laughing over the absurdity of the situation.

Bonus points if Tommy made the cake using a recipe book that Niki gave him, the last gift Niki ever gave to Tommy. Tommy was originally a really bad cook/baker but after the egg really started to take over he went full survivalist. Leaning to cook was necessary but learning to bake was something he did as a way to raise everyone’s spirits. He’s never gotten the flavor quite to match with Niki’s perfectly but everyone agrees he’s gotten pretty decent in terms of skills. He and Fundy in particular will sometimes just spend an entire day in silence baking and then quietly eat their creations while reflecting on the friends they’ve made and lost over the course of L'manberg’s lifetime. When the group got back to the past and Niki made cookies for Tommy and Fundy the pair very nearly started crying.

Tommy is in an interesting position as a character since he did commit a lot of minor crimes and acted as a general nuisance but he was also still a child. (A very traumatized one considering I canonize SMP Earth with its unlimited lives but even more wars. Including against God. Tommy fought God just let me have this.) He acknowledges the moments when he went over the line and has tried to apologize. In particular at some point before the egg fully takes over he pulls aside Jack and tells him that he’s sorry for the way he acted when he was still in exile, taking one of Jack’s lives and all. Jack and Niki in particular are an interesting subject to address and a painful one for immune!Tommy to think about when he sees younger Niki because the three never fully tossed out the hatchet but it was obvious in the eyes of someone like Sam that both of them were growing more and more hesitant to hurt Tommy. It was made worse by the fact neither were even marginally immune, and it didn’t take long for the egg to get to them.

He never stopped being chaotic. Tommy at his core is just that kind of person. He did, however, grow up enough to act in a more mature manner. Started to recognize what’s too much. In particular he became a lot less violent and willing to lash out after Sam Nook in essence reparented him. He’s still an absolute wild card of a person, which in the eyes of Sam and Sapnap is a good thing. For this au I think we should actually address Tommy having severe ptsd and during the building of his hotel/the early days of the egg before it becomes a noticeable threat it shows. He’s a lot more subdued. Shows of aggression all carry a kind of desperation and his typical jokes feel flat. Lashing out at people slowly becomes more of a defense mechanism to see if someone’s going to leave or betray him, to test the limits of how nice they’re willing to be. After all, nice people have only ever been nice to Tommy when they wanted something from him. His eyes, especially after L'manberg is blow sky high, are well and truly gray. The first time Tommy genuinely laughs after filling Sapnap’s room with chickens is considered celebration worthy to them. His pranks take on a more hermitcraft-esque feel to them which honestly makes them more funny.

By the time they get to the past Tommy has recovered, but he still carries the kind of maturity that like Teddy Bear mentioned is reminiscent of age swap Tommy. When he gets especially stressed though, Immune!Tommy will slip into moments where he acts as tired and done with the world as age swap Tommy. With that said, most of the time he just acts like a more mature Tommy. Nothing could ever completely erase his unique vibe which Ranboo has gone on record as describing “Willing to fight God deaf, blind, and backwards just to prove a point." 

Immune Fundy and Tommy get on really well once Fundy manages to catch up with the rest of the group. It gets to the point where everyone from the past is kinda shocked since smp Fundy and Tommy do not get along. At all. Literally the first night Fundy’s back someone goes to wake them up and they find Fundy asleep on top of Tommy which is a wild experience since this Tommy is a goliath who often refuses to take off his full Netherite max enchant armor. He really becomes a "looks like he could kill you but is actually a cinnamon roll” kinda mans.

Also, yeah, this is Dream’s retirement arc. He is literally just sitting in the corner watching Tommy dote on his younger self and Tubbo before completely pile driving two of the most powerful people on the server straight into the dirt. At some point Tommy sits down with past Punz. He tells this Punz that their Punz died protecting him and Tubbo and that Tommy never got to properly thank their Punz so he’s going to thank this Punz. Tommy then gives Punz an entire stack of Netherite. If we’re gonna go ahead and agree on Phoenix Tommy then Tommy is fire proof, meaning he probably spent a large amount of time in the nether to avoid the egg crew and get rare supplies. Meaning he also probably did a lot of mining just to distract himself and it resulted in him being loaded. Tommy used to have a fear of tnt and explosives but he seems like the type of mad lad to say “exposure therapy” and make a massive cavern in the underbelly of the nether.

I think it would also be really interesting to dedicate like, a couple of chapters to other people’s perspectives. I kind of want to set the time they arrive in the past partway through the Pogtopia arc since I like mildly unhinged but not completely gone Wilbur. Plus then it also makes more sense for Techno to be there. Just prefer the aesthetic really. I want to have Wilbur see this version of Tommy and come to a sudden “oh” moment. I want to have a moment where Tubbo looks between his Tommy and this new Tommy, seeing himself nowhere to be found, and has enough what the fuck moments to become aggressively protective of his own Tommy. Especially if immune!Tommy ever admits to the past Tubbo why he is the way he is, what he faced under the thumb of the people he trusted. Which, out of everyone on the server, Tubbo would be the first one from the past to actively learn. 

I am fully on board with Tommy knowing how to sew. That should just automatically be canon in literally ever AU. Tommy for all intents and purposes is still Phil’s child for me. Survival runs in the family the same way that chaos does, so he’s got a ton of basic survival skills that he just doesn’t show off because it’s still Tommy. He would have been completely fine in exile if it wasn’t for Dream. Whenever someone ruins their clothes in the Immune group they automatically go to Tommy and at first the past versions are very confused (except for past Tommy and Tubbo obviously) and then Tommy’s just “Sapnap this is beyond ruined it can’t be saved, let me make you something new” and within a couple days he makes Sapnap a completely new outfit. Like maybe Sapnap fell into a lava pool because Blaze Sapnap Supremacy and his clothes are beyond saving and everyone is beyond baffled when Tommy just acts like this is a weekly occurrence. He’s memorized Sapnap’s measurements and style tastes and already had a new outfit in the works for him that Sapnap immediately adores upon it being presented to him. It takes about a week for past Eret to learn that Tommy stress sews new clothing and he cannot think of a better model. Eret has never had such a full closet. Eret has everything from three piece suits to ball gowns now. Eret lives in terror of the days where Tommy disappears god knows where with Fundy and the two reappear with a new wardrobe for the entire god damn server. 

Speaking of disappearing I really like the idea of part phoenix and part tanuki Tommy for a couple reasons. Being a Tanuki he’d have access to enough magic to hide his hybrid traits, which if they’ve been present for long enough would be a necessity to him. Additionally think about Fundy and Tommy building a den under Church Prime that slowly turns into a maze. Think about it. It starts off simple and then they both start digging more and it gets deeper and deeper and more complicate and the two just refer to it as their den and the only ones who are fully aware of the connotations of that word are Sam, Sapnap, and Ranboo who remember the absolute hell that was trying to navigate the original. Just Fundy and Tommy bonding over the fact they are literally the only creatures on this server that have this catacomb memorized and at the end of the catacomb is their saferoom which connects to rail way that the two spent a month straight on. It goes at least 25k blocks from spawn and it’s a final emergency resort in case they can’t stop the egg and the Immunes needs to regroup and essentially try again (if they keep bringing their younger selves with them then hopefully they’ll finally get an army large enough to stop this, but everyone really hopes it doesn’t come to that.)

I’m working on the first chapter of my fic right now actually if I’m gonna be honest and phoenix Tommy is absolutely without question canon to it but I’ve still been going back and forth on if I want him to be part tanuki as well or just blessed/favored by one like Teddy Bear mentioned. I’m also tucking away the whole thing about the magma blood for later use. Phoenix Tommy just makes sense. They used to call him Zombie Kid for a reason back on SMP Earth, he just literally does not die ever unless he decides he does.

~Snapdragon & Firefly

[ruby-whistler]

info taken from the research conducted by @/tower-of-deceit, all recorded responses were and remain anonymous. just some psychoanalysis of the fandom’s opinion on c!dream, since i ran through all the answers to one specific question and picked up some interesting patterns. (link to original post) /dsmp /rp

people who don't like c!dream have said these things about c!dream enthusiasts in the survey (enthusiasts being apologists, sympathizers, and enjoyers, they didn't use these terms but it was easy to sort either way). picked up some rough stats and intriguing responses based on reading every single entry on the sheet.

90% "enjoyers are ok, apologists aren't"

3% "enjoyers are ok, sympathizers and apologists aren't"

2% "don't care, to each their own"

2% "i don't understand c!dream sympathizers"

2% "i like sympathizers' analyses"

1% "apologists are ok"

that three percent interestingly enough seems to display a rather large bias.“He was always a villain … claiming that characters like Wilbur and Tommy made him a villain … It's these people I can't stand.” "the second you say he's misunderstood or the real victim or that wilbur...is the real manipulator..." this is very biased and not based on objective evidence. c!wil's not ‘the real manipulator’ whatever that is, but he did manipulate c!dream into becoming a villain, (courtesy of cc!wilbur being a genius writer and actor) setting the trend for how c!dream would act later on. another person said. "people who excuse his actions or try to say that the others ‘turned him into’ a villain are where it crosses a line." there is evidence c!dream was in fact turned into a villain. he was a misunderstood good guy shifting towards morally grey up until the 16th when he snapped full villain mode. this fall from grace was in no way his own choice, and he was villainized for long beforehand. 

it is interesting to me that people deny proof because they feel such strong negative emotion against this character. "i respect their opinions as long as they dont sympathize w him or think he's morally correct." is another one of the clear anti-sympathizer anti-apologist ones. "why though? he has no backstory ... he wants power and complete control and there are no established plot reasons for him to want [one big happy family]." "theres a lot of mystery surrounding him and i can see how it would be fun to theorize abt him and stuff. but i dont trust sympathizers lol" people are strongly misinformed about c!dream, either unintentionally or intentionally, which i find interesting. 

“if you unironically call yourself a dream apologist / sympathiser??? get well soon” "if you like him bc u think he can be redeemed/he's not a bad person ... get help" “that’s fine lol but also are you okay ?? do u need someone to talk to ???? is everything alright ????” honestly, all of the people saying c!dream sympathizers need help reminds me of jawsh’s statement that all stans are mentally ill. that’s an (insensitive) insult, not an argument.

"I strongly encourage those who like him to get some therapy" i actually was at my therapist's yesterday and she said liking fictional characters is a-ok. your point?

most of the people who are confused honestly just don't seem to have the information about the character's actual arc, which i think says a lot about the fandom. "i am confused, he's almost irredeemably evil" "I don’t really know why you’d like c!Dream ... he’s not exactly meant to be super sympathetic" "I’m confused by people who see him as sympathetic. He’s only ever done people wrong and doesn’t regret any of it." “I wish they had more of his reasoning to base their sympathy on” “I simply dislike the debates on morality, whos good or bad, where the question often is ‘is dream really that bad?’ Or ‘could there be a way he is justified in this?’ and the sympathy to him where he clearly shouldnt get any.” “????? I would say its because hes a jerk but people who really like him dont really seem to think of him as a jerk so im really not sure” so many people have no idea about the actual character or the enthusiasts’ reasoning, it’s honestly kind of sad.

reponses like “they’re wrong” and “they’re crazy” genuinely cracked me up the first time i read them, sure buddy-

either way, you’re allowed to feel uncomfortable around or dislike c!dream. it’s just the harassment c!dream enthusiasts face (proven by this research) and well, it does grind my gears a little when well-written characters get misunderstood, i must admit.

either way, have a nice day,

- ruby

[thecaffeinebookwarrior]

The Dos and Don’ts of Writing Smart Characters

Since I started this blog, one of the most common questions I’ve received has to do with the portrayal of intelligent characters.  This is also one of the most difficult to answer -- excluding questions about characters with specialized knowledge sets, which are fairly easy to answer with source compilations.  Most of the questions have to do with:  how do you portray a smart character believably?  How do you make the audience relate to them?  Can I still make them likable?  How do I avoid the pitfalls of popular media?

Well, I’m finally here to answer, utilizing examples from some of my favorite (and occasionally, not-so-favorite) media.  Let’s jump in to the dos and don’ts of smart characters!

1.  Do let the audience follow the character’s thought process.  

As demonstrated by:  Tommy Shelby from Peaky Blinders

Albert Einstein allegedly once said, “If you can’t explain it to a five-year-old, you don’t truly understand it.”  And the sentiment rings true:  true genius doesn’t need to dazzle with big words and technobabble.  Instead, it makes the complex appear simple.

The same rings true for brilliant characters.  BBC’s Sherlock (more on that later) ceased to satisfy in its later seasons because it began to rely too heavily on visual glitz to avoid actually explaining its mysteries and how they were solved.  Similarly, the biggest complaints with block buster franchises -- Star Wars, The Avengers, Game of Thrones -- is that they became obsessed with “subverting expectations” cleverly instead of leading the audiences to their most logical and satisfying conclusions.

Meanwhile, the smartest and most satisfying media dazzles not by staying over the audience’s head, but by illustrating how simplistic the solutions can be.

Let’s start with my boy Tommy Shelby, the charismatic, swaggering protagonist of the charismatic, swaggering crime drama Peaky Blinders.  Using only his intelligence (and complete disregard for his own life/suicidal tendencies, but that’s not the point here), Tommy claws his way up from the near-bottom of the social ladder (an impoverished Romani in early 20th century Birmingham) to being a decorated war hero, to being the leader of a feared razor gang, to dominating the race track business, to becoming a business mogul, to becoming a member of parliament and trying to assassinate the leader of the fascist party. He’s also one of the paramount reasons why I’m bisexual.

So how can such a drastic social climb be conveyed believably?  Because Tommy -- as the viewpoint character -- is placed in seemingly inescapable situations, and then proceeds to demonstrate that the solutions to those situations have been there the whole time.  I recently watched a brilliant video on how this is done, which can be viewed here.

Early in season one, for example, he responds to aggressive new methods by the police by organizing a mass-burning of paintings of the king, and uses the press this garners to publicly shame the methods of the chief inspector who’s been antagonizing him.  In the next season, he talks his way into a deal by bluffing that he planted a grenade in his rival’s distillery.  My personal favorite is in season four, when he responds to being outgunned by a larger, American gang by contacting their rival -- none other than an Alphonse Capone.

All of Tommy’s victories are satisfying, because they don’t come out of nowhere -- we have access to the same information he does, each victory is carefully foreshadowed, and we are reminded at every turn that failure is a very real possibility (more on that later.)  So when he wins, we’re cheering with him.

Other examples:  Mark Watney from The Martian, who explains science in its most simplistic terms and with infectious enthusiasm.  He would make every character on The Big Bang Theory cry.  

Also, Miss Fisher from the AMAZING Miss Fisher’s Murder Mysteries.  The dazzling, 1920s, female Sherlock Holmes of your dreams.  I cannot recommend it enough.

To apply this to your own writing:  Remember you won’t dazzle anyone if you smack them in the face with a “brilliant” plot twist.  They want to take a journey with your character, not be left in the dust.  

Also, for everyone in my askbox concerned that they’re not smart enough to write intelligent characters, just remember how simple the problems confronting smart characters can be.  Put them in a difficult situation, and provide them with a means of getting out.  Then, just let them find it. 

2.  Don’t assume the audience is too stupid to keep up (or try to make them feel too stupid to keep up.)

As demonstrated by:  Sherlock Holmes from BBC’s Sherlock.

Say what you will:  there were reasons why everyone was so captivated by this show during its first two seasons.  It felt fresh.  People had yet to become frustrated with the inescapable thirst for Benedict Cumberbatch.  The writing was sharp, and the editing clever.  And it wove a tantalizing web of mysteries that demanded solution.  The problem was, there weren’t any.

The most frustrating for many was how Sherlock faked his death at the end of season two, after which devoted fans spent two years creating intricate theories on how he might have pulled this off.  The creators responded by mocking this dedication in the opening episode of season three, by showing a fan club spinning outlandish theories (one of which included Sherlock and Moriarty kissing.)  This might have been laughed off -- at the time, many seemed to consider it quite funny -- if the creators had bothered to offer their own explanation of how Sherlock survived.  They didn’t.  And so began a seemingly endless loop of huge cliffhangers that promised -- and consistently failed to deliver -- satisfying answers.

The most egregious examples occur in season four, which provided answers to questions no one asked, and withheld answers for things everyone wanted to know.  For example, did you know that the real reason Moriarty engaged Sherlock is because he was hypnotized by Sherlock’s secret evil sister?  The same one who killed Sherlock’s best friend, whom Sherlock convinced himself was a dog?  Yes, that was a real plot point, in the climax of the series.  It’s an effort to befuddle the audience with brilliant and unexpected writing, but instead pulled them out of a story they were already invested in and made them far more critical of its pre-existing faults. 

It’s pointed out in the brilliant (if bluntly named) Sherlock Is Garbage, And Here’s Why that Moffat can be a great writer, but is a consistently terrible show runner, because he’s more interested in dazzling the audience with cleverness than actually telling a satisfying story.  The video also points out that the show often implied Sherlock’s brilliance, without ever letting the audience follow along with his actions or thought-process in a way that DEMONSTRATED his brilliance.  

I highly recommend giving the aforementioned video a watch, because it is not only a great explanation of how Sherlock Holmes can be best utilized, but about how writing itself can be best utilized.

Other examples:  The Big Bang Theory.  As Wisecrack points out in their wonderful video on the subject, the punchline of every joke is “oh look, these characters are smart nerds!” which is repetitious at best and downright insulting at worst.

How to avoid this in your writing:  Treat the audience as your equal.  You’re not trying to bedazzle them, you’re trying to take them on a journey with you.  Let them be delighted when you are.  Don’t constantly try to mislead them or hold intelligence over their head, and they will love you for it.  Also, cheap tricks do not yield a satisfying story:  readers will know when you went into a narrative without a plan, and they won’t appreciate it.

3.  Do remember that smart people can be kind and optimistic!

As demonstrated by:  Shuri from Black Panther.

Yes, brilliant people can be unhappy and isolated by their intelligence, or rejected by society.  But remember that intelligence isn’t synonymous with a cantankerous attitude, or an excuse to be a pugnacious ass to those around you!  

Part of the reason why Shuri of 2018′s Black Panther was such a breath of fresh air was the fact that she subverted almost all preconceptions about how a genius looks, acts, and regards the world.  And it’s not just the fact that she isn’t a sullen, middle-aged white man that makes her stand out:  Shuri has an effervescent attitude, and genuinely loves contributing to her country and family.  She referred to sound-proof boots as “sneakers” (and then explained the pun when her brother didn’t get it.)  She’s fashionable.  She teases her older brother, and cries when he is apparently killed.  She’s up on meme culture.  This makes her unlike pretty much every other genius portrayed in the MCU.

Except maybe the Hulk.  He can dab now.

Shuri is also allowed to take pride in her genius, and can be a bit insufferable about it, which makes her more enjoyable and rounded.  But she is an excellent example of how genius can be explored and portrayed in fiction, and I will forever be embittered that she was underutilized in Infinity War and Endgame.

Why, for example, are all geniuses portrayed as arrogant misanthropes?  Albert Einstein battled depression, but he is also said to have enjoyed blowing bubbles and watching puppet shows.  He was kind to those who knew him.  Similarly, Alan Turing behaved little like his fictional counterpart, described as “shy but outgoing,” with a love of being outdoors.  Nikola Tesla fell in love with a pigeon.  Why do we have to portray these people so damn gravely?

Other examples:  Spencer Reid from Criminal Minds.  Also an excellent portrayal of an intelligent person on the autism spectrum, as he struggles to interface socially but cares profusely for his fellow human beings.  He is brilliant, and completely precious.

Also, Sherlock Holmes -- the original version, and all faithful adaptations thereof.  Anyone who thinks Sherlock is an austere, antisocial jerk isn’t familiar with the original canon.  He blushed when Watson complimented his intelligence, for God’s sake. 

Then there’s Elle Woods from Legally Blonde and Marge from Fargo.  Brilliant, upbeat, optimistic geniuses.

To apply this to your own writing:  If you have a smart character who hates everyone around them for no identifiable reason, ask yourself why this is necessary and what this adds to the plot.  Are they angry about injustice, towards themselves or others?  Are they frustrated with an inability to relate to people?  Do they want to protect themselves or their family at all costs, including politeness?  If not, question why your brilliant character can’t also be kind to those around them.

4.  Don’t make your character perfect at everything they do.

As demonstrated by:  Wesley Crusher from Star Trek: The Next Generation.

Ah, Wesley.  Some call him the original Mary Sue, and it’s one of the only times I’ve seen the term applied with some accuracy.  He is somehow the most gifted and least qualified person on The Enterprise.  He’s Hermione Granger without the charm, jumping in to answer questions before any of the trained officers in the room have the chance to, always in the right.  His only obstacle?  Why, the boorish adults he’s surrounded with simply don’t understand his brilliance!

As early as the series’ very second episode, Wesley -- inebriated by an alien illness -- forcibly takes over the ship from Captain Picard, only to later save it from a threat with a reverse tractor beam of his own design.  

Wesley was obviously inserted as a means of attracting younger viewers, but failed egregiously, because he was too annoyingly perfect for kids to relate too, and not cool enough for them to be invested in.  I binge-watched the various Star Trek series in my youth for Spock, Data, and my wife Seven of Nine, not to watch seasoned military and scientific officers get lectured by an adolescent.  Even Wil Wheaton, who had the misfortune of portraying this character, expressed a dislike for him.  

Precocious children are great, if you get them right.  But get them wrong, and they can easily become your most annoying character, marring the face of otherwise great media.  The most important thing you can do for a brilliant character is endow them with weaknesses and flaws -- even something as small as Shuri’s fondness for teasing her older brother made her enjoyable, as anyone with siblings could relate to their dynamic.  

But, what if you want a supernaturally talented character who not only fails to be a ray of sunshine, but is something of an arrogant, antisocial jerk?  Can they still work, especially if they also happen to be a child? 

Yes, under one extremely important condition:

5.  Do keep your characters out of their depth!

As demonstrated by:  Number Five from Umbrella Academy.

Okay, he’s not exactly a child.  He’s a fifty-eight-year-old trapped in a child’s body, who’s traveled back in time from a post-apocalyptic future to warn his siblings of an incoming Armageddon.  In other news, Umbrella Academy is a weird show.  Unlike the comics, however, the apes don’t engage in prostitution. 

 The effect, however, remains the same:  a preternaturally talented child who talks down to everyone around him, including his (apparently) older siblings.  So why does he work while Wesley fails so egregiously?

For one thing, it’s demonstrated early on that Five has the skills to back up his sanctimonious attitude, with the delightfully ultraviolent Istanbul (Not Constantinople) sequence.  It also helps that he lacks Wesley’s squeaky-clean moral code, to the point at which he can get drunk in public or kill without remorse.  

But:  the element most vital to his success as a character is the fact that he’s kept completely, and consistently, out of his depth.  He knows the world will end in eight days, but he doesn’t know how this will transpire or how to stop it.  Ultimately, he fails again to stop the apocalypse, and must travel back in time with his siblings for another chance.  

Most authors have the impulse to demonstrate a character’s brilliance by allowing them to succeed against insurmountable odds, but the Umbrella Academy writers show tremendous wisdom in allowing Five to fail.  This allows the audience to empathize with him, and countermands the effects of his arrogant attitude.

This advice isn’t just true for pint-sized prodigies.  Look back over this list, and take notes of how often the most successful characters are allowed to fail, to have flaws, and to ascend past their comfort zone.  

Other examples:  Virtually every successful example on this list.

Tommy Shelby, a character of limitless ambition, conducts a new, perilous climb outside of his social rank each season, which almost always puts him in positions of mortal danger.  He faces threats both external (rival gangs, evil priests, and rising fascists) and internal (hello PTSD, suicidal tendencies, and crippling addiction) but either way, we understand that his fast-paced climb is not for the weak-willed or faint-hearted.  

Mark Watney is a brilliant scientist who has been stranded in an utterly impossible situation for which absolutely no one could be adequately prepared (spoilers:  it’s on Mars.)  We are drawn in by his plight, and how he could possibly escape from it, and there we come to admire him for his courage, optimism, and humor.

Shuri, though not the main character of Black Panther, is allowed to show off both tremendous gifts and vulnerability, as she is powerless to stop the apparent death of her beloved older brother.  She watches Wakanda’s takeover both as an innovator and a young woman, and a large reason for her success is that she is allowed to be both.  

How to apply this to your writing:  When portraying intelligent characters, take stock of how often they fail, their level of control over their surroundings, their vulnerability, and their flaws.  We don’t want to read about flawless deities.  We want to read about characters who embody and personify our humanity.  So remember they need to fall down in order to pull themselves up.

Happy writing, everybody! 

[dracolunae]

I posted 1,618 times in 2021

42 posts created (3%)

1576 posts reblogged (97%)

For every post I created, I reblogged 37.5 posts.

I added 593 tags in 2021

#art - 169 posts

#cat - 122 posts

#dragon - 51 posts

#minecraft - 46 posts

#music - 41 posts

#loz - 38 posts

#yugioh - 36 posts

#tma - 33 posts

#useful - 30 posts

#funny - 27 posts

Longest Tag: 138 characters

#things disappear from registering when they are in a place but also the only way my brain will get random moments of ‘oh yeah that thing!’

My Top Posts in 2021

#5

Luna does it make sense when I say that Techno gives off like old vibes but it’s very contradictory? Like you have multiple friends and colleagues of his who watched his vids before (Tommy, Wilbur, Dream, Ranboo) and looked up to him but he’s only 22. He’s been in YT since 2013, and he was only a teenager during that time. Techno speaks as if he’s been around for a decade (well close to) and seen tides change and witnessed channels rise and fall and he’s still really young. And his deep voice and cadence doesn’t help. For me it’s easy to forget he’s only 22 b/c of that. It’s very weird but also interesting to me b/c I feel like that’s such a rarity. To have someone that young who was part of the OG MCYT years. What do you think? -arah fren

@tinyheinz

Yeah, honestly Techno does totally give off old vibes.

Like, so many of the CCs that actually know him thought he was way older than he actually is! Notably that one Quackity clip where he freaks out at the fact that Techno is only a year older than him.

As well with the whole “Who is the older twin, Wilbur or Techno?” So many people said Techno even through Wilbur is, like, notably older than Techno!

He just has the vibes of just knowing shit bc he’s just been around that long, probably because in internet terms he has been around for quite a while!

I think the fact that so many CCs look up to him as a mentor/fear-worthy op veteran plays into this vibe a lot too.

It probably also doesn’t help that chat has tried to claim him as a dad figure for several years now KEKW

Man’s just radiates mentor/dad (apparently)/older brother vibes.

It is very funny though, to see very old Techno clips and hear baby Techno swear up a storm with a tiny little kid voice.

12 notes • Posted 2021-11-26 01:16:33 GMT

#4

COMRADE

COMRADE

20 notes • Posted 2021-02-01 13:03:33 GMT

#3

Starting my own picrew tag chain! With this picrew!

Tagging: @maybewren @jdc1717 @inkedmyths and anyone else who wants to join in! I really enjoyed this one, it’s so abstract!

23 notes • Posted 2021-08-04 01:55:14 GMT

#2

Hi, you can call me Luna, or Draco, or whatever nicknames you wanna give me! (I’ll let you know if any make me uncomfortable.)

I mainly use she/her and they/them pronouns but I’m fine if you wanna use other pronouns including any added to my pronouny, though I’d prefer not to be genuinely referred to by it/its pronouns (it’s okay if it’s a lighthearted bit or smth).

I’m 19 years old, German/Australian and identify as an Ace Demigirl! I am suspected to have ADHD and an anxiety disorder but I do not have a diagnosis yet.

My main/more static interests are liguistics, mythology, world-building (especially in a fantasy context), dragons, cats, owls/corvids/misc. birds/wings, ceramics (especially German Westerwald Steinzeug), Welcome to Night Vale, Origami, Minecraft, Mushrooms

Current interest(s):

Dream SMP and adjacent MCYT

Other Interests I’m especially open to talking about:

Sonic (especially any sort of lore and the comics)

Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure

Witch Hat Atelier

Avatar: Journey to Pandora

Yu-Gi-Oh! (Especially the card game)

Bee and Puppycat

Saiki K.

Hellboy (especially the Guillermo del Toro movies)

Inuyasha

The Legend of Zelda

TMA

Boundaries and general info:

Please do not sexualise me or make jokes about me being into someone sexually if I don’t know you (mutuals get more of a pass to joke about this one, I’ll tell you if I’m uncomfortable)

Empty blogs that follow me get blocked, unless they state that they just follow from a main they don’t use. I don’t like having empty followers, sorry.

I am fine with playful insults and banter, especially if we’ve talked before! I’m okay with die jokes if we’ve talked before or you make you it’s obvious you’re joking.

Feel free to send me asks if you just wanna say hi or chat about something! Or even just to infodump about a shared interest!

If you follow me and need me to tag something I can do that! I tend to organisationally tag most things anyway!

Feel free to tag me in things! I’ll reply/reblog if I feel like it but I’m always happy to get tagged because you thought of me or something :D

This blog is my main for posting a variety of things!

Sideblogs I post on:

MCYT things: @antarctic-empires

Blogs I am a moderator/admin on:

@technoblade-updates

See the full post

24 notes • Posted 2021-08-02 00:36:43 GMT

#1

Tumblr is advertising me pretty knives, since when does the algorithm know me so well <3

I mean, it’s mostly advertising them in French but it’s the thought that counts

36 notes • Posted 2021-11-06 12:35:11 GMT

Get your Tumblr 2021 Year in Review →