Tumgik
#characterization
raayllum · 1 day
Text
honestly something i think people forget about in regards to Rayllum and one of the reasons they've always felt very genuine as friends to me is because like... they think the other person is amazing and incredible, yes, but they also think they're soo fucking annoying and stupid sometimes? and that never really goes away like
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
it's crucial to their Best Friend core. like. that's their fucking best friend, the most annoying and the most amazing and smart person alive, To Them. no one else can be mean or annoy the other person ever (except for Ezran). them's the rules
121 notes · View notes
elitadream · 2 days
Note
Speaking of Peach using her healing powers, i have this very angsty scenario where Mario is seriously injured and Peach goes to heal him. Even though she knows that doing so will completely drain her of her energy (or worse), she doesn't care. All she wanted is to save the man she loves.
Mario then wakes up completely healed only to find the woman he loves laying next to him pale and motionless...
Poor Mario had to live the rest of his live in guilt (and grief) thinking he's responsible for the princess's death. Idk how he will deal with that 😔
Anon, why. ;-;
( Same brain, actually. 🤝 Among the many concepts I've never publicly shared, I remember I had compiled sketches for a very similar scenario and I almost drew it but couldn't bring myself to actually go along with it, so I've reworked the idea along with my personal lore and changed a major element to integrate it into the bigger/overarching plot of my AU. I won't spoil anything, but- If I ever finish and share said scene, I can tell you that it will be the single most epic thing I've ever posted on this channel. ) ✏️
38 notes · View notes
Text
I love the "came back wrong" trope but from the opposite side.
Imagine you are dead. And then you are RIPPED from the embrace of decay into the world of the living again. Your memories are hazy and you don't recognize any of these people, but they act like they're close to you? Like they love you? So you try to get your memories back, to act like you belong here, but everybody tries to forget you died. And you can't. It is omnipresent. And just trying to grapple with that fact pushes the people who "love" you away, and they're incapable of understanding, and they're so confused, what's wrong N̶̄̀O̶͛͗T̷̉́ ̷͋͝Y̴̎̌Ȍ̴̈U̸̓R NÄM̴̃͑E̵̾̇? And you just need them to understand, you aren't that person! You aren't! You don't know who that person is! You don't know why any of this is happening, but they're unwilling to bend, they keep insisting you are that person, your memories will come back, everything will be normal again, and you want to scream and cry and claw yourself open to show them you're different. Your existence as a being wholly separate from whoever you "used to be" is a sin unto itself. All you can do is scrabble for life and to them, you're killing whoever they loved to do it.
just. lots of fun in that concept, you know?
60K notes · View notes
mylordshesacactus · 4 months
Text
Random thought this morning:
When doing characterization questions to try to build a character's personality--whether that's for fiction, an RPG, whatever? "Favorite" is often meaningless compared to "average".
It's very possible your character has a favorite food! But for most characters, a "favorite" food is.....nebulous. It may or may not tell you anything about them--if it does tell you something, it's probably something you already knew, and if it doesn't, then it falls flat and the question fails to do its job of actually helping you get to know this character better and making them feel like a person.
Something that's often more helpful is: What is their default option?
Your character walks into an unfamiliar tavern. What's their "safe" order? What's their default drive-through option? How, on a normal day, would they take their coffee? If they go to a normal bar with their friends on an average night, what do they have to drink? What do their pajamas look like?
Nine times out of ten, "my character's favorite color" is a nonsense question, but is there a color that dominates a lot of their wardrobe? (Using me in real life as an example here: My favorite color is earth-tone gold, but the vast majority of my clothes have a black base because it's more convenient--black doesn't clash with anything.)
Yeah, absolutely, have fun designing what they'd wear for a fancy ball--that's also great characterization! But what do they wear on an average day? Because by definition, that's who they are under normal circumstances. The best characterization question I've ever heard, genuinely, was "describe your character's shoes on a normal weekday".
That baseline will often reveal to you that your character does have a "favorite," and much more organically! It's much more important, when it comes to portraying a character consistently, to know who they are by default--and when you know that, you can poke at them and find the...dissatisfaction points, for lack of a better term. The places where the default feels just fine vs the places where you feel your character would want something more when given the opportunity.
The "Well... she'd order venison stew and beer by default, because it's pretty hard to fuck that up and she's a pretty down-to-earth person, but I think she actually really enjoys delicate aromatic spices...when they're in big cities with real restaurants, she probably spends a decent amount of her personal funds on nice food when she has the opportunity" feeling often does a LOT more to spark an understanding of a nuanced character than going straight for trying to define a Favorite Food out of the blue.
665 notes · View notes
writingwithcolor · 2 months
Text
What Makes an Ethnic Villain "Ethnic" or "Villainous?" How Do You Offset it?
anonymous asked:
Hello WWC! I have a question about the antagonist of my story. She is (currently) Japanese, and I want to make sure I’m writing her in a way that doesn’t associates [sic] her being Asian with being villainous.  The story is set in modern day USA, this character is effectively immortal. She was a samurai who lost loved ones due to failure in combat, and this becomes her character[sic] motivation (portrayed sympathetically to the audience). This story explores many different time periods and how women have shown valor throughout history. The age of the samurai (and the real and legendary female warriors from it) have interested me the most, which is why I want her to be from this period.  The outfit she wears while fighting is based on samurai armor, and she wears modern and traditional Japanese fashion depending on the occasion. She acts pretty similar to modern day people, though more cynical and obsessed with her loss. She’s been able to adapt with the times but still highly values and cherishes her past.  She is the only Asian main character, but I plan to make a supportive Japanese side character. She’s a history teacher who knows about the villain and gives the protagonists information to help them, but isn’t involved in the main plot otherwise.  Are the way I’m writing this villain and the inclusion of a non-antagonist Japanese character enough to prevent a harmful reading of the story, or is there more I should do?
Why Does Your Villain Exist?
This makes me feel old because David Anders plays a villain with this kind of backstory in the series Heroes starring Masi Oka. 
I think you want to think about what you mean when you say: 
Villainous (In what way? To whom? To what end?)
Harmful (What tropes, narratives and implications are present?)
I’m relatively infamous in the mod circle for not caring too much about dimensions of “harm”. The concept is relative and varies widely between people and cultures. I don’t see much value in framing motivations around “What is less harmful?” I think for me, what matters more is: 
“What is more true?” 
“Are characteristics viewed as intrinsic to background, or the product of experiences and personal autonomy?”
“Will your portrayal resonate with a large audience?”
“What will resonate with the members of the audience who share the backgrounds your characters have?” 
This post offers additional questions you could ask yourself instead of “is this okay/not okay/harmful.” 
You could write a story where your antagonist is sly, sadistic, violent and cold-blooded. It may not be an interpretation that will make many Japanese from combat backgrounds feel seen or heard, but it’s not without precedent. These tropes have been weaponized against people of Japanese descent (Like Nikkei Japanese interned during World War II), but Japan also brutalized a good chunk of Asia during World War II. See Herge’s Tintin and The Blue Lotus for an example of a comic that accurately showcases the brutality of Japan’s colonization of Manchuria, but also is racist in terms of how Japanese characters are portrayed (CW: genocide, war, imperialism, racism).
You could also write a story where your character’s grief gives way to despair, and fuels their combat such that they are seen as calculating, frigid and deeply driven by revenge/ violence. This might make sense. It’s also been done to death for Japanese female warriors, though (See “Lady Snowblood” by Kazuo Koike and Kazuo Kamimura here, CW: sexual assault, violence, murder and a host of other dark things you’d expect in a revenge story). 
You could further write a story where your antagonist is not necessarily villainous, but the perceived harm comes from fetishizing/ exoticizing elements in how her appearance is presented or how she is sexualized, which is a common problem for Japanese female characters. 
My vote always goes to the most interesting story or character. I don’t see any benefit to writing from a defensive position. This is where I'll point out that, culturally, I can't picture a Japanese character viewing immortality as anything other than a curse. Many cultures in Japan are largely defined by transience and the understanding that many things naturally decay, die, and change form.
There are a lot of ways you could conceivably cause harm, but I’d rather hear about what the point of this character is given the dilemma of their position. 
What is her purpose for the plot? 
How is she designed to make the reader feel? 
What literary devices are relevant to her portrayal?
(Arbitrarily, you can always add more than 1 extra Japanese character. I think you might put less pressure on yourself with this character’s portrayal if you have more Japanese characters to practice with in general.) 
- Marika. 
When Off-Setting: Aim for Average
Seconding the above with regards to this villainess’s story and your motivations for this character, but regardless of her story I think it’s also important to look specifically at how the Japanese teacher character provides contrast. 
I agree with the choice to make her a regular person and not a superhero. Otherwise, your one Asian character is aggressively Asian-themed in a stereotypical Cool Japan way (particularly if her villain suit is samurai-themed & she wears wafu clothing every so often). Adding a chill person who happens to be Japanese and doesn’t have some kind of ninja or kitsune motif will be a breath of fresh air (well, more like a sigh of relief) for Japanese readers. 
A note on characterization—while our standard advice for “offset” characters is to give your offset character the opposite of the personality trait you’re trying to balance, in this case you might want to avoid opposites. You have a villainess who is a cold, tough “don’t need no man” type. Making the teacher mild-mannered, helpful, and accomodating would balance out the villainess’s traits, but you’ll end up swinging to the other side of the pendulum towards the Submissive Asian stereotype depending on execution. If avoiding stereotypes is a concern, I suggest picking something outside of that spectrum of gentleness to violence and making her really boring or really weird or really nerdy or a jock gym teacher or…something. You’re the author.
Similarly, while the villainess is very traditionally Japanese in her motifs and backstory, don’t make the teacher go aggressively in either direction—give her a nice balance of modern vs. traditional, Japanese vs. Western sensibilities as far as her looks, dress, interests, values, etc. Because at the end of the day, that’s most modern Japanese people. 
Sometimes, the most difficult representation of a character of color is making a character who is really average, typical, modern, and boring. 
- Rina
465 notes · View notes
penandpaperdreams · 7 months
Text
Are your characters too “perfect”? Struggling to give them negative traits?
Tumblr media
I’ve definitely fallen into the trap of making my protagonists and side characters too ���perfect” before. It’s an easy mistake to make, but it can lead to your characters feeling one-dimensional if you’re too afraid to make them seem morally grey.
Here’s a very simple method:
1. Take a character’s main positive trait. Let’s take Hermione Granger, for example - her intelligence is a defining aspect of her character.
2. Exaggerate it into a negative trait. In the instance of Hermione Granger, she can come across to the other characters as a know-it-all. She’s not always portrayed as perfect for her intelligence, which is what makes her character more interesting.
Using this method, we have a number of options for negative traits for an intelligent character - patronising, arrogant, smug - to name a few.
I use the Fatal Attraction theory for this, which suggests that we fall out of love with someone for the same reason we were initially attracted to them. So, if you grew to like someone because you liked how strong and dominant they are, you may become tired of that down the line when their behaviour is controlling.
I’ve illustrated a few examples for how to exaggerate common positive traits into negative ones in the image above, but I have a few more examples to share so you really get the idea:
1. Comic relief / funny - can’t be serious, humour as a coping mechanism
2. Dark and mysterious - emotionally distant
3. Creative - aloof
4. Loyal - neglects own needs, willing to hurt for those they love
5. Compassionate / empathetic - overstepping boundaries
6. Honesty - overly blunt
7. Responsible - too serious
8. Humility - lack of self-belief
9. Trusting - easy to manipulate, overshares personal information
10. Perceptive - rude
11. Flirtatious - inappropriate
12. Organised - controlling, “neat freak”
13. Easygoing - lack of care about serious matters
14. Flamboyant - can be too much for some
15. Spontaneous - puts self in danger
Of course, you don’t have to do this. You can just have a character be spiritual and creative without making them out-of-touch and aloof. It’s completely up to you!
Using a method such as this, even if you only apply it subtly, adds a touch of realism to your writing by making your characters feel more well-rounded. It means that their negative aspects are truly coming from a part of them, rather than selected at random and mashed together from a list online.
672 notes · View notes
Note
I love how Jake is unquestionably the leader when it comes to Animorphs business and Rachel is unquestionably the leader in social situations
It even goes beyond that! Because the team is that good at listening to and respecting each other. They're always listening to whichever teammate has the best strengths for the current situation.
Like you said, Rachel leads in social situations. She coordinates outfits (Erek in #27), ties bowties (the banquet in #21), and generally excels at talking their way into and out of situations (Zone 91 in #14, the hospital in #17, etc.)
Tobias leads any time the group is all flying — rescuing George Edleman in #17, the dogfight in #24 — and any time there's a battle in the wilderness because he directs troop movements from overhead (#13, #30, etc.)
Ax obviously leads in matters of technology (Bug fighter in #11, repair dock in #45, sario rips in the MMs), and andalite culture (#18, #38) even though he doesn't want to.
Cassie's in charge the moment the kids are in a new environment. She's leading the survival efforts in MM2, #25, #11, #4, #42, and every other time the setting gets dangerous.
Marco's role might be the subtlest. But IMHO, any time Marco's in charge, it's because Jake's fucking up. Marco's only real coup d'etat is when Jake spirals out in #31, but he also takes charge when Jake's panicking in #16 and #25, and he spends a lot of #50-54 informally leading to make up for Jake's unwellness.
833 notes · View notes
prodigal-explorer · 8 months
Text
how to write children's personalities
(this is part of my series, how to write children in fanfiction! feel free to check it out if you want more info like this!)
this is the main aspect of writing children that i see people mess up so often, especially in the fandoms i'm in (sanders sides and undertale). children are not adorable little noodles with no brains and no concept besides being cute and silly and crying. children are beings that are just as complex as adults, and they deserve personalities to match. this will make them way more interesting to read about! let's get started!
since there are so many aspects to personality to talk about and i don't want to sit here typing for ten years, we're going to do this guide a little differently. i'm going to divide these issues into archetypes, write a short description, and then make a list of do's and don't's for each one!
archetype one: the cute little baby
okay. babies are cute. we all know this, and i'm not saying it's a bad thing to make your babies cute. a lot of people love reading about moments with adorable little babies. but here are some ways to step this kind of thing up, and some things to avoid if you want to improve upon writing this archetype.
do's:
give the child character another archetype besides this one. though "cute" is the foundation for a lot of child characters, it's not a personality. and if a character is vital to your story, then it needs a personality. that's just a rule. you will read more about other archetypes further along in this post!
make the moments symbolic. though it doesn't seem like it from an outsider's perspective, basically everything a baby does is for a reason, and every action a baby makes can say something about their personality. if you want this baby's personality to be energetic and curious, have them crawl around and explore things, and laugh a lot, and babble. if you want this baby to be more sullen and shy, have them cry quietly instead of wailing, or have them squirm when being held by new people.
make the actions of the baby's guardians affect the mannerisms of the baby. babies act differently depending on how the people taking care of them act and react. for instance, if the baby's guardians are very busy people, then maybe have the baby cry very loudly whenever they want something, since they know that it's the only way to get the attention of their guardians. stuff like that can add depth to a character and to a general story.
don't's:
decide that the baby is cute and call it a day. sweet little babies are cool and all, but they get very boring to read about after a while. this can barely even be considered an archetype because of how bland it is when it's by itself.
keep this archetype around for too long. as babies turn into toddlers and then children, they don't act even remotely the same way. it's strange and off-putting to read about a seven year old acting like a two-year old, unless it's a very clear character choice that is a result of explicit actions and events.
make the baby know that it's cute. realistically, children don't understand the concept of cuteness until they're around toddler age. if then, you want to make the kid be like "i get what i want when i'm cute, so i'll act cute!", then sure, that's hilarious. but when they're two months old, they're not batting their eyelashes because that's their personality. they're batting their eyelashes because they got something in their eye. the main thing that makes a baby cute is that they don't know they're cute. they're just figuring out how to do ordinary things.
make everything a cute moment. while babies are awesome, raising them isn't always sunshine and rainbows. make the baby do something wildly chaotic, because babies do wildly chaotic things all the time. not only does this make things more realistic, but it makes things very interesting!
archetype two: the shy kid
as a former shy kid, i know good and well that these types of children exist, and they are very real and valid. however, there are certain ways i've seen them written that are just terrible because once again, this archetype cannot be considered a full personality on its own. let's get into the do's and don't's.
do's:
make their shyness a deliberate choice. kids aren't usually naturally shy. kids are usually more curious than cautious. is there a reason why the kid is shy? there doesn't have to be a reason why the kid is shy, but there could be a reason why the child is NOT outgoing/curious. try and give something like this some deliberate cause, instead of just making them shy so they can seem more precious and infantilized.
make their shyness manifest in diverse ways. not all shy kids cling to their guardian's leg and sit alone during recess. there are different ways to be shy. you can be aggressively shy, or fearfully shy, or shy due to general unwillingness to change.
make their shyness have realistic consequences. someone who's shy is probably not going to have many friends, if any. not all shy kids magically meet an extrovert who adopts them. someone who's shy probably has underdeveloped social skills, which can lead to them being less emotionally intelligent down the line. this makes the shy kid archetype a lot more three-dimensional than just a wet noodle of fear.
don't's:
infantilize shyness or treat it like it makes the kid some sweet, precious angel. not only is this very uncomfortable for shy people to read, but it's generally unrealistic. shyness doesn't affect how good or bad somebody is - it's a neutral trait.
use shyness as a tool to make characters seem younger. shyness does not indicate age. fear manifests in many different ways, and shyness is not the only way.
rely on cliches. not all shy people have the same journey, and the idea that a shy person becoming more outgoing is the "goal" is not only a bit offensive, but it's very cliche. shyness is not always an obstacle to be overcome.
archetype three: the happy-go-lucky kid
oftentimes, the reason why children characters are written into stories in the first place is to give a little bit of lightheartedness and innocence. to add a unique voice among all the cranky, stingy, burdened adults. but you have to be careful when writing this archetype. i personally really dislike this archetype as a whole, but i'm going to put personal feelings towards it aside because honestly, there's no valid reason to dislike it besides opinion.
do's:
give the kid a trademark. maybe this kid makes a lot of little jokes, or maybe they always see the best in a situation. give the kid one thing that makes them happy-go-lucky instead of just giving them everything because nobody is endlessly happy all the time in every way.
go deeper. while happiness is very often genuine, sometimes, it's a mask that hides something else. this can be an interesting way to sort of spice up your happy-go-lucky kid character. maybe the kid is hiding a big secret behind all those jokes.
don't's:
make the character always happy. while children tend to have simpler thoughts, they don't have simpler minds. this child needs to have thoughts, real, genuine thoughts that aren't just happy things.
see happy-go-lucky as a trait that is exclusive to children. comparing happiness to childhood and viewing them as the only places where the other can exist is just wrong, and it's kind of depressing. maybe give happy-go-lucky kid a happy-go-lucky adult to exchange jokes with!
---
those are the archetypes that i see a lot. but now, i'm going to suggest a few child character archetypes that i LOVE that i don't see enough in fics! feel free to use any of these that you like. alter them, combine them! these are, in my opinion, some of the most fun child character personalities!
the spoiled brat: "i want this, and that, and that, and- why aren't you giving it to me?? if you don't give me what i want, i'll tell on you!". spoiled brats are so fun to read and write about, especially when they have absolutely no reason to be spoiled given the current situation (think riches to rags). they've got everything, humor, angst, and best of all, lots of pockets for personality. think about why the child is spoiled. were they enabled by their guardians? did they grow up rich, with access to everything they wanted? think about whether you want the child to stay spoiled. does something change? do they learn how to improve their materialistic and selfish tendencies? there are so many opportunities to play with the personality of this child!
the know-it-all kid: while i do see a lot of know-it-all kids in media, oftentimes, they don't actually have personality besides bossiness and intelligence. i love know-it-all kids who have depth to them. kids who are constantly spouting information because of their sheer love to learn. kids who have one specific thing that they know everything about, so they never stop talking about it. kids who tell people what to do and act like they know best because they don't have a lot of control over anything at home, so they grasp at whatever control they can find elsewhere. i think this archetype could open up a lot of ideas for personality further down the line. it also has a lot of variety with humor and angst, and general depth.
the serious child: this is an archetype that i cannot get enough of. i love a child that doesn't think they're an adult, per se, and still enjoys kid things, but just has such a calm and regal air about them that isn't learned. it's just natural. think of the kid that doesn't really get excited about things conventionally, but you can tell they're happy by their faint smile. the kid that seems to live in slow motion, and doesn't mind this fact at all. the kid that sits alone at recess just because other kids scare the birds away, and they want to see how a bird acts when it doesn't think its being watched. i love kids who have poignant thoughts, because their thoughts are so creative and different from adult thoughts.
the adult-ified child: now this is another archetype i can't get enough of, but it's for a different reason. this child, on the other hand, does think that they're an adult for one reason or another. maybe their guardians forced them to grow up too quickly. maybe they just wanted to grow up quickly by themselves. but this child has thoughts that are too big for their little bodies. they explore things that aren't meant to be explored when their brains are still so small. they do everything too quickly, they stumble through life as if a clock is ticking somewhere. to me, they're just haunting to read about. it feels wrong and dangerous to just watch them do things that hurt them because they don't know any better, but they're on a page. nobody can stop them. it's just so tragic, i'm obsessed.
the prodigal child: this archetype isn't really as deep or detailed as the others, but i do appreciate it. this archetype is for a child who knew who they wanted to be from an early age. a child who wanders into a ballet class and finds out they're better than the ten year olds by the time they're five. this archetype often pairs really well with the know-it-all kid or the adult-ified child because usually, children don't experience what it's like to be the best at something until they're a lot older. this is just a really cool archetype when you aren't quite sure what to do with that main character's little sister.
the chaotic child: this archetype is so much fun to read and write, to be honest. this is a child that just does as they please, whether it's out of curiosity or for pure enjoyment. think of the crazy stories that your guardians have about you or your siblings being absolutely insane. scribbling in a book and then demanding that the library publish their version. trying to ride the dog like a horse. cutting up clothes in an attempt to be a fashion designer. this one is just plain fun!
---
now, there are so many more archetypes out there, but those are just my spotlights and recommendations! i hope after reading this, you feel more equipt to write child characters that have real, engaging, interesting personalities!
901 notes · View notes
elumish · 2 months
Text
One thing to keep in mind when writing dialogue is the age of the character. A common issue I see in stories written by adults is that children below a certain age will all sound like toddlers and above a certain age will all sound like adults, with nothing in between.
Your characters don't need to use hyper-contemporary slang, especially if you're writing something other than a contemporary story, but they should in some way reflect their age in the way they speak, whether it's through vocabulary, syntax, content, vulgarity, confidence, or any other aspects of dialogue.
If the reader can't tell the difference between the speaking styles of a 12-year-old, a 20-year-old, and a 50-year-old, your dialogue probably needs another look.
369 notes · View notes
writingwithfolklore · 5 months
Text
Everyone Has Flaws
                Flaws in characters are one of the most important parts of them. Flaws make a character interesting, give them depth, and make their job of propelling and driving the story a whole lot easier. My screenwriting prof’s biggest argument for thinking out your character’s flaw was, “why don’t they already have what they want?” It is a character’s flaw that keeps them from their goal, which creates the story of how they overcome it.
                In this way, we don’t want to think about flaws as something you kind of tack on afterwards. A flaw should be created within the base of your character, driving and determining every aspect of their internal journey.
                I’ve learned two ways to create flaws in character journey. They’re pretty similar, so I’ll try to explain simply.
Method 1: The flaw is in how they’re trying to reach their goal
                Remember that characters have both a goal (internal, what they desire), and an objective (external, what they believe will give them what they desire). Boy wants to feel secure (goal), boy believes girl will validate him (objective), boy pursues girl. In this method, his flaw is in his thinking of how to reach his goal. Essentially, his objective is wrong, and he needs to realize it by the end of his arc.
                So maybe the point of the story is that he should be finding internal security, or learn not to rely on others for his self worth. That would be his arc throughout the story.
Method 2: The flaw keeps them from their goal
                This one is a touch simpler. Character A wants to belong somewhere but pushes away people when they get close. Flaw keeps character from their goal—it’s the reason they don’t have it already, and thus the thing they need to grow from to reach their goal in the end.
                The reason they are the way they are tends to come from an event in their childhood or past. If Character A pushes people away, maybe it’s because the people who were meant to love them let them down, or they’re not used to people being genuine towards them, or they were bullied, etc. etc.
           Of course, you could always try a mixture of both methods. The important part is that your character has something holding them back from what they want, because otherwise, why wouldn’t they already have it?
(More on creating characters here:)
467 notes · View notes
confusedraven1 · 6 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
i absolutely love that jim is the one to keep the heart of stede’s crew alive while ed did everything he could to destroy it.
one of the first comments ed makes to stede’s crew in season 1 is “everyone’s covered in rope!” so what does jim do? literally covers themself in rope, to remind ed that, as long as they’re alive, that hope and love isn’t going anywhere.
not only that, but, in the bible, rope is a symbolism for trust and security. jim became a secure place for the crew to tie themselves to while just trying to stay alive.
of course, i then had to look into why they have a fishing net around their shoulders as well, and found The Fishing Net Parable from the Book of Matthew (13:47-52):
"Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish. When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in baskets, but threw the bad away.”
“This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
jim amputates izzy’s leg, despite having never done it before. they quite literally separate him from the rotten bits to save his life.
jim says, “he was your friend.” they separate ed from who he was before from who he’s allowed himself to become, not to punish him, but to remind him of the consequences of his actions.
jim tells izzy point blank, “you’re in an unhealthy relationship with blackbeard.” they aren’t trying to break them up; they’re just bringing to light whats true so things can (hopefully) get better.
jim shows archie that, just because pirating is normally done a certain way, doesn’t mean it has to—they separate archie from the toxic belief that “that’s just how things are, it’s just life,” and “why save him if he’s a dick?”
jim tries to separate the idea from the crew that ed is fine, because they immediately recognize that things are about to get much worse: “so, do we think he’s better?” “FUCK no!”
jim immediately says, “wasn’t the wedding thing a bit over the line?” they know they’re all pirates and have questionable morals anyway, but knows it was fucked up of them to massacre a wedding, an event that’s supposed to be joyful and full of life and beginnings, not death and destruction. they’re, again, dividing up the way things are vs. how they could (and should) be.
ed tries to pin them all dying on jim cause they wouldn’t kill archie, but they bite back with, “you would’ve done it anyway!” they know exactly where the lies are, and separates them from the truth, and ed can’t deny it.
jim separates themself (and olu) from the bounds of monogamy through their honesty. olu is still their best friend and lover and family even though they found and did things with someone else.
jim holds out their hand for olu to take when they’re escaping the red flag. olu’s interest in zheng yi sao isn’t bad and jim’s not trying to separate them, but is trying to keep together the things that are good: their family.
(later addition, edit) jim is also the one that “kills” ed. they’re the one to make that final choice, to say, “it’s you or us.” jim’s actions and choices entire first two episodes led them to that moment, like it was the “final judgment” of blackbeard.
jim is the rope and net of the crew. they’re trust and security and honesty, everything that stede was trying to get the crew to understand from day 1, everything stede is always trying to embody (and i dare say is starting to succeed at).
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
478 notes · View notes
thepedanticbohemian · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
733 notes · View notes
elitadream · 3 days
Note
Regarding what you said about Mario's reaction to Peach in Showtime: out of all the things she could have been in canon, I think that a real princess is indeed the most impressive one. What does the man think about the fact that he's friends with literal royalty in your AU?
He still doesn't quite believe it! 👀🤭
A big part of what makes Mario's charm is his genuineness, humility and courteousness. He wouldn't hide his awe and amazement when wandering inside the castle - even for the hundredth time! -, and wouldn't remotely conceal his sincere thankfulness either when obtaining a permission from the princess.
But in terms of his actual friendship with Peach, Mario would always see and treat her as the person that she is; her royal title merely echoing at the back of his mind. And to his own dismay, he would find that his heart cares even less for social statuses, forgetting its place and reason with disconcerting ease. 🥺💓 Whether he had met her as a peasant in a neighboring kingdom, a nurse or a regular stranger on the subway back on Earth, it wouldn't have made a difference. He would have been equally struck by her grace and loveliness then, and would have fallen in love with her all the same. 💫
47 notes · View notes
jkl-fff · 27 days
Text
Remember that time
Laois dealt with the projection of all his insecurities and disappointments with human society (his parents' uncomprehending disapproval of who he fundamentally was as a person, the schoolmates who bullied him for not fitting in, the colleagues who took advantage of his trusting nature, and the guy who he thought was his best friend turning out to be someone who just sorta tolerated him) by conjuring up a manifestation of his special interest (monsters) to literally crush them?
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Certified and iconic Autistic Joy(TM) moment right there. Good for him and his swag.
248 notes · View notes
Text
so I had a Big Brain Moment...
Tumblr media
had this been done? I don't think it has
there's so much more I couldn't fit. so much more. feel free to expand on this (or make it look better)
other things:
since avatar is based off of Asian culture technically zuko also helped save China
all could be seen as an lgbt allegory
mulan and zuko both fighting for their honor (why didn't I think of that sooner, it's so obvious!)
atla had the kyoshi warriors and mulan fought with a fan
atla and mulan both had a strong woman having men to do drag
all have fairly recognizable voices
all at some point had talking animals (mushu, aang's sleep deprivation hallucinations scene)
zuko and mulan both had pivotal hair cutting scenes
all of them being physically different than others in some way (po being the only panda at first and being made fun of for being fat, mulan being a woman warrior, zuko and his scar) (this along with other things fits into the lgbt allegory idea)
badass old men (iroh and bumi, oogway and shifu, the emperor)
po and mulan both meet flower symbolism (the peach tree vs the cherry blossom tree)
atla and kung-fu panda both have turtles/tortoises as wise figures
mulan and zuko both wear badass clothes
all underdogs who eventually earn the respect of pretty much everyone in their stories
zuko and po both being the comic relief at some point
zuko and po both joining an already well-established team and feeling left out at first (the gaang, the furious five)
shifu and iroh both essentially losing a son but in wildly different ways
lotus symbolism (po's birth name being little lotus, iroh's white lotus group, again the flower blooming quote for mulan)
mulan and po being bowed to by someone higher up than them (the emperor, shifu)
153 notes · View notes
lizzy-bonnet · 10 months
Text
I love Jane Austen's work and I love podcasts, so naturally I follow several JA podcasts (please drop recs in the tags). I'm enjoying Live from Pemberley from Hot and Bothered, but a comment from literally the first episode of the series has been circulating in my brain since I listened to it several months ago: one of the hosts expressed surprise (and disappointment?) in the fact that when we first meet Lizzy, she is "employed in trimming a hat". This comment literally comes right after a conversation about how Austen tells us so much in the very short space of Chapter 1; without wasting any words, we know exactly who Mr. and Mrs. Bennet are (lightly toxic relationship), understand their family situation (need to marry well), meet the main driver of the first act (rich man in the neighbourhood), and understand a social dilemma (girls can't meet him if Mr. Bennet does not make the first overture). So what is Austen telling us when we meet Lizzy in the employment of trimming a hat?
We so often read a sort of modern girlboss feminism into Lizzy because she is smart and stands up for herself, but I think that's something that really gets embroidered on to the text. Lizzy trimming a bonnet is telling us several things about her:
She is frugal - new hats and bonnets are really expensive (my casual hobby is shopping for reproduction bonnets and this remains true), because the straw is braided by hand, the bonnet shape is assembled and blocked by hand, feathers have to be gathered from real (living or dead) birds, ribbons and flowers are hand-finished, the whole situation is fuck expensive. Lizzy is most likely putting new trim on a straw or wool bonnet she already owns to make it work better for this season's fashions, or a new dress, and possibly recycling trimmings from other hats. Contrast this with Lydia's spending all her pocket money on an ugly hat in Chapter 39, just so she can reduce it to parts, even though she acknowledges she'll also have to buy some extra satin too, to finish the project.
She cares about fashion - we don't get a lot of information on sartorial choices in Austen's work, and when characters are discussing fashion, it tends to be a framework for explaining something about their characters; Miss Steele's need to know how much Marianne's dresses cost (rude, crass); Mrs. Bennet's loving description of the lace on Mrs. Hurst's gown (shallow); Catherine Moreland's agonizing over what to wear to the Assembly (young, a bit flighty); Bingley wears a blue coat (has probably read The Sorrows of Young Werther, is fashionable). The fact that Lizzy is trimming a hat tells us she is fashionable, but paired with the fact that she will get a petticoat muddy in order to see her sister, and does not spend a lot of time worrying after fashion like Lydia tells us that she does not live and die on fashion.
She is creative - I've trimmed various hats and bonnets over my years of interest in historical fashion and honestly it's not easy. It's quite fiddly to get a nice ribbon edge, a ruched lining takes forever, and getting sprays of florals and feathers to be nicely shaped and all in a complementary palette is quite fussy. Getting a nice looking bonnet requires some thinking and planning. But it's also great fun! The Regency era is, in my opinion, a particularly good period for hats.
She is normal - I think Austen wants the reader to understand that Lizzy is a young woman with normal cares and concerns. She doesn't have cash for a new bonnet, she wants to look nice, she knows how to put an outfit together, she's not frivolous like her sisters, and she engages in the typical pursuits of someone who is not yet one and twenty who does not have a specific occupation.
A lot of modern readers are expecting Lizzy to be striding around the countryside unconcerned with "girly" things, or reading a clever book because we have come to think of her as proto-feminist in a way that suggests she might be a bra (corset) burner, but I think that comes from an outdated feminist lens that still wants to tell us that girly things are bad, or at least, a bit weak, and I don't see that in the text at all (I think some of this trickles over from the adaptations). Lizzy walks enthusiastically, she enjoys reading (but not to the exclusion of other employments), she dances very well and plays with mediocrity, she cares deeply about her friends and family, she has excellent manners, and dammit, she trims hats.
1K notes · View notes