#canon evidence is the only thing that supports theories

[peridots-pixiwolf]

[Start ID. A drawing of two scavengers from Rain World, one labelled Sanic and the other one Shrek. Sanic's fur is light brown, with darker extremities, a messy row of pale green spines down its back, and bright blue eyes. They sit contentedly, staring at the screen, with a couple grenades by its feet. Shrek has pale fur, a green head, hands, and feet, and brown eyes. It's facing to the right, with their arms splayed out and an explosive spear on their back. Beside each scavenger are a few woefully-compressed screencaps of their in-game appearance. End ID]

An ode to these silly beasts, who accompanied me on my second visits to Industrial and Chimney

[aya-luri]

Am I the only one who doesn't associate Zekrom with Ingo and Reshiram with Emmet but do it the other way around? Well, perhaps this will become an unpopular opinion, but, if you stop to think about it there are quite a few points that can support this theory. Let's check them out! To begin with, it's the legendary dragon Zekrom the one who appears on the cover of the White version of the game, while Reshiram does the same on the Black version, which would indicate that they actually represent their opposite color. Such small detail is already important in itself, not just the basic color of the dragons per se. Also we all know that Zekrom's associated element is the electric type, like Emmet's Eeleektros, while Reshiram's is the fire type, like Ingo's Chandelure, both being the most representative pokemons of the Subway Bosses.

Although the issue of ideologies of each dragon is used to link them with each brother among the fandom, "ideals" being the one typically attributed to Ingo for his passionate way of encouraging trainers, while for Emmet it is the "truth" for his direct way of communicating, this could work much better the other way around. If we have learned anything from Ingo on Pokemon Legends Arceus, it is that this man is full of existential doubts that lead him to want to get closer to the player in order to know more about himself. That's it, the truth about his origins. But he already had some tendency to this type of behavior long before, as it was evident in the first Black & White games.

"Where is my destination? I've kept thinking, and I've learned one thing. That is, you cannot know what happens after winning without winning." Through such questions, Ingo seeks to reach a real conclusion, his own truths. And perhaps in our idealized image of him we forget that he can also be frank and direct, without the need to embellish words with lies.

"However, it is difficult to win unless you and your partner are in total sync." On the other hand, and as we have said before, the frankness with which Emmet expresses his opinions makes him look like an open-minded character, sincere, making this seem (for many people) to be his only notable characteristic, despite the fact that it's kinda obvious the way in which he greatly idealizes Pokémon battles.

"This time, I am really serious. Really serious. Because if a battle is not serious, it is not fun." He firmly believes that there is a way to go about Pokémon battles, and that way is by giving it your all in them, and in an ideal world, everyone would have fun battling just as he does, but this is not always the case. Emmet clearly expresses how he believes things should be, and he's also aware that his own victory may not only be due to his skill but also to circumstantial elements or, put another way, luck. So he also idealizes the player's own defeat when it occurs, having enough consideration to make it seem like something unfourtunate. Further proof that the fandom has been associating the wrong dragon with the wrong twin can be found in the legend of the twin heroes, where it was the oldest who pursued the truth, while the youngest pursued the concept of ideals.

This birth order also corresponds to Ingo and Emmet, Ingo being the eldest of the both and Emmet the youngest.

That's why despite being white, I think Reshiram suits to Ingo much better and the same for Emmet regarding the black dragon Zekrom. All of these points put together carry much more sense than simply thinking that each dragon's ideologies relates to a brother just by the main color of his outfit. Although this, in the end, does not have much relevance either, since canonically there is no relationship between these legendary Pokémon and the Subway bosses, other than the simple fact of playing with mere chromatic issues. Still, it's always fun to speculate, right?

[starbylers]

Rambling about things that’ve been said a million times but like…character’s final scenes in each season foreshadow what will be going on with them in the next season right? We’ve seen this. So by that logic we literally know what’s going to happen in s5. (In terms of character’s journeys, not talking about plot). Like we know for certain. They’re barely even theories to me anymore it’s just canon waiting to happen 😭. A huge amount of my Byler confidence comes from this tbh so if you need a little boost maybe this will help.

Dustin’s scene shows he is going to be grieving Eddie (we’ve already had confirmation of this I think so we know the pattern follows for s4 that final scenes are foreshadowing)

Lucas’ scene shows he will obviously be doing everything possible to care for and help Max

El’s scene shows she’s going to be focused on 1) saving Max & defeating Henry and 2) her family and having the support of her dad back

Caleb literally mentioned that Lucas & El’s relationship will be explored and we know Max is the thing that ties them together (the boyfriend and the best friend) so that’s another piece of evidence of s4 final scenes being foreshadowing

So it has to follow that Will & Mike’s scene shows they are definitely going to be working as a team

And if we take symbolism into account…

Their final one-on-one in s3 lingered on a shot of a blue telephone on yellow wallpaper & we know all about their s4 communication issues so yeah we’re absolutely taking symbolism into account

…that red flipped couch? They’re going to be in the upside down. Together. In the season where Will is going to have an emotional arc which will ‘tie the entire series together’. (Although even if the couch stuff was somehow incorrect the team part still stands).

To me the chances of M*leven being endgame in this scenario are so tiny they’re almost nonexistent? If next season was about showing how strong of a couple and how in love they are (which is basically the only place their story could really go atp if the intention was for them to be endgame), they would’ve had their final scene together! El would be sitting in Will’s place on the couch! Mike would be reaching into the light and grabbing El’s shoulder, symbolising that he’s choosing her.

The meaning behind this shot is so clear it’s almost funny like it literally looks like some magical celestial beam of light from heaven is shining down on where they’re connected

They wouldn’t be spending the season with their stories primarily focused on & tied to other people (“other people” being Mike’s literal other love interest!!!) if the show was trying to tell a story of them being this alleged central power couple working together and growing together in a loving, healthy, mature, supportive relationship. It’s completely illogical.

I feel like it’s so obvious that Mike and Will are at least going to be working together next season, and it’s incredibly weird to me that people even try and argue us on that point. Is it denial? Is it the fact that deep down, they are actually aware of how foreshadowing and logical story structure work and they’re scared that if they admit Mike and Will are going to be paired up, they’ll have to admit where the story is inevitably leading…?

[paper-starz]

WELCOME HOME THEORIES(+ Observations)

I CANNOT BELIEVE IT

after so many hours, days, months.... ITS BACK!

And now, after careful observations, I present to you fine fellows a few theories and observations. THIS WILL BE VERY LONG AND IT WILL CONTAIN SPOILERS FOR THE UPDATE!!

OK to start off, lets debunk a theory thats been bugging me: THE WELCOME HOME NEIGHBORS ARE DEAD THEORY!

yeah.... has been debunked. Look no further than the guestbook! PG 2 SPECIFICALLY!

Image reads: idonotknowwhatclownis_iaskedfrank_hesaidbarnaby_hereisbarnaby.png

So, Wally was able to ask Frank what a clown was during the time of this ask, therefore, none of the puppets are dead (yet)

"But Paperstar!" I hear you cry. "The neighborhood descriptions were in past tense, while Wally's and Home's neighborhood descriptions were in present tense!"

And for that, I have a simple answer: The puppets aren't aware. Since they aren't aware, they still think that they are living during the 70s. To us, the 70s have already past! And since Wally and Home are aware that they aren't living in the 70s anymore, they use present tense. NOW ONTO THEORY NUMBER 1

THE RED BOOKS THEORY

As we all know, when we look into the website, doodles (presumably made by Wally) are littering the website and sending us into secret links!

While these doodles are fun, creepy, and cool to look at... have we ever stopped and wondered how exactly Wally is doodling onto the website?

By doodling onto a book.

Throughout the website, we see few instances of Wally doodling. Where was he doodling on specifically?

On a red book. But I can take it FURTHER.

I believe the book that Wally is doodling on is THIS ONE

A RED BOOK WITH SWIRLS AND AN EYE.

All 3 things connected to Wally. (Lord knows Wally loves drawing swirls and eyes, especially in this update) "But PAPER!!!" I hear you scream. "THIS BOOK IS IN REALITY! HOW CAN WALLY GET THIS BOOK IF HE'S STUCK IN WELCOME HOME?" Ah, patience, dear viewer! This is called the Red BOOKS theory, not the Red BOOK theory. It's simple, there's two books, one in Welcome Home, and one IRL. As above, so below

Whatever happens above, also happens below!

And it seems like the Question Answerer is in possession of this book as well.

Which brings me to my next theory!

THERE ARE TWO PEOPLE HACKING INTO THE WEBSITE

Specifically Wally (pretty much confirmed) and the Question Answerer.

If the Red Books theory is (hypothetically) true then the IRL book SHOULD be able to doodle onto the site as well! But how do we know this?

Pay close attention to these doodles of Barnaby. Notice one that's... Different from the others?

YES YOU ARE CORRECT, VIEWER! THE RIGHT ONE IS DIFFERENT!

As you see, the right one is scraggly, rushed, not coloring in the lines at all!

BUT WAIT THERES MORE!

Yeah, so it appears to me that Wally draws neater, while the 2nd doodler seems to draw messier and they don't even color the full drawing in most of the time! (For all I know this info could be vice versa. With Wally being the messier drawer and the 2nd doodler being neater.) BUTTTTTT IF YOU WEREN'T CONVINCED OF THESE DOODLES, I HAVE MORE EVIDENCE TO PROVE MY THEORY OF TOO DOODLERS

WALLY CANONICALLY CANNOT DRAW HEARTS (<- Click for proof)

And yet, there are hearts littered not only in the Guest Book page, but all across the website as well. And unless Eddie is helping Wally draw hearts every time he needs to draw one, then I doubt that Wally is the one doodling these hearts.

And for the last piece of evidence saying that there IS a second person, look no further than the HANDWRITING.

Say it with me kids! "One of these things is not like the other!"

ITS THE MIDDLE ONE! YES THE MIDDLE "hello"

It's all lowercase, while Wally usually writes in all UPPERCASE, and in red.

Even his signature supports this statement as well!

Therefore, dear viewers, I believe we need to pay closer attention to the doodles. Who is the one ACTUALLY writing to us?

[avelera]

"Sometimes it's not that deep," aka, How to Write a Mystery (That's Actually There)

A good rule of thumb about predicting a well-written mystery is that other people are predicting the same things. Even better if a lot of other people, on their own, are analyzing the material closely and each, on their own, are reaching the same theories and conclusions! Yes, this can mean everyone's falling for the same red herring too, of course, but generally speaking, no writer is putting all that effort into writing a mystery only one person can solve.

The thing is, a good mystery should be predictable, but at varying speeds based on the attentiveness of the audience.

The most laser-focused readers (or viewers), the true Holmesian mystery-solving mystery readers with encyclopedic knowledge and a fine-toothed comb to go through the material, should be ahead of the characters trying to solve the mystery, but not so far ahead that the story becomes boring, ideally. Your mystery shouldn't be so predictable that it can be figured out on page one but, if a truly clever sleuth does figure out your mystery on page one, your story should also be good enough that it is still an enjoyable tale even if the audience know how it ends.

The attentive reader should figure out the mystery at about the same time as the main character. They should have the "Aha!" moment about two seconds before the character solves it for that little thrill of feeling very clever, which to authors is very funny, because if we're doing our job right, we didn't just set the clues for you to solve the mystery, we agonized over the timing of each clue's introduction just to make sure you got that little thrill of self-satisfaction at the moment we wanted you to.

The casual reader should figure out the mystery when the characters figure it out. They should get the enjoyment of seeing the mystery solved, and in retrospect be able to see the clues, but in the meantime have enjoyed their time nonetheless. It should be a good story on its own.

Now, this is relevant to fandom theory mongering because clues are not accidental. And there are usually a lot of them, if the author is doing their job. Yes, you should be able to analyze the costume colors to see that there are parallels between the green dress or whatever that the lead is wearing in this episode and how it's a call back to another episode and that means blahblahblah is going to happen, but, that sort of deep-cut, freeze-frame sleuthing is usually only in support of more overt clues intended for general audiences.

(Not to pick on any one fandom, but Ted Lasso S3 for example had a lot of Tedbecca shippers looking for hidden clues in the cinematography as their hopes faded for a canon confirmation of their ship. Alas, those didn't bear out, because they were not accompanied by textual evidence in addition to the subtextual evidence of how any moment now, these characters are going to stop dating and pursuing completely different people and actually hook up with or even verbally express confirmed interest in each other.)

Of course, a mystery can be tough to solve and be satisfying! It is sometimes even possible to solve those truly out there or even not yet fully supported mysteries that eventually turn out to be true (say, predicting a later book in the series before all the clues are even there from installments in the meantime). It can be really satisfying to correctly extrapolate from incomplete data before the author even intended you to see it or had figured it out themselves!

However, more often than not, the clues are deliberate and to assume you're the only one seeing them is probably a sign that they're not actually there.

A good mystery, a well-written one, should provide all the clues for the audience to solve the mystery on their own, within the text, even if the last few pages are ripped out. A good mystery is not a "gotcha". And a sign of a good mystery is that more than one person can pick up on all the clues because those clues are placed deliberately and yes, that requires a certain amount of sign-posting as well and in fact, one of the most fiendishly difficult things to do as a writer is strike the proper balance between sign posting your clues at just the right time to reward your attentive audience with enough data to solve the mystery just before the characters do, but not so early that they lose interest.

So, why is this important for fandoms? Because it's entirely possible to go down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole and convince yourself of stuff that's not there and then get really bummed when it doesn't happen. We're all guilty of this, myself very much included, especially in the largely subtextual world of slash shipping.

There's also real world exceptions and extenuating circumstances to my statement that a good mystery will actually provide the clues: like studio changes, dropped threads due to contractual complications, or a crowded writers room where not every idea gets pursued.

Plus, we've got the whole goddamn JJ Abrams-inspired mystery box bullshit run of television making creators think it's cool to pull one over on the audience and deny the clues they set up just to make a "twist" that no one predicted because it wasn't there, thus betraying the principles of a good mystery, and that also muddies the waters about how good mysteries should be written. (If you can't tell, I absolutely despise writers who pull this bullshit with the intent to trick their audience and they do not deserve any praise for being "clever" to just surprise people with an outcome that's not supported by previous text ala "rocks fall, everyone dies", ugh.)

But besides the damned mystery box crud, there are some good rules of thumb for determining if the clues you're picking up are real or not:

Is the subtext supported by text? Not "is her green dress backed up by a micro-expression glance you can barely see if you freeze-frame the show" but actually in the text. Does someone say, in dialogue, "Hey, we should go on a date," when you're reading subtext between two characters and can you be certain that the writers intended that text to be read the way you read it? One way to tell is if this sort of thing happens more than once, if there are more clues. Of course, there's also red herrings, etc, and hey, that's half the fun of a mystery, not all clues are Clues. But generally speaking, there's more than one clue for important stuff.

Is there evidence against your theory and have you considered it? This is basic Logical Thinking 101, of course, but only looking for evidence that confirms your theory and ignoring everything that doesn't will definitely convince you of some pretty wild stuff in a hurry!

Have you considered the genre of the work and whether it even has mysteries? Or is it, for example, a comedy which might address those "clues", most likely comedically, but might just as easily not even realize they were seen as clues?

But mostly importantly: do other people have this theory? Did they arrive to it on their own, based on the same text? If you are the only person with a theory and cannot use textual evidence to convince more than one person who is not of the same background as you (ie, convince your less-progressive dad that these two guys definitely want to boink based on the way they look at each other) there is a very likely chance you are stringing together disparate data points to match your desires, not the evidence. Bonus points if, seriously, you can convince someone who is of the same demographic as the content creators (writers, directors, etc.) that these clues are intentional. Most likely, your less-than-progressive dad has more in common with the thought process that went into creating the vast majority of content than your average Tumblr user does. (OFMD is the exception that proves the rule.)

As a final note, one thing it's very dangerous to do as a writer is introduce the idea of clues and a mystery without making your mystery air tight. Mysteries invite the reader to put their brain on high alert. It means they're looking for clues everywhere and even seemingly innocuous throw-away descriptions or the camera lingering on a random prop for too long can be misinterpreted and end up pissing off the audience who thinks it's a Clue.

You have to be so deliberate with a mystery, because it's not about just controlling the clues you release, but controlling the perception of the audience so they know what isn't a clue (unless it's a red herring, of course). That's part of why scifi author David Brin said all aspiring writers should have their first novel be a mystery, because it teaches you volumes on how to control your narrative and make everything intentional.

[liam-summers]

I feel like we don’t really talk about how there’s a through line from “I Will Remember You” all the way to “End of Days” and a resolution to Angel turning back time so he can prevent Buffy from an untimely death. (I acknowledge that the following was probably not intended by the writers, but I think there's sufficient evidence in canon to support this theory.)

In "I Will Remember You", the Mohra demon says the End of Days has begun, which leads Angel to go see the Oracles to confirm if this is true and asks what will happen to Buffy. The Oracles say she will die, sooner than she would have, and Angel asks them to take his human life in exchange for hers:

Jump to Season 7, in an episode titled "End of Days", Angel shows up with the amulet that would ultimately lead Buffy & Co. to defeat the army of Turok-Han and the First Evil. (S7 frames the battle as a war between evil and good, with the slayer/potentials as soldiers for good vs the First's army of Turok-han as "The Soldiers of Darkness")

So...if Angel had remained human in IWRY, Jasmine and Wolfram & Hart would've no longer had any interest in him. They would've never brought Darla back as part of a scheme to turn Angel evil, Angel would've never done the Trial and earned the second life that Darla ended up not being able to use at the time, he would've never spiralled and slept with her, Connor would've never been born, Jasmine would've had to find some other way to bring herself into the world (she needed Cordelia AND Connor to make it happen), the Angel Investigations Team would've never prevented "world peace" and Wolfram & Hart would've never offered them a job as a result, which specifically included the amulet that Angel brings to Buffy in the finale (that W&H was hoping he would wear). In turn, Buffy & Co. would have faced the army of thousands of Turok-Han, and more than likely died, with the rest of the world quickly following. (End of Days, literally)

And actually, now that I'm on the topic, I think there's also something to be said about the First Evil's introduction in "Amends" and how it specifically targeted Angel and Buffy. In my opinion, the First Evil was not only trying to get Angel to kill Buffy, but it was also trying to get Buffy to kill Angel. It was trying to manipulate them with the dream sharing, driving Angel crazy with ghosts from his past, trying to make Buffy believe that Angel was a threat and needed to be killed, but at the same time actually working to make Angel give in and turn evil and kill her, because it knew that the two of them would play a major role in it's ultimate demise. It's also interesting that Buffy's speech to Angel in "Amends" ends up becoming the motto of Angel's own journey on his own show, which he exercised in IWRY (choosing to continue fighting, even if it meant making hard and painful choices)

(screenshot from this gifset by @buffysummers)

and the episode is often seen as a backdoor pilot for Angel the Series.

A line that is especially relevant here is: "Maybe this evil power did bring you back, but if it did it's because it needs you. And that means that you can hurt it.", which he DOES end up doing...4 years later.

There’s also this:

Again, I realize that none of this was probably intended or planned, but I do find it really interesting that we can clearly see a domino effect/through line originating directly from the specific events that happened in each of these episodes. And I think it's especially beautiful that the end result had so much to do with Buffy and Angel defying destiny through the power of their connection, their love, their shared mission/values, and their impact on each other...all things that the forces of darkness greatly underestimated.

[yazthebookish]

I posted my take on the Lightsinger theory and Gwyn's "luring" powers theory on Reddit two days ago but thought I'll reshare it here (with some additional thoughts)

The only canon information we have on Lightsingers:

Nesta winced. Cassian went on as she scanned the bog, "There are lightsingers: lovely, ethereal beings who will lure you, appearing as friendly faces when you are lost. Only when you're in their arms will you see their true faces, and they aren't fair at all. The horror of it is the last thing you see before they drown you in the bog. But they kill for sport, not food."

Does this correlate with anything Gwyn did in ACOSF? The answer is no.

I am not saying it is impossible for her to be a Lightsinger though where things stand it's unlikely in my opinion, but I'd attribute any potential powers either singing or glowing to her River Nymph heritage. We have no idea of her powers and she's also half High Fae of course she'll have powers like every other High Fae.

I think a lot of the "canon evidence" are different interpretations of the text but sometimes try to present itself as concrete evidence or proof when it isn't. Some attribute her singing during the services as the cause to Nesta having vision of the Prison and the Harp, but that also means we will have to ask what connection is there between Lightsingers and the Prison/Harp? And some believe it's the lyrics that trigger the vision as they're written in the ancient language and "Nesta saw what the song spoke of". Some believe Nesta power reacting to the crackling energy around Gwyn is a sign that she is a Lightsinger, but like... that's an indicator she has powers just like how Nesta in a later chapter felt Merrill's ornerry power. How is crackling energy means it's a Lightsinger when we never saw them? Powers recognize each other sometimes, just like how Feyre was surprised when Eris was able to detect a cold flame in the Dagger Nesta forged when it was given to him as a gift (like calls to like, Eris also has flame power).

In the bonus chapter, it's described at one point that the Shadows danced with Gwyn's breath as if it heard some Silent MUSIC (emphasis on music and not song). What was referred to as Music between Souls? The mating bond. Interestingly enough it was that same night when Nessian consummated their bond and they were connected by a music between their souls. So that could be a hint, and at the end of the scene Azriel hears a distant beautiful singing and the shadows sing back, hard to tell whether if it's Gwyn, who went back to trying to cut the ribbon, starts to sing or it's also another wording for a hint at the mating bond (also called the Song of the Soul).

I'm more keen to believe it's the mating bond because there are far more parallels and similar mate language to support it across all her three series and if someone is going to tell me "but Lorcan's chest glowed after he took the blood oath from Aelin—" my love context matters in this case and it doesn't invalidate the 10+ examples I can pull out of similar mate language like in the bonus chapter.

To ADD, for Azriel to be lured to the library at 7pm because of said Lightsinger singing, he has to be able to HEAR the singing for the power to influence him and Azriel didn't hear any singing, he was conscious and aware of his actions. It was mentioned Nesta sang with Gwyn at the services frequently and she didn't make any comments on a vision being triggered or her constantly seeking out Gwyn so there are holes in those kind of conclusions—again, because we never see Lightsingers on page.

"But when he arrives to the library it chimed 7pm!! That's when they sing for the dusk service" welp that's another hole in the theory, it depends on Azriel being drawn to the library because of Gwyn's singing but if he showed up at the library and they don't sing until 7pm then before the clock chimes at 7pm, they weren't singing so... not a convincing answer. Also, Clotho is usually seen during those services and Azriel still found her at her desk.

Early on when ACOSF came out, some readers made connections between Lightsingers and Shadowsingers and made the assumption that Lightsingers are the Shadowsingers' Light counterparts. That's why you had people musing about Azriel's mate being a Lightsinger, but canonically Lightsingers are evil once we go back to the text but we don't even see them to know for sure how they wield their powers or if they even sing because Shadowsinger Azriel doesn't need to sing when he uses his power.

In an Elain book (in this scenario it's her and Azriel), I don't see any purpose of Gwyn being revealed as a Lightsinger or anything about her powers because it'll be used as a plot device for an Elain/Azriel romance rather than contribute to Gwyn's own growth and that's why I don't like it. It will have implications on Nesta and the Valkyries dynamic too. If that's the case it will mean Gwyn will need more page time in an Elain and Azriel book to tackle something like that, especially if they're going to "help" her since that's the reasoning I see often—that she's not evil but she doesn't know it and if she did they will help her but like... why? To make her realize she has been keeping them apart or that she wanted a necklace she didn't even have any clue about.

Given Gwyn's history who even at the end of the book said despite training it didn't erase the fact that she let her sister die, she is still dealing with survivor's guilt, she still refuses to wear the priestesses stone, and also her desire to leave the library and see the world (which we didn't see yet). She has a lot of promise as a character than be a plot device for someone else's relationship.

The way I see it, Gwyn's theoretical powers is used to absolve Azriel of any accountability for his actions (ala Necklacegate) because it's not a good look on him, so it's better to pin it on someone else by saying he was lured against his will (since I often see that the reasoning behind her presence in the bonus chapter is to hint at her powers).

So if I have to read about Gwyn dealing with her powers whether they're good or bad, I'd rather see it from her point of view and for it to be beneficial for her own personal arc and healing journey. My problem isn't her having questionable powers (which I don't mind because many SJM characters had questionable powers but used it for good), I don't want it to be used as a plot device for another couple just to smear her as a character and clear the actions of the other male character so his "love interest" doesn't blame him for his actions.

Whew, this was long but I adore Gwyn and I am not a fan of the current version of the Lightsinger theory. I think even if SJM makes it happen, it would probably play out way differently than the fandom expects.

Also, it's not in SJM's style to use other woman drama in her romances. The other women are often 💀 or insignificant past lovers. I don't see her taking that route with Gwyn at all.

She could be half Asteri and I would still love her and be eager to explore her powers and story, I just don't like it being used to further another couple's conflict or whatever (they already have Rhys and Lucien).

And no, I hate the idea of Gwyn being controlled by either Koschei or Merrill because it takes away her agency and the suggestion here is about her doing things that harms others, how will that not have any implications on Nesta and Emerie and the trio's healing journey? Given her own tragic history and the fact that she was helpless and powerless to help her twin sister and she's still dealing with survivor's guilt over it all.

"Why did you sign up for this, then?" Nesta drank the glass Gwyn extended. "If you already have mind-calming exercises you're accustomed to?"

"Because I don't ever want to feel powerless again," Gwyn said softly, and all those easy smiles and bright laughs were gone. Only stark, pained honesty shone in her remarkable eyes.

Her being controlled is putting her in a powerless position again because she has no choice but to do Koschei or "evil" Merrill's bidding that could potentially harm Nesta and the others. I despite it.

And if I have to read about any comparisons between Gwyn and Ianthe as proof that priestesses can be evil, I'll go insane.

Also, if Gwyn's power can influence anyone through her singing, it would've influenced every single person in the services. It would have influenced other members of the IC. This particular theory is weak and depends one interpretation of the text that tries to present itself as evidence of an evil creature that never even shows up on page.

Gwyn wasn't added in the bonus chapter by coincidence. Sarah confirmed she left crumbs all over the book and specifically his bonus chapter, and what we speculate may or may not be confirmed in the next book so you can't dismiss the bonus by saying it has no relevance when the author said she left crumbs for readers to theorize about, which leads me to believe she wants us to come up with different theories until she publishes the next book where we'll know for sure if we nailed it or not.

[ravelights]

head canon/ theories for who Hisashi is and role he'll play in the story

With DFO resting in the grave, I thought I'd give a few of my other theories I have come up with for Hisashi over the years.

He's the person the Deku narrating everything too. IDK why but for Some reason I always liked this theory. Although there no evidence that Deku is telling the story to anyone, I can't help but think it's neat.

He studies quirks, like that his job. Considering 80% of the world has a quirk I think it's fair to say there would be people studying them for many different reasons. I think he be this strange mash up of a doctor, scientist and academic. His job would make him travel around the world and study bizarre, amazing and dangerous quirks. It also be a great tie in stories wise to the quirk doomsday theory, if it turns out he was really away studying to see if that theory is actually true. (I also think that where Deku pick up his hobby for studying quirks as well) his job would make him have to be away from home for long period's of time and not easy to contact sometimes. Despite how interesting his job sounds, it actually involves a lot of paperwork and reviewing and research.

When he's home he's usually home for a good six months or more, and typically the three would do things together when he's home. Inko doesn't mind Hisashi job because he was doing it long before he met her and didn't want him to quit doing it just because they got together. And like most Japanese housewives she controls the finances he just makes the money that give them all comfortable lives.

I think he's a quite, charming guy who keeps to himself, unlike Izuku and Inko he's much more calm and never cries. He very much like's his life, he has no dreams or goal to become a hero or be out on some battle field. He's a passive guy who isn't big on violence, and see's the value in a ordinary life. I wouldn't think of him as a pushover, but like Izuku he's nice to everyone he meets. Also like Izuku he is the person you do not fuck with, he seems like a guy that vaguely feels like he's been through some stuff, it take a lot to get him mad but when he is, you run for the hills.

Izuku doesn't think of him much because he knows his dad doing just fine and is used to him going away on long trips. But also because as much as he hate to admit it, Izuku does not want to end up like his dad when he grows up. As much as he loves and respects Hisashi and think he's a good man with a stable job, he feared that if he grew up to be his dad then it's an admission to giving up on his hero dream, and just being content with ' an ordinary life'. Something he does not what to think about now that he had a real shot at being a hero. That being said, If Hisashi where to come home at anytime Izuku would absolutely be happy he's home and they go do something together.

Hisashi is the person who introduced heroes and heroics to Izuku, and arguably shaped how Izuku viewed them, and how Izuku would believe a hero would act. Hisashi like Izuku is an All Might fan, just not to Izuku level. Izuku only vaguely remembers, but Hisashi was the one installed a lot of values that is ingrained in to Izuku being, of being a good person. One of them being to never give up on saving a person and that everyone deserve a seconded chance. (I think he'll show up at some point in the flash backs that are happening)

His is neither supportive of Izuku hero dream nor is he dismissive, ultimately he just believes that Izuku life is his own and Izuku can do what he wants. Hisashi just there to provide Izuku with every possible pathway he can get, no matter how impossible they may seem.

He's AFO son, because can you imagine how hilarious that would be.

[madame-mortician]

Phone Guy is the one saying “It’s Me.”

So I’m gonna preface this by saying, this is just a theory/headcanon, so if you disagree with me that’s fine. Nothing in FNAF is 100% canon anyways so it’s okay to have your own personal interpretations, this is just mine.

Also spoilers for FNAF: The Week Before.

In FNAF 1, there’s a well-known Easter Egg of random instances of “It’s Me” being seen across the game.

It’s still, to this day, unknown what this means with there being many theories to discuss it. The most popular I’ve seen is the one where it’s the Crying Child trying to communicate to Michael (the night guard) that it’s him, but since he’s possessing Golden Freddy he can only communicate in this way. This theory is fine, I don’t dislike it or anything, and it does make sense considering that sometimes “IT’S ME” will appear alongside the Golden Freddy Easter Egg, so there is some evidence to support this theory, I just want to discuss my personal theory.

So first up, the entire reason I got this theory was because of the new FNAF book, which if you didn’t know, it’s a prequel that takes place the week before FNAF 1, where you play as Ralph, a.k.a Phone Guy. Now the book isn’t officially out yet, but it did get leaked, and one of the leaked pages is the official canon ending. In this ending, he records his final phone call for Mike before dying and being stuffed into one of the empty suits. He “wakes up” but realises he cannot move or do anything, and that he is dead, and he thinks to himself “It’s me” when realising what that corpse-like smell is.

From this we can tell a few things. First up, it is canon that Phone Guy was stuffed into one of the suits, which we figured but now we have confirmation. Secondly, he isn’t just dead, he’s actually still conscious and haunting the area, he just cannot move and can only wait. He can still sense things since he can smell his own corpse, and he can see the backstage area, so he is fully conscious.

Now the “It’s Me” thing here isn’t entirely the same, as here it’s him realising what that foul odour is, instead of, y’know, trying to communicate with the night guard, but it is still notable since this is FNAF after all.

Anyways here’s the main part of my theory, since we know Phone Guy is definitely still back there and unable to move at all, there’s no way he can try and get help, so he’s just sitting back there, waiting. We get to the next week and Mike starts the night shift, hearing none other than the phone calls Phone Guy had left behind for him. Whether he hears these calls or just knows that his shift has started, he’d realise this is his only way of getting help. Sure he left a message asking Mike to check backstage, but whether or not he’ll actually do that isn’t clear. He can’t get up and physically go up to Mike, so what can he do?

In FNAF, it’s clearly canon that ghosts can change what people see, albeit in small doses. The posters can change to newspapers about the missing children, the paper pals disappear and seem to teleport, Golden Freddy and an oddly positioned Freddy can appear on posters, these are all clearly things that they’re doing with “ghost powers” or whatever, since there’s no way Chica is getting up and sticking newspapers to walls. Now although Phone Guy isn’t technically possessing anything, he’s still a ghost, so he too would have these ghost abilities, and would be able to do small changes in the scenery. What can he do though? Write out a whole message saying he’s stuck in the backstage and needs help? He’s probably not super powerful as a ghost, he can’t even move, so he needs something short and sweet to get the guards attention. So what does he say?

Now you might be wondering why he would say this, but I think not only is it short and easy to spot on those shitty cameras, but it would actual relate to the left behind phone calls. Think of it this way, we don’t get an actual canon time where the “It’s Me” stuff happens, obviously it must happen in canon we just don’t know when since it’s random in each playthrough. Now for most of the nights, what’s going on, ignoring the robot murder stuff? The phone calls.

His only way of alerting Mike and getting any help would be to use his ghost powers to send a short message, either on the cameras or on his face (?) and I believe it’s him trying to say “It’s me, I’m the guy on the phone talking to you.” How successful this ends up being is unknown, but it’s very likely Mike had no fucking clue what “It’s Me” meant and mainly ignored it until Night 4 where he literally hears Phone Guy’s death. Perhaps then the “It’s Me” stuff would make sense.

Another thing is what you see when you get the in your face “It’s Me” stuff.

We see an up close shot of Bonnie and Freddy, Freddy noticeably has bloodshot human eyes. Now we know it’s canon that if you die in FNAF, your corpse is stuffed into the spare Freddy suit backstage, and it’s likely Phone Guy was also stuffed into a Freddy suit. So here’s the thing, I believe this would’ve been his last moments, kinda flashing in our face. An animatronic all up in his face (jumpscare) and then the Freddy suit he was stuffed in, with this human eyes. He’s trying desperately to show Mike what happened to him, but it’s hard and obviously doesn’t explain much.

Whether or not Mike actually searched the backroom and found his corpse, it’s unknown but I feel like he wouldn’t just leave him there.

Of course there is one major thing that doesn’t make much sense in this theory… If the “It’s Me” message is Phone Guy, why does it sometimes play before Golden Freddy appears? The only thing I can think of is it just being a coincidence but that’s lame so I’m gonna admit defeat with this one part unless you guys have any theories.

TL;DR: Phone Guy is the one saying “It’s Me” throughout FNAF 1, because he is trying to tell the player that it’s him on the phone, and that he needs help, he just doesn’t couldn’t make it more specific due to his situation.

[unikhroma]

the big acid theory post

(i am sorry for how long this is)

couple weeks ago someone on discord asked if i could dm them my gripes about acid theory, since they hadn't seen any criticisms of it. i was very surprised to hear that so of course i did what any normal deltarune fan would do and wrote an essay (aka complained for several paragraphs). posting for reference sake so i have all my thoughts in one place and never make a post about this topic again

----------

basically my criticisms for acid theory are on all tiers/interpretations of it as an life-changing event where he ends up disfigured. i don't think it makes much sense to happen for multiple reasons

for it to happen from a narrative perspective i don't really buy it. spamton's downfall is already tragic in that he lost his friends, his fame and fortune, and got evicted. in regards to the mansion, the eviction itself is the tragedy, in particular that it's implied that it wasn't only him that got evicted that day. a swatchling says that the mansion used to be for high-class citizens. the rooms that were once for these citizens are now for lightners, so it wasn't just that he had no money, he was gonna get kicked out anyway.

i mention this cause a common interp of acid theory is that the mansion staff threw him in as punishment, and i think there's little evidence for that given the circumstances. a while ago i went on this whole spiel about how mischaracterizing queen and/or swatch to try and support the theory makes it weaker to me but that's additional stuff

and about the acid as a threat, it's hard to take it seriously when the majority of mentions of it are for gags or game design-related. for example, the gold berdly statue being dropped into the acid slowly dips in because if it just sank instantly, you could very easily miss it. the swatchling being stranded on the island is a goof with anticipating a battle the moment you set the bridge out for them.

for spamton falling into the acid as an explanation for whatever caused him to be a physical puppet (this is going off of taking the addisons' word that he was an addison too), it doesn't really line up. it doesn't make a lot of sense from a lore standpoint; there's no evidence to suggest that the addisons look like puppets underneath. i mean it's an interesting hc, but to assume it's canon that that's why spamton looks like a puppet now is kinda just filling in blanks.

that one q&a answer where spamton talks about there being some kind of "spamton method" he used every day and became "big" to me implies that it was some kind of slow transformation into a puppet. it's not much to go off of, but it's a lot more compelling than taking a tumble in acid. there's more mystery there and might even explain why spamton showed up to the mansion less over time

i think at this point it's clear that at some point he did get pushed in by someone, as stated in the spa attire from the sweepstakes and one of his valentine's cards, but to me it seems like it was an example of him being mistreated by the other rich residents in the mansion. before he talks about getting pushed in a pool, he mentions that he's gotten swirlies at the mansion, and to me it seems like he's still really bothered by his treatment there which is why he mopes about it.

queen mentioning that the acid can shrink people is also played for jokes, even susie in the ch3 video saying that they'll die if they drink the acid is played for jokes (also i think it would probably hurt them cause they're lightners and not cyber darkners)

anyway, if acid theory ends up being directly confirmed without any cryptic wording and all that i would still dislike it. i just don't think it fits with spamton or ch2's themes and it's randomly dark in a way that's not appealing to me. i like psychological horror more and the puppetfication thing already fits that. i know it's definitely appealing to others and i don't think people are bad for liking it per se, but it's not my kinda thing at all nor do i think it's canon, so i personally want nothing to do with it

[oldmanjenkins985]

someone’s morals cannot be accurately judged through their fictional interests because at the end of the day it isn’t a reflection of their morals. You post on ao3 too, do you think everyone who writes about murder, cannibalism, taboo relationships etc is endorsing all of these things irl? And if you think they do, how can you tell?

fact is that the only think you CAN judge people for is their behavior, because that is ultimately what leads to actual crimes. Not someone fantasizing about Barbie dolls

also, ao3 was made by an incest shipper

Hello anon, just because I write about murder, cannibalism, and other stuff, does indeed not correlate to me supporting those things. Hence, why I make my main character, the bad guy. Erik has a sympathetic backstory, but he also willingly murders thousands of innocents including a fucking baby.

I am making it very clear in my writing that killing and eating people is bad because the character doing it is a bad guy. As for canon MD characters, they did it because they were given a false mission and later with Uzi it's because she literally got possessed. Erik is fully conscious and aware he's slaughtering sentient creatures while J calls them barely sentient toasters.

But when you actively support incest, to the point you get giddy when new evidence pops up that supports your incest theories, that's fucked up.

as for ao3 being made by an incest shipper, I'll need some evidence before I can believe that.

[anidaladefencelawyer]

It is important to understand that, regarding romantic relationships...

No romantic relationship is inherently toxic from the get-go, barring those that started out with a massive exertion of intimidation or force against one partner(and then it can't be truly seen as "romantic" at all outside of say YA, which I will give more leeway to deal with stuff like that, and even then a lot hinges on the execution and to what extent can any coercive patterns be effectively overcome). Rather a relationship is just as much shaped by social and material conditions that can make or break it.

And Anidala is no exception.

A lot of the things that Jedi uncriticals like to hold against Anakin and Padme as a couple(ie: never knowing eacn other, “over-idealization”, “two marriages”) and even some legitimate flaws(ie: weak communication, secrecy and paranoia, lack of "preparedness" in a relationship) have more do with a combination of how they were raised, combined with being literally separated for most of their three years together by a war, a war which broke Anakin's mind. They never have any time to even define themselves as a couple or talk about what boundaries are.

Even some of the "OOC" stuff that Anidalas hate and Jedi uncriticals point as the "smoking gun" evidence that Anidala would never work at all like the Clovis arc could be explained by this: Anakin lost Ahsoka and having witnessed the death of his mother, not having a good mindset to deal with loss because it never was imparted onto him properly, and this would only worsen his possessive tendencies. And that's not even getting into headcanons that Anakin was being exposed to far-right toxic gender norms from Palpatine and the even more plausible headcanon that Anakin saw some hutt or crime lord rape his mother and it traumatized him seeing Clovis behave like that.

Not only that, but Anakin is a character that has been confirmed tries his best to treat his Clones like human beings and the death of each Clone is confirmed to hit him hard. While it dosen't justify entirely him trying to make Padme his escape from reality when she is pushing through bills that could hinder Palpatine's consolidation of power, it at least explains why he behaves the way he did in Hostage Crisis, which is another "smoking gun" Jedi uncriticals like to use--he was likely getting traumatized by the war and has a two weeks "mindfulness break" to say the least, and he turned to one of the only people that could give him peace of mind. It dosen't justify him trying to prioritize their love above Padme's commitments, but both canon and the Legends EU makes it clear that the Clone Wars actually traumatized him considerably, and there is enough room to explain that behavior from Anakin via headcanon knowing what we know in expanded material.

In order to run the thesis that "Anidala was inherently toxic" you need to prove that they'd implode in peacetime and Anakin would behave at his worst on a daily basis even without a war or creeping fascistic influence into his mind. However, there is very little that supports this theory outside of an interpretation only Hidalgo has, even if you draw on the most negative headcanons of Anakin.

Actually, I wouldn't say "very little" or even "scant", I'd say there's literally no evidence that Anidala would implode in peacetime. The closest we get to how "Anidala would behave in peacetime" is AOTC, with Anakin and Padme happily running around the fields and trying to enjoy each other in Varykino, along with the first few minutes of ROTS where they express hope of being a happy family before the visions drove Anakin to the edge. And the argument that Anakin would behave poorly in peacetime falls apart even further if you consider the deleted scenes as canon--we see him getting to catch up with Padme while walking through Naboo, expressing interest in her political career(these outright shatter the assumption that Anakin didn't even get to know Padme at all, when the actual anwser is that "he did try, but he didn't get time to"), meeting her family and having a nice talk with her father, and her entire family has a lot of fun with him and actually root for him and Padme together. So that thesis gets entirely blown to pieces with the deleted scenes.

And this is not even considering the fact that whenever they can team up during the war in TCW and in the canon-era EU, they make a pretty good team.

So it's clear that the entire relationship was shaped by social and material conditions rather than a single choice to be selfish(and frankly from the outside looking in, I wouldn't even call that choice selfish until ROTS on Anakin's part, more "shortsighted" at the very worst), and a lot of what brought down the relationship or prevented it from "maturing" has more to do with external factors than some inherent incompatibility between the two.

Even E.K. Johnston, who is pretty polarizing in Anidala circles because while she made it clear in her books that Clovis was actually the mismatched one with Padme and gave them some cute moments and some decent payoff in Queen's Hope, she at best finds Anakin hard to write because of what he would become and at worst, dosen't even find Anakin redeemable, had this to say about Anidala:

"He’s kind of….not happy go-lucky because Jedi don’t really do that. But like his life has literally never been better than it is right now. He’s really good at fighting. He really likes clear-cut “these people are good, these people are bad” conflicts. And he’s married to the love of his life so, ya know, everything’s coming up Anakin at this point, which does make him very interesting to write because, of course, we all know what’s coming. But you get these sort of moments with them where they do have a genuine love. They like each other so much, they just never have any time and that’s their tragedy. They never have any time to talk, they never have any time to work things out, and I got to write a very, very small sliver of that time, which is something I think people have been looking forward to seeing for a while now."

If someone who is potentially pretty harsh on Anakin could see that structural factors and lack of time brought down Anidala, I don't know how modern day Jedi fans and Jedi uncriticals can ignore this nuances.

[deusvervewrites]

The absolute nonsense some people come up with regarding Aizawa and All Might continues to boggle the mind. I know it’s been said multiple times so it’s not like their deluded ‘understanding’ of the characters is anything new; but still it always throws me off whenever it comes up you know?

That these people seem to legitimately think that *Aizawa* is a more understanding and less biased person than freaking All Might while ignoring any evidence or statements to the contrary.

Like, they seem to love to give Toshi a ridiculous amount of shit for the rooftop scene while ignoring the reasoning behind his actions there, and then also ignore like…every other scene he is where he is unfailingly supportive and caring of Izuku? Then treat Aizawa, who as we all know, is a major ass that lambasts Izuku and doesn’t provide any help or support whatsoever (and even rigs a test specifically so that they will fail) like they are the best thing ever? (Which doesn’t even account for all the other messed up things he does)

I just don’t understand how they could possibly think that? How many levels of mental gymnastics they must go through to do such a thing? I’d normally assume such people are just trolls trying to mess with people, but at least some of them do seem to genuinely believe the crap they are spewing, so idk.

Anyway, sorry for the rant but people doing absolutely nonsensical or otherwise stupid things is something I tend to get…passionate about.

I've seen some theories floated on the topic. I've seen the suggestion that Aizawa has pretty privilege but, uh, hm. I'm AroAce, not blind, and in his first appearances, Aizawa... I don't see it.

I've also seen the suggestion that it was an echo chamber. Get a large enough fandom and you'll have people who haven't actually interacted with the canon material, only fanfic. Someone sees enough "Aizawa Good, All Might Bad" and believes it enough to write it themselves, repeating the process. But that really doesn't explain how the cycle started.

Even the Dadzawa trend is mildly confusing when you consider that All Might is right there and so ready to Dad while Aizawa's canonical positive interactions with Midoriya are... uh... I'm sure there's one but I'm not thinking of it off the top of my head. Like, if you want to give Midoriya more dads, his canonical father isn't exactly competition. You can give him more dads.

[redpenship]

Happy New Year! I’d love to know if you have any headcanons about Mobian culture and/or holidays, either based on things you’ve seen in the games/comics/movies etc OR just stuff you’ve made up for fun. :) Maybe this isn’t really your forte but I thought I’d ask haha!

Happy new year!

I actually don't have too many headcanons on Mobian culture itself. However, I do have HCs for their society in general which I guess would feed into the culture idea anyways. I'm just going to put all of it here because why not.

(Heads up: this post is 1.8k words long).

Thesis I: There is no Mobian state.

If you've read my fic Buzzsaw Dilemma, then you'll have already been given a basic run down on how I think this works. Since I like rambling about this kind of stuff, I will explain everything again, but this time with evidence from canon to support my theory!

To begin, it's always best to define what a "state" actually is. I prefer the Max Weber view as a state being an "organization with a monopoly on the legitimate use of force". Let's break down what this actually means with an example:

The state establishes a rule that you can't assault other people. One day, you feel that someone has wronged you and decide to punch them in the face. A police officer nearby notices this and responds by punching you in the face and detaining you. After spending the night in jail, you're charged with felony assault and the police officer is not. Why?

As a random citizen, you do not have a right to the legitimate use of force. You cannot punch people to get what you want with impunity. The police, as official arms of the state to use against domestic populations, do have a monopoly on the use of force. They can shoot people, put them in prison, and basically do whatever they want (within reason, technically, but the state doesn't like challenges to its authority and will always resist holding itself and its officers accountable for perceived illegitimate uses of force) because they're the only ones allowed to do so! Your boss at work can't kidnap you and hold you prisoner for a year because you broke a rule. The state can do that to you because it is seen as a legitimate use of force.

Now that we both know what a state is, I can explain why I don't think one exists on the Mobian islands. I am going to cite a lot of stuff from IDW since it's allegedly canon now and the games tend not to focus too much on day-to-day life on the islands anyways.

Point one: the Restoration. Since aid organizations apparently don't like working on the islands, which I suspect might be due to the Eggman Empire's fixed presence there, the Restoration was forced to step up after the war to fix up the islands. Although it's true that some states just don't give a shit about their populations, I don't think it's wrong to say that post-war clean up would typically be a job for an existing state. The lack of any central authority points to the conclusion that one may just not exist.

Here are some panels from IDW issue #42:

Here, Zavok is surprised about the lack of security at Restoration HQ. Master Zik explains that Mobians don't see a need to prepare for violence because they aren't violent to each other. This is an interesting assertion given Tails' backstory, but I guess his two tails were just that disturbing to the people at home!

The main takeaway here is that the islands don't really have security guards or police officers. I like these panels for that reason only. I'm afraid the reasoning provided by Zik still implies that police/guards would be necessary if there was violence among Mobians, so it's not really that revolutionary of a worldbuilding moment and realigns the comic with statist ideology.

So, let's summarize: the islands don't have a central authority. They don't have any means to enforce a monopoly on the use of force. Does this mean that they don't have a state? In the absence of government, does the Restoration pave the roads?

In my general opinion, yes. There are some instances that could be used to disprove this theory, such as the Everhold Prison seen in Bad Guys, which is seemingly guarded exclusively by dog Mobians:

The existence of a prison implies a functional penal system, which in turn implies that somebody on the islands has a legitimate monopoly on force. On the other hand, it's never explicitly stated that Everhold Prison is hosted on the islands, so for now I can still cope and pretend it never happened. Yippee!

Thesis II: The islands don't use money.

I hosted a poll on this subject a few weeks ago, in which I learned that most people think there's money on the islands. Allow me to argue otherwise!

The most common theory for the origin of money is that it came into existence because bartering for stuff fucking sucks and nobody likes doing it. Nothing has a standardized value, so if the guy in your village responsible for making shoes is a pompous asshole who makes ludicrous demands such as asking for FIVE bushels of wheat in exchange for a pair of shoes, even though you've heard the guy in the next town over only asks for three bushels, then you're shit out of luck and have to fork over all your wheat. Maybe the shoemaker is on a gluten-free diet and refuses to trade with you, so as a wheat farmer who only trades in wheat now you can't even barter for a new pair of shoes! Sucks to be you, buddy.

Under a monetary system, a bushel of wheat and a pair of shoes both gain a standardized value. A bushel of wheat is $1, and a pair of shoes is $4. After selling enough wheat that you have $4 in profits, you can walk over to the shoemaker, slap some coins down on the table, and tell him to get to work. Now, you might say, "wait, if you're in a captive market, can't he just charge whatever he wants and you have to deal with it?" The answer to that question is yes, but asking economic theorists to consider greed in their theories is a bit hard since they don't really care about fairness at all and still don't understand what's wrong with kids making carpets in factories since their hands are the perfect size for that sort of thing. All these stupid labour rights activists don't understand comparative advantages and it's sickening!

Here's the problem with an existing Mobian monetary system: it assumes greed! Or, at the very least, assumes that Mobians have normalized the hoarding of commodities for personal gain. I don't believe this is the case at all.

Let's recall Zik's statement to the Zeti: Mobians don't steal from each other because they are kind and compassionate to one another. I would argue that the origins of property/commodity ownership implies large-scale theft, as developing something like an apple orchard requires dispossessing your neighbours of a plot of land and claiming it for yourself. Then you grow a ton of apples on your land--that they once could have used as they pleased before you took over--and tell them that they can't eat any of these apples unless they give you something in exchange. But the apples are right there, bro, they'll complain. You can't eat all of those on your own. You'll tell them to suck it up and eventually they'll bring you items (or money) in exchange for some apples.

This doesn't seem like something we'd see the cute Sonic furries do to each other. Since we're talking about farming, here's a panel from there IDW 2022 annual where all the characters are helping out on some kind of communal farm:

Moving on, let's look at why Sonic hates Eggman so much. Eggman has always served as a representation of industrialization, environmental exploitation and degradation, and individualist greed. If the islands had a monetary system, and the ideals required to develop one in the first place, then a lot of what Eggman is attempting to implement would have already existed! Economic development requires exploitation, both of other people and natural resources. Money is the result of economic development. It just doesn't fit for me.

Thesis III: Equity as a norm.

This is basically the section on culture. Leading up to this section, I've established a rule: Mobians live in a stateless and moneyless society. Here are some cultural norms that might have lead to such a society in modern times.

Ecology as a priority. This is consistent with the environmentalist themes in the series, but also with the way that most Mobians we meet in the series seem to really care about the environment. My personal take is that they simply haven't developed the view that they are above nature, which is something seen in Eggman and other industrialists. In Sonic Prime, we see Thorn Rose react aggressively when she notices that her friends harming plants by taking more than they need from them. This may have been because they violated a strict cultural norm! Although this occurred in an alternate dimension, I like to think about its implications for the main universe, too. Is the cultural pressure to maintain and protect the land they live on enough to suppress industrial development? Maybe!

Conformity as a means of social cohesion. Generally, I think Mobian society demands a lot of personal sacrifice from people. A core tenant of collectivism is that you have to put up with not getting what you want most of the time, and sometimes this even comes at a direct cost to you. Maybe your neighbour stole your favourite toy truck and you can't complain about it or everyone will accuse you of trying to establish private ownership over something stupid. Or, maybe, there hasn't been a lot of rain this year and your communal farms are flopping. Out of desperation one day, you wander into the woods and find some bushes of edible berries that could help you survive better for the next few days. However, since eating while your neighbours starve would violate the ethical values imposed on your by your collectivist society, you must accept only having a few berries instead and sharing the rest with your village. If you're someone like Tails, who stands out because of a physical mutation, then tough luck if your village cares about appearances. Everyone knows your business and you're dependent on them for support. As soon as they decide they don't like you, you're going to suffer severely. Upsides and downsides to everything.

Alternate methods of punishment. A society without a state likely wouldn't have prisons. Building on the concept of conformity, social crimes would be mitigated through social pressure--basically, if you do something wrong, everyone will be mean to you and not like you as much as they did before. Fear of risking the judgment of peers is a very strong deterrent for most crimes, arguably moreso than prison itself.

Everything I've written here is my basic take on Mobian culture and society! In terms of holidays, I'm sure they have stuff relating to harvest times and seasonal changes.

Thanks for the question!! Sorry if this isn't what you wanted at all haha.

[nuatthebeach]

I’ve noticed in your posts you always mention Harry’s endgame is Ginny or no one, but you’ve never mention it the other way around? I’ve always thought those two loved each other equally and they were each other’s endgames in every universe. Do you believe Ginny doesn’t love Harry as much as he loves her? Or that his love isn’t enough for her? I don’t think anyone could love, support, or make Ginny Weasley as happy as Harry Potter could, and I don’t think any man or women could make her feel the way Harry could, and vice versa.

hahah, i do do that a lot, don't i

the following is my opinion, and my opinion only:

to your point, yes, i totally 100% believe that ginny loves harry as much as he loves her. to be explicit, in canon, it is harry or no one for ginny. they have just gone through hell and back for each other that, personally, i just do not see them even considering being with anybody else after the war. the series ended in a way that implied that harry's main priority was going to be centered around building something with ginny, and judging by the fact that ginny never said she was going to wait for him, there's no canon evidence to suggest that she didn't wait in her 6th year (though, obviously, there were more pressing matters at the time.)

to me, it was always inevitable that they would fall back together. they would, of course, have many problems to deal with (harry's communication issues, ginny's fresh grief, harry coming to terms with ginny's very dark circumstances, ginny's sense of self-preservation, amongst so many other things that i think @whinlatter's Beasts does a phenomenal job of tackling, and i can't wait to read more. (those dang eggcups goddamnit 😭.)

now why do i talk more about harry loving ginny than vice versa? frankly because fandom seems adamant on proving just the opposite. and i absolutely refuse to give an inch about it. at risk of pissing everyone off, i'm also more likely to read ginny/other, if not for any other reason than to spite the haters. plus, ginny's love life is so interesting; if you think about it, she really "dated" all tropes of men: the toxic guy (tom riddle, if you count intimacy as not just romantic), the "nice guy" (michael corner), and the guy who's just generally a great person but not the one for ginny (dean thomas). how could you not want to read about it? and it's so beautiful, thinking that after all of that, she finds her way back to harry.

and...(tw) harsh truth alert... 🚨

honestly? truthfully? there just is more canonical evidence of harry caring about ginny. (again, this does NOT mean that i'm saying that harry loves ginny more than ginny loves harry.)

why? because unlike ginny, we can actually see inside harry's head. we know for a fact he thinks of her as his greatest source of comfort from book six. we know for a fact he thinks of her like family since book seven. we know for a fact that she is his last thought before he freakin' dies. we do NOT know for fact that ginny thinks these things because we cannot see inside her head. while ginny's feelings for harry are an interpretation (a heavily evidence-based one for sure, duh, i'd be stupid not to think that), harry's feelings for ginny are just...reality.

it's like arguing evolution vs gravity. one is a theory, and the other is legitimately a law.

though you'll still have people argue that neither are true, and...well. welcome to the harry potter fandom.

[greenhikingboots]

Jon’s Pre-Canon Crush

Okay, Jonsa fam. I’ve seen a lot of great posts, especially in the last few months, about Jon’s reactions to Val. Among them, there’s one particular vein I like to assume everyone loves as much as I do. That is, when Jon thinks of Val’s hair as silver vs. when he thinks of it as the color of dark honey. You’ve seen those metas, right? They explain the likelihood of Jon’s future connection to Dany being negative — The air tastes cold. / My tongue is too numb to tell. All I taste is cold. — while his future connection to Sansa will be positive — It had been a long while since Jon Snow had seen a sight so lovely.

Well, in this post I want to expand on the angle of Val-is-sometimes-a-stand-in-for-Sansa. Only, I don’t want to speculate on what will happen between Jon and Sansa in the future, if we ever get GRRM’s last two books. Enough people have already done that, and they’ve done it so wonderfully that I have little to add. Instead, as the title of this post says, I want to focus on Jon’s pre-canon crush. More specifically: I want to focus on what Jon’s thoughts and feelings about Val say about his thoughts and feelings about Sansa.

But let me lay some groundwork first, okay? Until a few weeks ago, I went back and forth on pre-canon crush theories. I agreed they held a lot of potential and were a lot of fun to daydream about — a great premise for a one-shot, to be sure! Oh, and I’ve always loved it when people said things like, “Hey, Jon, your Targaryen is showing.” That’s classic stuff. But did I really think GRRM meant to hint at prior feelings rather than just laying a foundation for future feelings? Again, until a few weeks ago, I wasn’t totally convinced either way. But now I am fully committed to the Pre-Canon Crush Camp, assigned to cabin Jon-Had-Feelings-for-Sansa. [Did Sansa have feelings for Jon too? Ummm maybe? I think there’s some evidence to support that, but not as much. But, hey, that’s not the point of this post. Sorry. Moving on.] So what changed? Well, basically some ideas I’d previously had sunk in on a deeper level. It started with this post from @sherlokiness. It talks about GRRM commenting on a discrepancy in the books, two occasions where Jeyne Westerling’s physical descriptions do not match up. GRRM said the discrepancies were a mistake, a really unfortunate one because it distracts from the times when he intentionally included discrepancies of physical appearances. And basically us Jonsas loved it. Like, “Yep! Make sense! We assumed as much already, Mr. Martin.” And that’s because of the canon line mentioned earlier, right? You know the whole thing, don’t you? Oh, but you want me to quote it here anyway? Okay, fine, I’ll oblige.

They [Ghost and Val] look as though they belong together. Val was clad all in white [bleh, bleh, bleh] …but her eyes were blue, her long braid the color of dark honey, her cheeks flushed red from the cold. It had been a long while since Jon Snow had seen a sight so lovely.

Direwolf. Lots of white. Suspicious ellipses. Blue eyes. Long braid the color of dark honey. Right, okay, got it.  [BTW. Did you know there’s also a point, early on, where Val’s described as having high cheekbones? You know, a feature Sansa has as well!?!?] Anyway, when I saw sherlokiness’s post about GRRM’s comments and the Jonsas relating it to that canon scene with Ghost and Val, I reblogged it. Naturally. And in the tags I said something like, “I’ll have to double check but I’m pretty sure the willowy creature line comes after this line. As in, maybe Jon knew exactly who Val reminded him in that moment and he was trying to talk himself out of his pre-canon crush coming back to the surface.” I’m paraphrasing here. My tags were probably not as clear as that. Also, I was being a bit facetious. It was a thought I’d had before, but just a passing one. Again (AGAIN! Do I say that too much?), I’d been going back and forth about pre-canon crush theories for a long time. But @agentrouka-blog saw my tags and was like, “You might be onto something there.” And then @zimshan saw my tags too and did the double check for me. Thanks! And guess what? GUESS WHAT, JONSA FAM!? I was right about the order. First, Jon sees Ghost and Val, thinks her eyes are blue and her hair is like dark honey, and it is a lovely sight. Second, this line:

Val looked the part [of a princess] and rode as if she had been born on horseback. A warrior princess, he decided, not some willowy creature who sits up in a tower, brushing her hair and waiting for some knight to rescue her.

But guess what else? The order isn’t even the most striking thing. The most striking thing is how closely these two lines appear to one another — within just a few pages!!! That's what zimshan said. So I went back to read it myself. Not just the two lines to check the order, but a little before, and a little after, and everything in between. If you want, you can do the same. It’s ADWD Jon XI.

Want to know what stuck out to me most? The willowy creature line actually seems… so odd, and out of place, and unnecessary. I swear to you. Let me try to explain.

Basically, by that point in the chapter, Jon has already clearly established his take on Val. She’s beautiful, everyone knows it, but she’s more than that. She’s strong and capable. She found Tormund and brought him back to Castle Black when Jon’s Night’s Watch Rangers couldn’t manage it. Like, Jon’s thankful for Val, okay? 

Oh, and he also seems aware that he holds her in higher regard than the rest of the men who keep calling her a princess even though she’s not one. I think he feels smug about it, to be honest. Like, he wouldn’t use these words because it’s ASOIAF, but he knows he’s a budding feminist and he’s proud of himself for it. Like, “I’m so much better than these asshats who don’t respect women and think all Val has to offer is her pretty face.”

How great is that? I love book Jon so much.

Where was I, though? Oh! Oh, oh, oh! This next part is key. Up until the willowy creature line, Jon has not had a single disparaging thought about Val. Val being cruel about Shireen’s greyscale hasn’t happened yet. But for some reason — *Getting too executed. Brain malfunctioning!*

AH! I SWEAR JONSA FAM! If you read the willowy creature in fuller context, it comes across as if Jon’s correcting himself for having a disparaging thought about Val, like he’s reminding himself of who she truly is. She’s a warrior princess, not a willowy creature. But like, why? Why does Jon feel the need to do this? He hasn’t had a disparaging thought about Val, so why correct himself as if he has?

Just because she’s beautiful? Just because he’s tired of other men calling her a princess? I mean, I guess that could be the whole story. That’s certainly how we’re supposed to take it, if we’re taking it at face value. But I’m not convinced. Go read it again, and I think you’ll see that when the willowy creature line happens, it actually feels like a weird logic leap.

The dots aren’t connecting because one dot is missing!!!! Let me put a pin in that for a moment while I turn to other mini metas in our Jonsa fandom. Antis like to say, “Jon doesn’t like girls like Sansa. He doesn't like willowy creatures, he said so himself.” But we know that’s crap, right? The boy who liked Ygritte’s gentle side? The boy who helps Alys Karstark by marrying her to Sigorn? The boy who dreamed his mother was a highborn lady with kind eyes? The boy who wanted to show his hypothetical wife Winterfell’s glass gardens and bath with her in the hot pools?

Yeah, that boy is a budding feminist, like I said.

So again I ask (AGAIN!) why would Jon — who is not especially critical of women in general and has not been critical of Val at all up to this point — feel the need to correct himself by thinking this critical thing about willowy creatures? In other words, why does he lift up Val by putting down some vague idea of other women he’s never had a problem with before?

Well, obviously it turns out that I believe my facetious, tongue in cheek tags more than I realized when I wrote them. My position is that somewhere in the two pages between ...a long while since Jon had seen a sight so lovely… and ...not some willowy creature who sits up in a tower, brushing her hair… Jon realized Val reminded him of Sansa, he felt guilty and ashamed about it, and then felt the need to do damage control. And because guilt and shame are icky, confusing feelings, his damage control took the form of being critical of Sansa even though he isn’t normally critical of such women. 

Am I making sense? How do I explain myself further? Like, why am I so stuck on this idea Jon’s willowy creature line being two pages after the Ghost and Val looking lovely together line must mean Jon had a pre-canon crush?

I think the crux is what I said about the willowy creature line feeling like a weird logic leap — like the dots aren’t connecting because one is missing. The missing dot is Jon being aware that he’s mentally swapped Val with Sansa. He just doesn’t acknowledge this on the page.

Let me be extra clear. I’m now differing from several others who have written about pre-canon crush theories in that I think Jon was aware of his crush. I’ve seen many say it’s all subconscious. But this stuff with Val makes me think otherwise.

I mean, I know Jon has a pattern of dissociation. For him, thinking, and speaking, and acting from his subconsciousness is a common occurrence. So, yes, he could have subconsciously thought Val looked like Sansa and subconsciously felt guilty and ashamed and therefore subconsciously decided to do damage control by subconsciously reminding himself Val is a warrior princess and therefore not a willowy creature.

But I think GRRM was hinting at an exception to Jon’s pattern with these canon lines. Because if the first part is happening subconsciously — Jon thinking Val looks like Sansa and that it’s a lovely sight — then he wouldn’t feel the need to do damage control afterwards? If he wasn’t aware of thinking of Sansa in that moment, isn’t it more likely he’d just carry on with taking Val to meet Selyse, and the odd, out of place, unnecessary line about a willowy creature wouldn’t have been included? What else, what else?

I said earlier that I think Jon’s crush is an innocent, not sexual thing. Let me expand on that. And uuuuuhhhhh... let me clarify that I think that might be changing some over time.  My guess is when Jon was younger, his thoughts were more along these lines: “Sansa is pretty, and a proper lady, and everything men are taught to want. She’ll be a good wife for someone someday. Obviously not me. That’s sinful, I don’t want it, and I’m a bastard so I can’t marry a highborn lady anyway. But objectively, Sansa’s a good catch.” Which kinda matches how Jon thinks of Val at times, right? Like, she’s a catch but he doesn’t want her. He’s not taking Winterfell and a Wife because Winterfell belongs to Sansa and he’s a man of the Night’s Watch, dammit! But hang on a second. Sometimes Jon’s thoughts about Val are more elicit, aren’t they? He thinks about the size of her breasts and she’s the hypothetical wife he pictures romancing in Winterfell. Don’t worry, I’m not saying I’m secretly a Jon/Val shipper. What I’m getting at is this other thing we’ve talked about in the Jonsa fandom. Jone projects his general desires onto Val. He’s getting older. He’s unhappy at the Wall. Winterfell isn’t Robb’s like he thought it would be, and Bran and Rickon are thought to be dead. And Stannis is offering Winterfell and Val to him. Plus he’s now been intimate with a woman, Ygritte. So he knows that sex feels nice. All in all, Jon’s becoming more in tune with wanting Winterfell, and a wife, and a family, and wanting to fu—

You get the idea. ;)

Soooooo. If you buy into the premise that A) Jon considered Sansa a good catch when they were younger B) He’s thinking more and more about romance and sex C) Val is also a good catch and easy to project feelings onto and D) Woopsies, Val just reminded me of Sansa! Well, then where does all that leave Jon? Feeling like he needs to distance himself from positive thoughts about Sansa, right? But without ever thinking her name because of his pattern of dissociation and because GRRM is tricky like that.  Am I making my point clearer, or just talking in circles?  Like, I know plenty of people have already said Val is a switch-back-and-forth-stand-in-for-other-characters. The first two short paragraphs of this post mentions those metas.  But holy smokes! If Jon is aware of A-D mentioned above, that adds a fascinating layer of subtext to his scenes with and thoughts about Val.  Let’s talk about it forever!

Just kidding. I think I’m almost done here.  Basically, I think the willowy creature line is Jon knowingly saying to himself, “Yikes, the thoughts I had about Sansa in the past didn’t bother me much because they were 99% innocent. But they are less innocent now and that’s a problem! You can’t like Sansa! Don’t confuse Sansa with Val,  dummy! Val is a warrior princess! Sansa is a willowy creature and willowy creatures are bad!”

Okay, sure, Jon.  Let me wrap up with one more canon line.

Of Sansa brushing out Lady’s coat and singing to herself. You know nothing, Jon Snow.

We often link this line to Ygritte for obvious reasons, but I’m now in the habit of linking it more to Val and the canon lines mentioned previously. I think GRRM wrote a the three lines — a sight so lovely + willow creature + of Sansa brushing out Lady’s coat — as a subtle continuation of one another. Us Jonsas saw the potential for underlying romantic feelings in the last one, that’s nothing new. But I want to add that it’s a direct contrast to the willowy creature line. As Jon is bleeding out, he can no longer be bothered to put up a front and pretend he doesn’t have feelings for Sansa, feelings that have gotten more complicated as of late.

Oh so subtle. Really not that much different than what others have said before me. But different enough I wanted to mention it. Now someone put it in a fanfic!!