#challenged myself with the perspective and depth stuff

[whysamwhy123]

Started a new WIP and hoooooooooo boy! It's been a long time since I've written something this ANGSTY. It's soooo MESSY and BAD and I'm sure nobody will enjoy reading this at all but I AM HAVING FUUUUUUUN!!

And I've barely started too. It's only gonna get angstier and worse and I am so here for it 🙂🙂🙂

You see, this is what happens when I write, like, five fluffy nice-nice fics in a row. Eventually, my brain revolts and goes ''Yeah, but what if one of them did something bad and then they both cried, and then none of them know what to do about it?''

[waitmyturtles]

Have you read any of the Thai academic papers regarding MAME's work? sometimes I feel like fandom at large has a very strong western bias towards her that borders on xenophobia in review of anything attached to her unless it's more low stakes gmmtv style stuff like wedding plan was which suits western sensibilities more.

Hi, Non! This is interesting framing you've put forth here. I want to note that I'm close with some folks, particularly @bengiyo and @lurkingshan, whose critical tastes I trust, and I can assure myself that they would not call Wedding Plan low stakes. During my Old GMMTV Challenge project, I promised myself that I would not watch another MAME show after Love By Chance and TharnType, and I've taken Ben's and Shan's urging to chuck that aside to add Wedding Plan to my OGMMTVC syllabus, which I'll get to after my summer travels. Let me take a second to sort this all out in a more sensible and chronological answer to touch upon what I know about MAME now that I'm much more read into Thai BLs and the history of the genre.

Regarding academia and MAME, I have not read Thai source material on her start and her legacy in Thai Y novel writing and Thai BL/Series Y television productions. What I am in the midst of reading at the moment is Dr. Thomas Baudinette's Boys Love Media in Thailand (Baudinette hailing from Australia), and he does get in depth with MAME's beginnings, which for me was the first primary source material that I have encountered about her background. To summarize quickly, MAME (along with individuals like INDRYTIMES/Kwang Latika, who wrote the original novel for Love Sick, and others) was part of the first crop of young middle-to-upper-class female college students who became enamored with Japanese BL/yaoi manga, as well as (in many cases) K-pop idols, and began writing fan fiction about and/or in the styles of these interests, which led to the development of the unique Thai Y novel genre.

It does seem to me, at least on Tumblr, that a good chunk of Western fandom here has written off MAME. I'm Asian-American, and I come to my hesitation about MAME from a particularly Asian perspective, so I really can't speak for the non-Asian fans about what they're rejecting. Let me at least explain what I'm rejecting, and how I've engaged in dialogue about it with critical friends here.

LBC did not have as much of what I will attempt to describe as I saw in TharnType, something that I might now call collectivist homophobia or collectivist bias. But LBC had a smattering of it, something that I smelled early on in that series. In both series, MAME seemed to approach her characters, to me, with a distanced hand of judgement that, to me, recalled the kinds of biases that my Asian parents tried to implant in me in my childhood, that I rejected throughout my young years. Queer material is so very often not good to its queer characters, and it seemed to me through LBC and TT that MAME intended to gild that lily to channel a populist homophobia that she seemed to know would resonate with a broader fanbase -- which it did, in part, because TharnType in particular was the first Thai BL with heat in every episode.

(Two things to note about my review of TharnType that I penned last year. First item to note is that Boys Love Media in Thailand had not been published yet, and I had not read primary source material about MAME. I was enraged at the time about fan theories that MAME had been a victim of sexual assault, and had therefore written her queer characters with the biased vitriol that I perceived coming from her because of that theorized past. I still think these theories are equivocating and problematic. Second item is that I heavily recommend reading the reblogs of my TT review, tags and posts and all, to see literally the spectrum of commentary of the MAME fandom/anti-fandom across Tumblr. Writing that post and reading those reblogs was a hell of a great experience.)

Just to summarize this, then -- I choose to not engage with MAME because I see under- and overhanded bias in the work that I've watched, with my Asian eyes; and I just might assume that many Westerners see the same thing. But I don't really know, because I haven't talked to that many Western fans about the depth of this.

So what does this mean for this moment in time? I understand MAME's Love Sea is airing, which I'm not watching, and I missed the boat on Love In the Air -- so I think I'm missing some critical and/or catty chatter about those two shows from the fandom because I don't have context.

But I do know there are folks out there that either write MAME off wholly, likely for similar reasons that I've listed above, and/or hate-watch her shows and post about it. To each their own.

I would not have considered Wedding Plan if Ben and Shan weren't screaming about it. I'm happy to have fewer shows on my plate, I got no time. However.

Nothing in this world exists in a static vacuum. If MAME is experimenting with tone, approach, style, and even taste regarding her shows, then more power to her. @bengiyo's post linked above about Wedding Plan is important for me to see, because I see that he's noting that parts of the fandom may have actually demonstrated real homophobic dialogue about MAME's fictional characters, which, to me, I'm like, what? Really? You got time for that? But also:

If MAME, back in 2019 with TharnType, picked up that her Thai and global fanbases were more inclined to check in with collectivist homophobia, as I'm calling it.... and now, in 2023-2024, has noted that her fanbases might be far more inclined to support real queer equality and overtones in shows, and is including those themes in her work -- can we not welcome that change in? That's why I'll give Wedding Plan a shot.

Let's be sassy and ironic for a second. Could she be making this change for da money and the fame? Sure. But -- capitalism unfortunately rules this world. Car commercials in the States have interracial queer couples parenting children nowadays. If equality talks to money, then content makers will take note. I think I'd be a hypocrite to say that MAME shouldn't make her dollar, all while she's experimenting with more equitable stances.

Last note. There's been quite the dialogue simmering these past few weeks about GMMTV's We Are, and whether or not GMMTV is stepping away from a past where many (not all, but many) of its shows explored queerness in depth. He's Coming To Me, Bad Buddy, Dark Blue Kiss (yes... the first three shows I listed were Aof Noppharnach shows, fuck), Theory of Love, 3 Will Be Free. The major GMMTV BL/GL shows that have aired recently that have made huge waves on social media -- Only Friends, 23.5, Last Twilight, and now My Love Mix-Up -- were/are helmed by branded (capitalism, hello!) pairs, and three out of four of them were flops, with MLMU already treading that territory in EPISODE TWO, for heaven's sake. (Y'all, read the reblogs on this post. Wow.) I finished a rewatch of The Eclipse weeks ago, and I'm dragging my feet on my review, because of what I think that show represents for what branded pairs end up doing to otherwise original content.

I want to posit a theory, that I'll work more on when my OGMMTVC is over, that we have living, real-time proof that the branded pair system is failing good content -- because these shows have to produce engagement snippets of these pairs, instead of more broadly penetrating artistic content. GMMTV's one-off shows with non-branded pairs, like Be My Favorite and Wandee Goodday, are FAR MORE INTERESTING content-wise, varied and inquisitive in their artistic takes on queerness. Even Cherry Magic, featuring the long-awaited return of TayNew, felt fresh, because we literally hadn't seen TayNew in FIVE YEARS. Tay actually KISSED ANOTHER DUDE, shocker!, in 3 Will Be Free. I want to go back to those days, where the pairs could act well outside of their range and their business partners, instead of being limited to the same tone and style that their pairings and their fandoms demand.

I say ALL OF THIS, because isn't it interesting that GMMTV seems to be reverting on a scale of inquisitiveness about queerness -- and MAME seems to be going in the opposite direction?

I would not have expected it. But I have found, lately, some of GMMTV's "takes" on "queerness," as in Only Friends, to be outright offensive. This corporation has become far more gunshy to let their branded pairs just be fictionally gay. If MAME wants to take on a healthier stance of equity, and to play around with more realistic depictions of what it means to be queer in Thailand, then go for it, girl. I will admittedly be watching Wedding Plan with my Asian side-eye and my smell tests for bias, but I look forward to being proven wrong about my suspicions. I want to be a responsible fan here, open to MAME's changes.

This ended up being a lot, but thank you for provoking these thoughts, Non.

[hergan416]

Coming across another please comment post, specifically about people who say nice things about fics to their friends but won't tell the author, and how betrayed authors feel by private book rec servers and stuff.

And yes, that's not an adequate substitute for talking to the author and isn't motivating and I don't think we should be privatizing our community. But the idea it is a generational fault kind of is bugging me because I notice myself doing some of that too- reading something recc'd to me and only responding in depth in the server or in priv instead of on the fic, and I didn't used to do that five years ago. Granted sometimes that person is in the server or I'm talking in private with the author, and that's... something different? But regardless, it's still not completely generational, it's a changing norm and I want to examine my experience to figure out why that might be.

And for me, I think it comes down to safety and vulnerability. It's easy to see this from the perspective of an author. To post a work for the judgement of The Internet is to be vulnerable. Comments help sooth over that moment of vulnerability. They help make it worth it. Whether the work is low or high effort, doesn't matter.

But commenting is also a moment of vulnerability. It is becoming visible to the author, for a brief moment, and writing down your thoughts when your interpretation might not be "as intended." I've known friends who anxiously waited to see what an author would say about a comment- would it be well received? Would the author be happy?

I feel that too when I comment. I reread the thing and try my best to not impulsively edit it over and over again to be more clear with what I want to say. That this is meant as a compliment, please don't assume malice with my words.

I didn't used to feel like that.

Where did that anxiety about being misinterpreted come from? Why do I feel I have to say everything perfectly or not at all, unless I know you well enough to know you will tolerate a mistake?

Is it of my own making, having had a reader look at the events I wrote and coming to the exact opposite conclusion about the morality of the situation as I did? I was so confused about that, think it ended up being a cultural difference, but I'm not sure because I had the last word, and I still feel terrible about that interaction. I wish I knew how to properly express how fascinating it was to be challenged on my assumptions like that, even if my definition of what constitutes rape didn't shift at all.

Or did it start before then? Was it because of that one time that I got all the way to the end note of a story to find out that alwill shippers weren't supposed to interact because they didn't want readers to interpret an interaction between them as anything but brotherly? (I hadn't read it that way, the fic was tagged sherliam and they hadn't wrote it that way. I left a comment anyway at the time, but I don't think I would have done that if I came accross that fic today.)

In fact, the fact that a loud and vocal subgroup of people simply don't want you to exist because of your taste in ships makes it hard to engage with any people you don't know in fandom at all. What if I leave my comment then click on the author's socials and see that their bio says proship DNI? What happens if they click on my profile and get mad at me for existing around them, like AO3 is Twitter or something? It hasn't happened yet but what if it does?

I'm basically "out" about shipping dark and disturbing content and so this next one doesn't apply to me per se, but what if a group of antis trolls the comment section of my fics for people to harass over their tastes? That's a public admission trying you to me. That could be dangerous in the current internet environment.

And my friends ... know who I am and know I say stuff stupid and largely don't care. So it's easy to tell them "hey look at this, it's y ship and does h really well."

I have no idea if these experiences line up with anyone else's. I don't want to say this ought to excuse me from trying to also tell the author they did h really well. I just am trying to parse through some of my own fears and anxiety and seeing how that relates to the current state of things.

Because I also want more comments. I just also empathize with people who might not always leave them. I don't think it's a moral failing to choose not to comment on a fic you liked. And also I know many of my original core readers have left the fandom/gotten busy/etc. And I know that my writing is probably "tolerable and I finished it, but I am not excited about it enough to talk about what just happened" to a fair amount of people. (And the barrier to talking about it just keeps getting steeper and steeper for me, so maybe that's what's happening with you too.)

[flying-fangirls]

Arthur's Story

Okay so now that Part 46 is out and we got that moment of John explaining what Arthur's train story meant to him, I kinda want to talk about this particular allusion myself. Arthur's retelling is mostly pretty close to the original, but I am going to get into interpretation/implementation stuff. So if you want to read the original story for full context, it's "Solitude" by Ben Ames Williams!

To start bluntly: I do not like the Lilly comparison /nm

I'm not saying it's wrong per se, but I do believe it's a fairly weak conclusion that misses out on a lot of other compelling potential.

Let's back up.

Where It Falls Short

Alright, so if you go and read it, you'll quickly see that the original short story, "Solitude," is ridiculously well-aligned with the tone and mood of Malevolent. There are ideas of cosmic insignificance, perseverance and despair, questioning morality and "goodness," and helping others in dark times. (it does have some of the weird hallmarks of early 1900s white dude writing, but otherwise I actually quite like this story! it's got nice vibes and pretty words)

Now, an allusion is a reference within a story to an outside piece of information, and its entire purpose is to add new depth. A good allusion considers the full context of whatever it's referencing, and uses that context to its advantage. It challenges the audience to work through that outside context and uncover some new perspective(s) on characters, themes, and/or plot— something they otherwise had not seen or considered before.

The thing is, when Part 46 applies the "Solitude" allusion to Lilly specifically, there's nothing new gained whatsoever. What does John tell us during this moment?

Lilly took care of him, showed him his first glimpse of humanity, and gave him a name— all good stuff! But also all old stuff, these details have all been said in the show before, some more than once. Since we know that the main point of an allusion is to bring something new to the table, then this implementation fails on that point because all it's done is simply rehash previously established perspectives on Lilly.

Not only does this take on the allusion fall short, the show's interpretation also limits our ability to understand it. This isn't a moment where the podcast shows us new information and lets us draw our own conclusions. This is a moment where John stands in for the podcast's voice, and he tells us what it considers the "right" interpretation. Even if we had formed our own interpretation about this allusion, the show has now essentially told us that those interpretations are "wrong" (which isn't an antagonistic move on the show's part, by the way! just the message it's unconsciously implying)

I agree that John's connection between the story and his experience with Lilly in Part 46 is a genuinely sweet moment! But unfortunately, because it neglects to take a new path, it's also a predictable moment that loses its strength among all the other sweet Lilly moments. And that takes away any chance for the allusion to impact the audience in a unique way, wasting its full potential.

Where It Misses Out

(now here comes the English major moment when I tell you why I'm right and you're not /j)

Alright, again, the Lilly comparison isn't wrong. I think it's totally legitimate to see this story about a woman helping an injured and lonely man, and think of Lilly! But personally, when I heard Arthur's retelling, I never once considered Lilly until the show told me to (12 episodes later). When I listened to Part 29 and the first half of the story, I admittedly was totally lost and dug through those lines over and over to find a meaning. And the only real interpretation that naturally came to me was a parallel to Arthur and John's journey. A man lost in a terrifying world, at the whims of forces much stronger than him, who has lost all of his loved ones to death or abandonment? Yeah, that's literally just Arthur and John.

And the conclusion in Part 39 only seemed to support that interpretation more— Moll abandons her entire life to follow Mat into the cold and dark, John and Arthur both (literally and figuratively) throw their lives away to help the other through the dark. We can even swap who's who here— either Arthur or John could be Mat struggling to survive as a "good" person, and either one could be Moll extending a hand to that person.

There's also a particular line that John says in Part 46 that feels completely out of place with the interpretation the show tells us:

He implies that Lilly did the same as Moll and shut out everything around them. But when Lilly takes care of John in the hospital, his development there isn't that she "drove out the world." Lilly brought the world closer to John, not further away— she helped him expand his focus outward, not close it off.

However, this line does fit extremely well with John and Arthur's dynamic! How often have we heard about these two's edges blurring, about their minds and emotions and internal selves blending together? How many times have these two expressed a love so codependent that it rejects everything outside of themselves? Heck, John's major emotional plot in s4 revolved around the desire to shut out the outside world and isolate himself together with Arthur.

Just like how Moll's arrival drove out the world for Mat, the arrival of John into Arthur's life certainly drove out the rest of the world, pulling him away from his job, home, and friends. Likewise, the arrival of Arthur into John's life most definitely drove out the rest of the world, removing him from the legacy of the King and literal world of the Dreamlands.

The podcast tries to push its Lilly interpretation into a mold that it simply does not fit. And in doing so, it completely misses the perfect connection between Moll/Mat and John/Arthur that already exists. "Solitude" offers a naturally perfect bridge between its story and Malevolent's, but Part 46 steers us away from that bridge and straight into the river where we're left without any strong understanding or impact.

Where It Could Go

Not only does a Jarthur interpretation of Arthur's story connect the allusion to the podcast well, it also gives us a new perspective to think about Jarthur with (again, the most important part of a good allusion).

Earlier I said that Arthur's retelling of "Solitude" mostly followed the story, and that's because he leaves out one key detail: Moll had spent most of her life trapped as the victim of abusive men who forced her to neglect herself and care for people who didn't care for her back. (Admittedly, I think it's weird the show ignored this specific detail, but most allusions do intentionally require outside work on the audience's part, so for now I'll hesitantly just say that was Guthrie's aim.)

If we consider this backstory in our interpretation, we can find a really fascinating view of Jarthur's dynamic. Both Arthur and John could be Mat: a man who has seriously harmed others before and is now left broken and lost in a dangerous world. Then we can have John as Moll: trapped by the King and the Dark World and Arthur's body, powerless to take control of his own self, forced to neglect his identity/values for others' wants. And we can have Arthur as Moll: stuck in relationships/lifestyles that restrict him, autonomy stolen by social expectations and eldritch beings with far more power than him. Both of them as Moll: escaping a past of abuse, but nevertheless still finding yourself in a position of supporting men at the cost of your individuality.

A Jarthur interpretation frames Arthur and John's pasts in a concept of abuse and neglect, which is not usually (if at all) how the podcast presents their backstories. It also forces us to reconsider the full scope of their dynamic with each other. Normally the show presents Jarthur as a messy, yet overwhelmingly restorative and supportive relationship. However, when we place Jarthur into the context of Moll, we are forced to stop and acknowledge how their dynamic still harms them both: They're codependent to a self-destructive degree, protective enough to harm anyone else who gets close, so closely connected that they lose a part of who they are for the other's sake. Neither one of them exist as a wholly independent individual anymore, both of them losing pieces of their minds, emotions, and bodies to accommodate for the other's needs.

While s4-5 John and Arthur are clearly at a point in their relationship where they openly express their love and gratitude to the other for "saving" them, this allusion presents us with a perspective on their situation without the rose-colored glasses. We have the opportunity to recontextualize their dynamic and remember just how much Arthur and John have lost for the sake of each other, no matter how loving and compassionate that sacrifice might be in their eyes.

Where I Conclude the Ramble

From the moment Arthur first told this story in Part 29, its ambiguous inclusion captivated my little overthinking brain. It was incredibly fascinating to mull over Arthur's words and John's reaction, and then to dig deeper into this obscure story outside of the podcast and uncover answers!

Which is why I think I'm so disappointed with the final answer that Part 46 told us. If anyone else has looked into "Solitude" outside of the podcast before, they likely saw the same well of potential depth to work with that Harlan Guthrie clearly also found. Yet, for some reason, the podcast offers a conclusion that barely scrapes the surface of that well.

Instead of giving us new depth to the story, a Lilly interpretation really just brings up more questions for us. Did Lilly neglect herself in some way when she took care of John? Was Lilly the victim of abuse at some point in her past? What parts of Lilly's past led her to this point? There's so much more information that we need for this layered allusion to make sense, but we never get that information, so all we're left with is a weak conclusion and wasted potential.

On the other hand, a Jarthur interpretation does answer questions for us, and it adds depth to our previous understandings of their dynamic. We better understand how John and Arthur's bad decisions lead them to their darkest moments, how lost and afraid they both felt at the start of the podcast, how they found relief and protection in the other. And we consider new possibilities of how John and Arthur's past circumstances abused them, how they were trapped in cycles that stole their autonomy, how they still cannot escape these cycles and keep throwing their lives away for others.

Part 46 told us a single interpretation to have for the train story, but there is no reason we can not (nor should not) look for other interpretations— especially when the story itself shows us evidence that points to a different answer.

(final disclaimer: I absolutely do not intend any of this as any sort of attack! this is just general literary critique to try and explain why I'm a little annoyed at a single line lol)

[johannestevans]

Hi! I remember you discussing clothes and silhouettes and stuff. I'm looking at doing some trans op shopping expeditions and was wondering how I would find out what aspects of women's clothes are easiest vs hardest to tailor? I'm pretty decent with men's clothes (esp thanks to following S. Bear Bergman over on bluesky) but I know I have a gap around women's clothes and I'd love to be able to give my transfem friends the same level of advice!

The above is the first part of an in-depth style guide I guiltily haven't worked on in a while, but it goes into various aspects of silhouette that are really useful from a gender dysphoria & affirmation perspective, I'm guessing that's the piece you're remembering.

Of my transfem friends, most anxieties normally stem from fears of the shoulders being too broad and the hip-waist ratio being too little, with anxiety about squareness of shape, and to a lesser extent, anxiety about the flatness of the chest and backside.

With a lot of jackets and stuff, you can go one of two ways - you can either focus on stuff that already has exaggerated shoulders if she likes to dress that way, so with 80s style padded shoulders or going for jackets that have epaulettes or can have other details added to the shoulders; or you can focus on a more straight down silhouette that softens the shoulders by adding more flow and motion to the skirts and trousers.

In terms of adding to shape, especially tailoring in shirts and dresses to add a bit more scultping, I always found darts to be an absolute motherfucker. A well-placed set of darts can really elevate a blouse or skirt, especially when you want more shape around the breast and waist, but they're really difficult to place and I always found them to be technically very challenging.

Good tailoring is a little outside of my scope, I'm afraid, I'm not a skilled tailor myself and my sewing skills are quite rudimentary, so that might just be me!

Obviously, lack of pockets is often a difficulty, but those aren't too difficult to add - what is nice is that for the big skirts you do often have a lot more ease in adjusting the waist and hem. With trousers, it very much depends on the shape of them in the first place, and honestly, just how well they're constructed.

You know yourself, I'm sure, that a lot of newer clothes will have less robust fabric and poorer stitching than vintage ones, and this issue is even more pronounced in women's sections than men's ones, but your mileage might vary from store to store, especially depending on your friends' styles.

Most of my friends favour skinny jeans or straight line ones that are quite flush to the leg, and so the amount of alteration they might need is minimal except for maybe stitching a turn-up in place, but for bigger girls or girls with more muscle (particularly thinking about climbers and rollerskaters) around the thighs, it can be absolute hell to find good, well-constructed jeans that won't just immediately either wear away or burst at the seams with the wrong slight squat. If you find good vintage ones in the right size (especially like, early 90s and earlier), absolutely snatch them up, because good denim is a lifesaver and is worth patching and maintaining.

I would also say not to underestimate the value a good bra can add to the shape of an outfit, especially if they can find a good specialist who can measure them properly - the brassiere lady a few of my friends go to recommended them some softer ones when they were early on in HRT, and then once their breast size and weight gain had evened out, recommended for them to come back and pick up the right cups and fit across the shoulders and stuff. There's a huge variety in brassiere design, obviously, and some aren't made with bigger women in mind - if you're on the fatter side, there's sometimes an assumption that you've got larger cups to match; if you're smaller but just broader or more muscular, a lot of brassieres won't have the right band around the middle and/or the shoulder straps will fit oddly.

If they're good with bralettes and off-the-rack support garments, that's great, but if they've got bigger chests or have more difficulty finding a fit, even if they have to travel to find a good person who will measure them and give expert advice, well-constructed brassieres that fit will help a lot when it comes to wearing shirts, blouses, etc over top, and they can always look for similar support in the garments.

As we're coming into the summer, nice sundresses are often great to get hold of, especially because they can be dressed up with a chunky belt - mumus don't always look the most flattering on the rack, especially the button front ones, but they're not too difficult to turn into a nice kaftan with the right cinching and adjustment, and especially for girls who are either anxious about shape and/or tend toward sunburn, big flowy sleeves over the arms whilst bringing in the waist can help a lot with both anxiety and general coverage!

[writing-with-sophia]

I usually find myself using the same range of ages in my stories (young adults, teens), and just plotting a crime story, I realized how unrealistic it was to have almost every single character in early stages of adulthood, especially the team researching the case. Of course I have in mind a lack of experience in certain things for them and stuff but it's pretty hard for me to do older or much younger characters idk why 😭 what would u recommend? Is it somehow bad not to have a variety of ages or making it less realistic? It makes me feel like I'm doing a teen novel, sry for my english and uh ty <3

How to include a broader spectrum of ages in stories

Well, in fact, it's not necessarily bad to focus on a specific age range in your stories, as long as it serves the narrative and the themes you want to explore. If you find it difficult to write for a wide range of ages, you can certainly focus on teenagers. A story about young detectives can also be engaging and exciting, right? But if you want to incorporate a variety of ages to add depth and richness to your story, here are a few suggestions to help you:

Tip 1: Develop characters

Create well-rounded characters of different ages, each with their own distinct personalities, perspectives, and life experiences. Develop their backstories, motivations, and goals in a way that reflects the impact of their age on their thoughts and actions.

Then, explore how age can influence characters' motivations, goals, and challenges. Older characters may bring wisdom, life experiences, and a different perspective, while younger characters may have a sense of idealism, curiosity, and growth potential. By considering age-related motivations, you can create more dynamic and believable characters.

Tip 2: Build relationships for characters

At different ages, people develop various types of relationships. For example, a 16-year-old girl may have relationships with peers, teachers, and family members, while an adult man may have relationships with family, coworkers, and friends in social settings.

Relationships between older mentors and younger proteges, or clashes between generations, can add depth and conflict to your story. These interactions can also provide opportunities for growth and learning for your characters.

Tip 3: Pay attention to characters' dialogue and language

The vocabulary, tone, and communication styles of characters from different age groups are different. Younger characters may use contemporary slang or have a more informal way of speaking, while older characters may have a more formal or seasoned approach. You can observe closely how the elders around you communicate and make notes in a notebook.

Tip 4: Research

If you find it challenging to write characters of different ages, consider conducting research or seeking firsthand experiences from people of those age groups. As mentioned above, you can make a small notebook to record the words, actions and behaviors of people around you in certain situations. Reality is always a great source of information if you know how to take advantage of it.

Tip 5: Beta and feedback

You can share your work with beta readers or writing groups that include individuals from various age groups. Their feedback can offer valuable insights and help you refine the portrayal of different age groups in your story.

Remember, storytelling is an art, and there are no set rules. Ultimately, it's about finding a balance that aligns with your creative vision while ensuring your story resonates with a diverse audience. Embracing a variety of ages can add depth and realism to your stories, expanding the scope of your narratives and making them more relatable to readers of different backgrounds and experiences.

[axilarycobra]

[Spoilers] WoF Guide book opinions

I recently got the guide and I wanted to share what I thought of it. Honestly, not really meant to be a post explaining in-depth details about what was in the guide, but yeah, this post will contain spoilers for the guide if you haven't read it yet. I'm going to go through it in chapters.

MudWings

I actually really liked the stuff we got in this chapter. It was sort of ruined because everything in it was spoiled or leaked before I got it, the only thing I had not seen yet as of reading that chapter was 2 pages, but I still really like the characters introduced and how it expanded on characters we already know.

SeaWings

This chapter was nice. Not my favorite, but I wouldn't say it was bad. Kind of wish there was more new information since there was a whole part just about Coral recapping the war of SandWing succession. I would have much rather have learned about some kind of folklore or something instead. I think the inclusion of letters between Albatross and Lagoon was cool but it really didn't give us any cool new information, instead just showed how their relationship was like. The Turtle and Anemone parts were fine. The chapter overwhelmingly featured royal SeaWing things when really, learning about some non royal SeaWing stuff would have been so much better because we have really only seen royal SeaWings this whole series.

RainWings

I would say I enjoyed this chapter. I wasn't really into the Kinkajou story but I get its importance in the series, but it felt like an excuse to get to write something from Kinkajou's perspective for once. The Dangers of the Rainforest things was honestly not really insightful. I would have much rather had something about RainWing potions which have been mentioned in other books, that sounds interesting while the Dangers of the Rainforest is really just more about the Rainforest than RainWings. The thing about royal challenges was interesting and included some cool history, it was also interesting to learn about a few other possible challenges that can happen during these. I do like the information about how RainWings traditionally tell stories that are passed down through words rather than writing.

NightWings

This chapter was ok. I skimmed a lot of it. The Tales of the NightWings story was interesting and I like the conversation between Starflight and Fatespeaker that took place after it. The guide to NightWing powers felt pretty unnecessary. I get that this is supposed to represent a real guide that would exist in the series, but I also feel like there should have been more of a priority to give us new information rather than give us information we have been told many times before. The Mastermind interview was way longer than it needed to be, but I did like the history we got about the NightWings developing language and medicine. Fierceteeth's letters was really interesting and seeing some character development in her was really nice

SandWings

Honestly, probably my least favorite section. The wanted treasure poster was cool but then we get thrown into stuff we've already been told. There really is not a lot of new information we learn in this chapter which sucks because I would have loved some SandWing history from Jerboa times or something about the Sorpion Den being founded. There was no reason why most of the chapter had to be focused on Smolder's scavenger journal.

IceWings

Honestly, very cool chapter imo. It also just looked really pretty. Mink's application was pretty long and tbh didn't really add anything to anything. Also, I thought we would get to learn about some new animus gifts but it just restated old gifts we had already learned about without expanding on the information. Literally just exactly what is on the wof wiki plus a tiny little bit of information about Diamond as a dragonet. The feast thing was cool, I never realized how interesting information about food could be but I found myself interested in it. I did really like the Caribou story and that whole history, that's kind of what I wanted more of in the animus gift guide: putting names to animi to their enchantments.

SkyWings

I'd say this chapter was interesting. Although most of the Scarlet kill list was stuff we already know, it's interesting that Tui created a whole new character to put on there with no context as to who they are. I wonder if she wants to do something with this character. I also found the letter from Queen Carmine to Queen Pearl interesting. We got to see a bit of how the massacre was explained to the SkyWings and Queen Carmine's personality. The Tailwind story was interesting, especially near the end parts. It really did explain quite a bit about SkyWing traditions (well, the traditions before they were taken away by Scarlet). I never guessed that Canyon would just be the male version of Scarlet and the reason she had him killed was because he was too obsessed with himself when Scarlet had to make sure she was the dragon most obsessed with herself instead.

SilkWings

This chapter was alright. I enjoyed the information about the SilkWing curriculum and professions back when they were in the Hives. This chapter, and all of the Pantalan chapters, never addressed the LeafSilk Kingdom or the SilkWing Assembly. It is as if that never happened and they were still living in the Hives. I like the history in Monarch's writing and thought that the part about her bringing cookies to the queen meetings was really cute. Aside from that, there was no BeetleWing info which I was really looking forward to possibly seeing.

HiveWings

I did like a lot of information in this chapter. The Hive guides was cool since we really only got a focus on two of them during all of arc 3. The Legend of the Hive part was ok, really just information we already knew, but also interesting that some SeaWings also moved to Pantala with the BeetleWings, LeafWings, and some RainWings. The Book of Clearsight excerpts were also interesting, probably would have been more if they hadn't been leaked.

LeafWings

This chapter was really short. The guide to the Poison Jungle was alright. I did really like the books part. Learning about folklore within the series is what I was more looking forward to in this guide. Then there were the letters with Belladonna and Liden which were alright. But that's it, the whole chapter is 3 things.

[the-bi-space-ace]

Tomorrow I’ll be posting chapter 1 of The World Tumbles Down and before I start that fic I wanted to say a few things!

First, it’ll be long. Like. Very long. I’ve got 20 chapters planned and quite an in depth plot to get through. It’s probably my most involved fic yet and I’m both very nervous and very excited for it. It’s a challenge for me that I feel like I’m up to so I hope everyone enjoys reading it!

The relationship dynamics are… complicated to say the least. There’s a lot of hurt between them all and it’s going to manifest in unhealthy and emotional ways. They’re going to argue. They’re going to fight. It’s going to be sticky and difficult and they’re all in pain in some way shape or form. It won’t be easy. They’re going to have to claw their way back to each other to resolve their issues. We’ll be revisiting a lot of stuff that was opened up in the first two fics that we’ll now have to resolve and it’s gonna be messy.

Side note: You’re gonna get fluff. I promise. It’ll be sad and heavy for a lot of it but it’s me so there will be fluff and cuddles and silliness.

This story means a lot of different things to me. But I’ve been reluctant to talk about what it means because I want to let you decide that for yourselves. I know what it means to me but you might have a different perspective and that’s perfectly fine. Seeing what people say about it and how they interpret scenes differently than me is one of my favorite things about writing fanfiction.

I’ll be posting every other Friday and I’m working pretty hard to keep up with that posting schedule. It’s a goal I set for myself that I’m going to try very hard to keep up with.

I’m so excited to get started. The first chapter is going to be… rough. We left off at a very tense place in the last fic and that… continues this time. We’re about to start the last fic!

I hope you’ll enjoy it as much as I do.

[crystallized-interest]

"Lilith" by Nikki Marmery review (pt 1)

Up to "she who walks on water" roughly halfway through (1/19/2025)

- book should have a light TW concerning r*pe, domestic violence/abuse, death of infants. I'm not a professional and most likely missed some others.

This book was listed for the first read in our local brewery book club for 2025. It's taking me a while to read it (life stuff) and I wanted to share a review.

In a nutshell, this is a feminist retelling of the fall of man and other popular Genesis stories. I find the feminism tastefully done and not "overbearing" as some readers were concerned about, but that's depending on the reader.

The first couple chapters had me going and searching for information, particularly pertaining to lemons. I like it when a book has me going and looking for more information.

I acknowledge that this book is fictional, but it makes me examine just how deeply internalized misogyny rooted into me personally through my exposure to Christianity. Particularly of the USA Southern Baptist and Evangelical flavors. Even though I've distanced myself from the teachings of my youth, "Lilith" makes a point of reexamining the foundations of gender inequality found in Genesis and how it impacts the later books. A particular example that was impactful to me was the belief that human bodies are inherently sinful, particularly women's, and therefore should be hidden. I was teleported back to youth group and feeling the same devastating feelings I felt then learning that lesson in sunday school. It's been literally decades since that lesson, and I'm able to acknowledge the damage inflicted on my psyche. I'm also able to make the decision in my mind that (IMHO) that was a pretty messed up belief, ponder about how that has manifested in my life, and have closure to dismiss the teachings of long ago.

Not only does "Lilith" challenge certain concepts directly, but also by retelling classic stories from women's perspective. The ones that struck me most were Noahs' son's wives and their terrible quality of life. Three women expected to repopulate the planet, no autonomy, not able to "deny their husbands" (cute way of saying marital r*pe) or consent to pregnancy. And how their daughters are cursed to labor, marriage, pregnancy, and birth, as they had been.

"Lilith" also weaves in bits of other cultures, which I would have loved to have seen explored a bit more in-depth.

I also note how the book approaches the subject of r*pe. I'm a sensitive reader myself, but I didn't find the particular scenes as distressing (so much as to not be able to continue the reading) as they could have been. Most likely, this is by design. Yet they were still impactful enough to stir emotion, thought, and speculation. I would still caution any super sensitive readers.

One last tidbit - There was/is a pretty comprehensive critique of the book on Goodreads that made a point to criticize Lilith (the character) zoning out for about a thousand years. There were other points, but that one stuck out to me. Let me articulate why that was an unfair assessment. It happens immediately after Adam and Eve are cast out of the garden of Eden, and Lilith feels that not only is she responsible, but that she failed Eve, herself, the goddess, and all womenkind. She's in a state of emotional upset and wanders into a place in between realms where time passes differently. With the emotional upheaval affecting cognitive function and being in a place where the rules of time are different, she didn't just "space out for a thousand years." If you read the same critique I did and this is a hang-up for you, I would say it's a very mute point.

Well, these are the thoughts I wanted to put out into the world. I hope this helps someone contemplating the read.

[quillpenkeyboard]

Hoo, this turned into a really long post, sorry!

I'm a small animal vet in private practice, who volunteers with my alma mater for screening and interviewing applicants. I'm going to add on info in 2 areas: getting vet/animal experience and getting what vet schools are looking for. Mostly not talking about how to craft the application though I can.

(1) Getting animal experience in high school is, as Orcinus said, not tied to being veterinary - volunteer at a shelter, an adoption event, muck stalls, etc. Tell *everyone* at these events but also in your general life that you want to be a vet and are looking for opportunities to get vet experience. If you have pets, go with them to their next appointment if at all possible and tell the assistant or doctor that you're looking for experience. So, so much of getting experience is getting your foot in the door - and the best way to find those open doors is to have people looking out for them for you. My main pre-vet-school vet experiences were found by: (a) my coach had a friend who was a vet, (b) my grandma's neighbor had cattle and asked their vet if I could shadow and (c) my mom's friend's ex-coworker used to own horses and knew a vet who just opened an equine practice. Putting myself out there was super uncomfortable - I am incredibly introverted and hated opening myself up to the risk of everyone knowing what I wanted in case I failed. But without that network, I wouldn't have gotten there. Especially in the animal world, everyone knows someone and you will find connections and windows there but also in your regular life. Be enthusiastic and excited about the boring and gross parts of the job - I know your life aspiration isn't to clean dog poop out of cages, but if you jump in there we all notice. Especially in vet experiences, ask questions - if it's not a good time, read social cues and ask later. If I know you're interested, I'm more likely to show you a cool thing or start a conversation about a case when I can breathe.

(2) Vet schools do differ and also you're really really not supposed to show too much behind the curtain on the admissions process, to avoid people gaming the system too much. But as OP said, they are looking for a complete person, as well as a person who knows what they're getting into.

From a vet experience perspective, that means good breadth and depth of experience. Think of it like someone asking how many countries you've been to: they don't really mean a place you never left the airport, but there's a difference between saying you took a week vacation somewhere, and saying you lived there for a year, and they care about both!

Breadth means you may know you want to be a small animal vet, but you should try to get a couple weeks of experience in as many areas as you can: cat/dog, food, equine, exotic, zoo/wildlife, research, etc. (It has to be more than a few hours to get counted on the rubric.)

Depth means that in at least one of these areas, you Got Involved and Stayed Involved beyond entry-level stuff - you got hands-on with cases, provided care and developed a better understanding of the expectations and challenges in the field.

They also want you to have done your due diligence and looked into what the challenges of this profession are. There is a national (arguably global) mental health crisis and veterinary professionals are disproportionately affected. Talk to the vets you meet during your experiences about what they find hard, what they wish they knew before they started, how they cope. It is a common conception outside of the field that euthanasia is the hardest part of the job, and I don't know a single vet who feels that way (although I'm sure they do exist).

From a whole person perspective, they are looking for people with demonstrated leadership skills, legitimate extracurriculars, and (increasingly commonly) an ability to play nice with others. These don't have to each be separate things you do.

Demonstrated leadership is what is sounds like: a vet is a leader by default in the clinic. Even if it's not an official role, think about how you lead and look for places where you can be a leader. If it is an official role, still think about how you'll explain it - because I know what's expected of some (not all) leadership positions, but I don't know if you were any good at it if you don't tell me (everyone who's been in a group with a bad leader raise your hand 🙋).

Legitimate extracurriculars means you got involved in at least one non-animal thing and did it often enough that it means something. You spent 2 hours at a food bank on Thanksgiving? Cool, but doesn't say much about you unless it's part of a larger trend. You play chess at a nursing home once a month for an hour? Tells me you have the ability to commit and follow through, you have a hobby, a community engagement, etc. This doesn't have to be volunteering, this can be you had a job (preferably not just a grind job though, if it is spin it a bit), played a sport, sang in a choir, whatever - just something or things that you do. A person who has more to their identity than vet med is less likely to burn out completely.

Ability to play nice with others is less defined and weighted lower on the rubrics but generally means that you are able to show that you have experiences outside of your own little local bubble and are able to handle being in a group with someone who has a different worldview or experience from you. (Context: My vet school was the whitest class I've been a part of, including a private Christian high school. Yeah. We had one (1, singular) Black student and a handful of other people of color in a class well over 100 people. They're, uh, kind of ish working on it, and this is part of it.) If you're on Tumblr, you probably (hopefully) aren't a raging bigot, but if you can demonstrate through your extracurriculars or other experiences that you aren't going to be racist/ homophobic/ classist/ otherwise horrible to your classmates or to clients, that does give you a bump. This can easily be things like peer tutoring, volunteering with groups providing assistance to low income people, working with animals that provide therapy for people with disabilities, or involvement in LGBT or DEI type groups. Even if you don't have an activity that was focused on or around it, it's just being able to demonstrate that your experiences involved people who aren't all the same.

hi, good morning/night! I'm a high school student hoping to become a veterinarian someday. do you have any advice on volunteer opportunities, eventually applying to the veterinary medicine program, or really anything else?

Good morning! High school is the perfect time to begin building your resume. I started working in the kennel at a vet clinic between my junior and senior years. If a part-time job is something you're considering, try visiting your local vet hospitals to see which of them hire high schoolers. Not all do, so don't become discouraged. If part-time work is unavailable, or something that doesn't fit into your schedule right now, many vets are willing to let students shadow them. It's a great introduction to the field and gives you the opportunity to ask a lot of questions.

At this stage in your journey, any experience with animals (outside of owning your own pets) is very helpful, even if not in a veterinary context. Humane societies, zoos, wildlife centers, farms/stables, and boarding kennels are examples of places you may be able to find work or volunteer experience. If you are based in the US and will be applying through the VMCAS, non-veterinary animal experience is still considered and will be logged on your application.

Another extremely important thing you can do: pursue your interests outside of animals and vet medicine. Sports, music, art, cosplay, community outreach, whatever it is you enjoy. Vet schools look for applicants that are unique and have passions and hobbies aside from animals. That was probably my biggest mistake when I applied. I was a cookie-cutter "good vet school applicant" with nothing that made me stand out.

I hope that's helpful! Best of luck!

[nunchucksnun]

Just run!

[wackus-bonkus-maximus]

the miraculous enneagram post nobody asked for

if by now you don't know i'm obsessed with the enneagram & personality stuff, i present to you know the depth of the hole i'm in. hello, i'm wackus, type 9, and if you skip this rambling post i totally understand.

the enneagram is a personality tool i use for writing (both fanfic & non-fanfic stuff) and irl to navigate relationships. this post will focus on how i type the mlb characters in my fics. however, the enneagram is more than putting people in boxes and stamping them with stereotypes. i use it in my writing is to know what motivates each personality and how their values shape not only their worldview, but the actions they will take in the narrative.

1 - the reformer marinette (wing 2), su han, kagami driving goal: integrity, perfection, improvement basic fear: being bad or corrupt

2 - the helper nino, rose, sabrina (wing 1) driving goal: love, appreciation, validation basic fear: being unwanted, unloved

3 - the achiever chloe (wing 2), lila (wing 4): driving goal: worth, success, image basic fear: being worthless

4 - the individualist gabriel (wing 5), zoe, juleka driving goal: identity, authenticity, significance basic fear: the void

5 - the investigator felix (6), max, nathalie (wing 4) driving goal: knowledge, understanding, competency basic fear: being helpless or incompetent

6 - the loyalist mylene, roland, sabine (wing 5) driving goal: security, community, certitude basic fear: having no support system

7 - the enthusiast adrien (wing 6), kim, gina (wing 8) driving goal: satisfaction, excitement, contentedness basic fear: missing out, feeling pain

8 - the challenger alya (wing 9), alix (wing 7), ivan driving goal: autonomy, importance, control basic fear: being harmed, being controlled

9 - the peacemaker luka, fu (wing 8), tom driving goal: harmony, connection, peace of mind basic fear: conflict, separation, loss

there is no enneagram type that's better or worse than the others. an unhealthy person will present the worst symptoms of their type, while a healthy person will present the best. remember, the goal of the enneagram is to get out of the box you're in so you can be a more healthy personality!

notes:

*i'm like 95% sure i got their types right but if you think differently pls feel free to correct me

*wings are when an enneagram type leans into the traits of the type next to them on the circle (either side). i, a 9 wing 1, am mostly laid-back and chill, but if you don't do the dishes like i asked then i'll passive aggressively get up and do them myself while saying "it's fine."

*each type might act like another when they are healthy/unhealthy. E.g nino (type 2) has gone to the "bad side" of 8 in stress (bubbler & rocketeer tried to dominate & regain control). but when he is healthy he looks like "the good side" of 4, making videos and dj-ing & just being super creative.

*any type can be in a happy relationship with any other type as long as they're both healthy (which is one of the things i like about the enneagram's perspective). that being said, my favorite couples that i always end up shipping the hardest are the 1/7 and the 2/5. just so much fun to watch ❤️

*if you're looking at this like "mm i don't buy it, sounds like bull" you might be a type 6

*if you are reading this and thinking "i need to research this more and get the right info" you might be a type 5

*if you're looking at this and are unsure which one you might be because some or all of them kinda sound like you, you're probably a 9

**i am not a certified enneagram coach, just v obsessed

tldr: wackus sorts the miraculous characters into enneagram types bc it helps her write good.

[artingabout]

The Queen’s Thief themed nook-book made as a gift for @meganwhalenturner​

Behind the scenes:

My materials:

ae woodene booke

much paper in many layers and shades

craft knife

scissors

foamy-tape-stuff (technical term)

acrylic paints

brushes and roller

pens & coloured pencils

PVA glue

faux gold leafing

resin

metal ruler and cutting mat

milliput

fimo

wire

craft foam boards

card

black tissue

wooden dowels

chalk

This one, I’ve been planning for a while. Originally I was going to do a standard book nook, but then remembered these gorgeous wooden books I’ve had just lying around waiting for a purpose and BEHOLD!

Because I can never keep things simple for myself, I wanted to try different craft styles for each section so I’ll go through them one by one.

Phase 1 was challenging because it’s the shallow left side. I decided to do one of the iconic scenes that stayed with me long after I read the books for the first time in cut paper, because it would let me play with layers and the illusion of depth while also... y’know. Paper. It’s thin.

First off I made a background to add some perspective and depth to the box, so it looked much deeper than it is.I painted on a sky effect and then dug out this gorgeous paper that has a kind of marble texture to it and made the buildings.

Next I did a base sketch of the faces to get the sizes right and snipped out Gen since he has more layers because his arm is foreground.

I didn’t remember to take a picture of the paper I textured for his skin tone, but basically various shades of pinks/reds/browns/whites applied to watercolour paper in erratic layers to get some texture and depth. It’s sort of visible on the hand (which was the first piece I cut out and it strikes me as ironic that it’s the piece I kept losing because I was working on my living room floor 😅)

For Attolia, I picked different papers/cards to use, specifically a rather nice handmade off-white paper with dark red rose petals imbedded in it to serve as her alabaster skin with the smudge of blood.

Nothing says love like floating heads, amirite? I added some layers to Attolia’s hair and coiled the strands of the ringlets around a cocktail stick to get the curls. The crown and earring are both faux-gold-leaf card with slivers of resin as rubies. So much gold-leaf everywhere. SO MUCH. Details were added with a fine-tipped pen and some shading with coloured pencils.

The layers. So many layers. I think Gen has about 15 separate pieces to him. For his sleeves, I added some texture by using a rubber patterned stamp and copper ink, then splatted paint all over it :D

And to add even more depth to a 1cm deep space, I used thick double-sided foam tape (I have no idea of technical terms. Foamy squishy stick string) to elevate them off the background. A wee glimpse of it is visible just under Gen’s collarbone

Phase 1 complete!

Phase 2 was another beast entirely. Originally, I was planning on doing the scene from The Thief when Gen steals Hamiathes’s gift, but realised that would mean an image of Hephestia that looked very much like the image of Attolia I had already done. Plus I was planning to use The Return of the Thief’s cover which is also red, so I wanted to do something less red.

Pheris was kind enough to give me some beautiful descriptions of the half-built temple of Hephestia in TRotT and I love me some forced perspective :D And naturally, I had a slightly deeper box to work with this time (omg a whole 2-3cm! Luxury!) so of course, it had to be 3D.

"I studied the Great Goddess, shining in the darkness. The treasury was new, but her statue was much older; the wood from which she was carved showed through the gold leaf. The pillars supporting the dome were tree trunks, smoothed of their bark and inverted, so they were wider at the top than at the ground"

First up, the Goddess herself. Fimo on a wire armature with a throne made of balsa wood . Since the statue is described as old with wood showing through the gold, I figured she could look a little crudely-carved and rough. Also, she is smol and I have sossige fingers.

I cut dowels to size to serve as the inverted-tree-trunk pillars and add an illusion of depth. My art teacher would be so proud.

The altar was the easiest piece of the whole thing: chopped up foam board, some card for stability, cut and shaped and decorated with milliput to add the Hephestial Mountains, coated in black tissue to give a nice strong black base to paint. I used drybrush to get a nice stone effect (see a bit further down)

And conveniently, the entire background of the scene is black, so I added the dome for More Optical Illusions! Because hey, if it worked once, do it again :D And also started layering up milliput for the tree-pillar bits.

And the last and messiest step before fixing the pillars and everything in place. Gold. Leaf.

The last bits to get done were the pillars, which I fixed in with milliput and glue.

Once they were set and painted, I glued everything in place and gave Hephestia her orb and behold, phase 2 complete!

And both sides together.

Finally, phase 3 - the cover. To keep things (relatively) simple, I went with the blood-red cover for Return of the Thief. Gave it a nice red basecoat, sketched on the design in chalk because lol, who uses tools to draw lines? Not me!

No in-progress pictures because I did it all in one run while listening to a webinar.

And as a special treat, more gold leafing!! I love the shininess of the figures on the cover of the book and thought “hey, that’s a sensible option that won’t leave you finding gold bits in your kitchen for days!” :D

Note to self: do not do this on wood again, it is very very likely the leaf will cling to the wood and require some repainting. This is a lesson. Do not forget (this memory will self destruct within 10 seconds of leaving this post)

For comparison before I did some touch-ups because of the stupid leaf going rogue

And behold, it is done :D

[inaconstantstateofchange]

Honestly, this was very disappointing to see. I would be hard pressed to find a more egregious example of a series of strawman arguments pretending at legitimacy.

Right out of the gate, you are coming at this from what comes across as an incredibly aggressive and, quite frankly, mean-spirited position. The OP made a post on their own blog, sharing their own opinion, in a very neutral way.

Your argument that "most notes, at best, augment what is presented in the cutscenes" is categorically and demonstrably untrue. There are a plethora of notes, books, and writings that exist solely to give extra depth to the world. Just because those are seemingly unimportant to you does not render them objectively unimportant.

Yes, because telling Shadowheart "I want to talk about everything that's happened to us" ten times and getting the same answer for eight of those times is SO much more enlightening than watching someone else do it. Truly riveting stuff, you just can't miss doing it yourself.

I am going to give you credit enough to presume that you didn't just entirely miss the OP's point, which means that you deliberately built this response around something that they didn't say at all, and clearly did not intend. That is an incredibly disingenuous way to build an "argument".

Maybe we should only count someone as having finished the game if they have done both, because you miss so much information about the world and history of the Absolute plot playing as someone besides Durge.

Once again, you are inventing and adding on to a fabricated version of the OP's argument. The OP said nothing at all of the sort, but you are acting as though they did, and doing so specifically to direct ridicule at them.

This is the same kind of elitism that is used to insult easy mode players of various games, saying that if they can't play it the "real" way, they don't deserve to see the ending, or that you can't call yourself a fan of the game if you only play on easy mode, etc.

I can't help but feel like this is getting repetitious, but once again: strawman. It is not elitism to hold an opinion different to your own, and I find your willingness to weaponize concepts like this against people you disagree with, frankly, incredibly concerning. No issue is divided into two black and white sides, and you finding something disagreeable about what the OP said does not equate to them embodying these other, completely unrelated, accusations you are lobbing at them.

What are you afraid of- someone's opinion being listened to when it isn't bought with money?

You keep making this about money, when that was not at all a part of the OP's post. In a game designed like Baldur's Gate, with a massive number of hours in an average base game run – that being the amount of time you are intended to spend with these characters – as well as the incredible ripple effects of so many of the choices made, it is not elitism or financially-motivated prejudice to voice an opinion that one's own experience of events might give a different perspective of the world and characters than merely viewing them in a much more condensed time frame.

It's like saying that someone who listened to an audiobook doesn't actually understand the book because they didn't turn the pages themself.

Video games as a medium exist to tell stories in a way that cannot be done with another format. As such, trying to reduce the discussion down to this flat 1:1 does a disservice to that very medium, and the artistry it allows and encourages.

And I have to challenge the premise that there is THIS much of an emotional difference between the two. Like, putting aside that different moods have changed my opinion on characters, I have experienced the "convince Shadowheart to spare Aylin" scene twice. Once with me playing it, once watching my friend. And guess what? I didn't feel anything when playing it myself that I didn't feel watching her. "Cool. Aylin's been spared. Time for Moonrise." Actually, I did feel one thing that was different: "thank fuck I don't have to fight Shadowheart, she has all my healing potions." That's it. Only difference.

I have been trying my best to avoid engaging in the "making judgments of someone else's character based on a few lines" that your post is filled with, but I feel inclined to give my thoughts upon reading this segment of yours, which are: You feeling absolutely nothing at all at this scene, no matter how you experienced it, might actually indicate more about your own experience of the game, story, and characters. I would not use that to draw conclusions about everyone's experience.

In conclusion, what I saw from your response was that you philosophically disagreed with the OP's personally held opinion, and instead of addressing it in those terms, you decided that to "win" this engagement, you needed to paint the OP as someone objectively horrible and ideologically flawed.

People are allowed to have different opinions. People are even allowed to discuss those different opinions respectfully. What you have done is so far into the the realm of bad-faith that it has nearly eclipsed the sun.

I'm gonna be honest with you guys: there's a major difference between watching scenes of BG3 on youtube and actually playing the game, and I'm saying this was someone who began writing a BG3 fanfiction before playing the game.

A video can be edited. Or you can skip the 'boring' parts of the video. And also, the person who posted made their own decisions that could be vastly different than what you would have chosen, and many of them affect the characters of the game. The person who posted the video might not have read the various books and scrolls that the game has.

When you play the game, it's you doing everything. You who make the decisions, who go throuhg the 'boring' interactions, you. When you play, you have access to all bits and pieces of lore, access to talk with the characters how many times you want.

*also, i'm considering playing the game as finishing the game (or at the very least, getting very far into it cause I know a lot of people kinda stop after getting to act 3).

It's a different experience. You have a different perspective of the game when you play it, instead of just watching someone else do it.

And like, i will be honest, it baffles me a little how I've seen people write this long ass meta and opinion posts about characters of the game when the person has only experienced it through watching videos on youtube.

Because, playing the damn game is such a different experience that my opinion of certain characters CHANGED when I actually played the game v. when I was only watching stuff. Also, when you play and then make your meta posts, you can at least have the fact that you went through the things you're talking about, you have a different view of how those things affected the world and you.

Also, since i'm already in this discussion, we gotta stop acting as if datamines and devnotes were as important as what is actually in game. Sure, there are datamine material that eventually makes it's way into the game, but it's not a guarantee and in my opinion, it should not be treated with as much value as what is ALREADY in the game. And devnotes, they're acting directions, they're not supposed to be taken as some secret lore, they're just there to help the actors portray the desired emotions.

Anyways, i made this post cause some behaviours have been bothering me and quite frankly, if i ever have to choose who to side on with, i'll probably side on with whoever actually experienced the game. Now, i'll be back on my usual shit.

[funkymbtifiction]

How did you decide your types and really be confirmed on it? I might have a 6 head type so it’s hard lol.

You have to stop looking at your behavior, and start looking at the inner functioning of your mind / consciousness, and "notice" yourself doing your type, while being your type. This sounds hard, and it is, because most people are not introspective, but it involves sitting with a type -- not passively, but actively "seeing."

One way to do this is to really study all you can about whatever you think your dominant and auxiliary function are, so that you KNOW what those patterns do, and then to observe yourself while doing something that you love. For example, an ISFP may notice while doing something they love (creating art, dancing, playing music, etc) how they disappear into their sensory activity; they become 'one' with it, their body and their mind are fully present. When you can see and understand what you are doing, while you are doing it, that makes your type clear.

I am conscious of my Ne every day -- when I hear one perspective and automatically object to it (it's too fixed, we need to discuss these other possibilities), I know it's my Ne not liking one perspective and generating others. I am "seeing" what my Ne is doing, and it becomes a choice of whether to go with it or not. I can see my Ne when it wants to run away with me, distract me from what's rational, or needlessly complicate something that should be simple. I see my Fi in my abstract sense of personal judgments; in the things that do or do not bother me. I see my Te from the inside out when I really excel at and enjoy organization, editing something, bringing a sense of order to chaos, or even when I am tactless because the answer is so obvious. I can see my Si when I forget something I read twelve seconds ago, because I haven't ever developed an internal memory structure to retain in-depth information.

The Enneagram was easier for me, to be honest. I read everything I could about 6s and then started observing myself. I always react like a 6, I become emotional like a 6, I am suspicious of things like a 6, and I can look back on the worst periods of my life and identify the strategies of 6-ness, some of which CONTRIBUTED to the problems (being accusatory, suspicious without proof, and creating hostility from others because of my cagey behavior). I am now so comfortable with my type that I can see various wings and lines working within me on a daily basis. I know when my 7 wing is encouraging me to re-frame things, or run away from hard things, or refusing to hang on to sadness. I can see clearly my line to 3 in how I want to be perfect at whatever I care about the most, without sacrificing my authenticity in the process (my Fi/resilient 6-ness). I can tell when I am using my line to 9 to ignore things, downplay them, or 'numb out' rather than deal with the things that cause me stress.

It's all a process, but it has to start from the outside first (learning about type) and then become introspective. Until you do the inner focusing and identification, you won't be self-aware. Type isn't just a cool thing to put on your blog, it's an admission of what you are good and bad at for the world to see, and a personal challenge for you to transcend through personal growth. MBTI gives you the process, and the Enneagram tells you the "why" behind your actions and thoughts. But it's up to you what you do with and about it.

Another useful thing is to learn the stances and identify when you are doing them -- as an attachment type and a dependent type, I can see myself attaching AND see myself "doing" dependent stuff, which is all built around "I should/I must/I ought." Knowing that it's just my super ego dictating my life to me, and I don't have to listen to it, makes it easier to say yes or no without guilt. I don't HAVE to do anything. I CHOOSE to prioritize this. It's the difference between passively going along with your type structure, and making it more deliberate and self-aware.

I know that's probably not what you were asking for, but there it is.

[ganymedesclock]

Clowns are great, tell us what you like about clowns!! Everyone seems scared of them to the point that a nice clown is an inverted trope...

I think that people initially get unsettled about clowns for a lot of the same reasons people get unsettled about dolls- the presumption of innocence that can be subverted, the 'that's not quite a normal face' affected by the makeup, and to a degree that circuses have become a little less common and a little more something regarded as fantastical or strange. (I attended a Cirque do Soliel performance- Cavalia- once in my life! It was extremely impressive)

I think on top of that, as you say, the trope of the monster clown, popularized by figures such as the Joker, has become so widespread that people tend to think of clowns as scary by default, a kind of monster category. Which is just kind of a shame and many people are taking that back. For me personally, I'm a bit more of a fond of old-school aesthetics/ court jester image than I am on the classic clown but I still think circus aesthetics are pretty fun.

For me, a lot of the appeal of this is twofold: I think "a performer" is an interesting psychological state to present a character in, especially someone like a clown who generally has a persona on and off and who drastically changes their face (with paint, wigs, costuming) between. The clown is designed to be funny- to affect a foolishness or otherwise harmlessness- and it is a performance taken on deliberately by others. At their core, clowns are actors, and their performance is to entertain one way or another.

This is an interesting thing to think about for me personally because I'm someone who tends to reflexively fear being not taken seriously, being found funny, harmless, ineffectual by others- but the key thing about a performance is that it is at the discretion of the performer. They are putting themselves, their art, and their control into it. At the same time, they're skillfully palming elements of themselves so the audience doesn't see who they are fully or clearly.

That can be used for horror, to be fair- the idea that someone is behaving harmless or benevolent when the actual person they are underneath is not necessarily. But at this point, the clown facade is so often associated with evil that it'll lose a bit of effectiveness before your audience unless you play it really well.

It can also be used for something interesting! I don't call myself a profound or storied batman aficionado, but I think it actually is interesting that the Joker has a "clown aesthetic" in some ways but that one of his most commonly depicted fatal flaws is pride- he dresses as he does to laugh at everybody around him but cannot stand the idea of being mocked or derided- he's not the one to take the pratfall, and any time he does, he hits the roof about it. Not someone who actually values the clown as an entertainer, but someone who wants to insinuate everybody around him belongs in the circus and he won't respect them.

But I think there's a plentiful amount of room for characters associated with clowns who are depicted as more of a clever hero; someone who performs and deflects, disarms and pleases, from the shrewd perspective of a person who knows they aren't being taken seriously. The core viewpoint character in one of my personal projects- Avery from Bevyverse- is raised by a circus and while he doesn't exactly keep up the clown makeup after leaving it behind, it still strongly affects his ideology about role, identity, performance and entertainment; to the point where, as an abandoned child with no known history, he takes the surname of the setting's equivalent of Robin Goodfellow- a role he came to thrive in at a key point in his upbringing.

I think there's not necessarily anything wrong with a scary clown, but I think that there's a trick and artifice to horror, in that fear is a very reflexive, instinctual response. There's a reason that the jump scare is the cheapest trick in the book and half the time we see it coming, but it rarely fails to get your heart rate up. As living creatures, on an instinctual level we want to keep going. We get startled by things not by any moral failing but by an assessment of risk that goes by so vanishingly fast in the depths of our brain we are left only with a sense of lingering unease- or a moment of direct terror, cued by our entire body shifting into high gear so we have the energy and resources to- hopefully- fight, fly, freeze, or fawn our way out of it.

But because this is so reflexive, and because many primal fears are intuitive- a fear of disease, a fear of injury, (and from those, a false-positive unease at anything that seems "like us, but not quite" or "us, but not moving right") a fear of predators, a fear of parasites, a fear of fire and shifting stone, asphyxiation and other natural hazards that could kill or profoundly injure us- in writing and designing horror we don't actually need to think about this stuff. So someone can think, hey, that horror movie I saw with a scary clown was really gnarly, right? I think I can capture that feeling in my own work!

I think that, if I have to cite one thing as the most important part of writing- for myself, which I'm sure many people can and ought to disagree with because there's never just one way to do art- it's interrogating the elements of your story, even to yourself. Not all of it needs to go into a story, but for me, someone who is very fond of conceptual horror, I feel like it's a good idea to not take things for granted, but challenge them to yourselves- why a clown? what's scary about a clown? If we unspool these reflexes and instincts, what do they lead us back to?

And I don't mean this as a reason you shouldn't have an evil clown! If you really want to have an evil clown, asking these questions will help you make the thing a lot scarier- it'll give you a clearer thesis of what, exactly, is the horror element here, what about this is scary- and hopefully help you avoid bigotry in horror, which can be a real problem in the genre when prejudice is to a degree rooted in fear, and fear is not objective- we can train our feelings to lead us astray, and while that isn't a mark of how we're a bad person- we often aren't given a choice in it- it's important to return to the source and ask yourself what's scary and if that is inherently so.