#for him the suffering this war will lead to is not theoretical

[mxtxfanatic]

A lot of people say that Wei Wuxian's demonic cultivation is inherently disrespectful to the dead. I personally disagree but I'm not really sure how to say that, especially when they bring up how he treated the ghosts for the war or the torture session.

It's confusing 😔

Ok, to answer this question, we must first cover the basics of both what Wei Wuxian's cultivation is and how cultivators deal with the resentful dead in the orthodox path. 1) Wei Wuxian is not s demonic cultivator. He is a ghost cultivator, hence why his cultivation path is called "the ghost path" and why the title of the novel is a misnomer. The cultivation world calling him a "demonic" cultivator is meant as a slander of his work, not a neutral description of it:

“Let me ask you, are fae, demons, ghosts, and monsters all the same kind of being?” Wei Wuxian smiled. “No.” “Why not? What are the differences between them?” “Fae come from living non-humans, demons from living humans, ghosts from dead humans, and monsters from dead non-humans.”

—Chapt. 13: Elegance III, fanyiyi

By definition, Wei Wuxian is not a demonic cultivator, and every cultivator is taught this distinction from a young age. Moving on, 2) this is how orthodox cultivators deal with the resentful dead:

[Lan Wangji] nodded his head politely, and quietly said, “First, release the spirit from suffering. Second, suppress it. Third, eliminate it. For the initial approach, use the loving memory of his parents, wife, and children to comprehend his deepest desires and fulfill them. If this fails, move to suppression. But if the crimes are too great and his resentment too bitter to dissipate, eliminate him root and branch; his continued existence must not be permitted. Cultivators must conduct themselves carefully in accordance with this sequence of measures, without error.”

—Chapt. 14: Elegance IV, fanyiyi

The ideal goal of dealing with the resentful dead is that you get them to move on. That is why these are not three separate paths but a single route:

Lan Wangji said, “Thus release from suffering is the primary strategy, suppression, supplementary, and elimination, the last resort.”

However, only the first part of this route leads to peace for the suffering spirit; the other two either lead to prolonged suffering or utter destruction. Wei Wuxian's ghost path opens up a second route, the so-called fourth solution:

Everyone inside the elegant room stared at them in shock. The old man suddenly shot up. “The purpose of subduing demons and exterminating ghosts is to alleviate suffering! Not only have you forgotten this, you want to incite further resentment! You are inverting the means and the ends, without a care for humanity!” “If some people’s suffering can’t be relieved, why not make it useful?” Wei Wuxian replied. “When Yu the Great tamed the floods, redirection was the superior strategy, and obstruction the inferior. Suppression is like obstruction, it can only be worse—” Lan Qiren flung a book at Wei Wuxian, who quickly ducked out of the way. The color of his face unchanged, he continued to run his mouth. “Spiritual energy is energy, but resentful energy is also energy. Stored inside cores, spiritual energy is able to cleave mountains and drain seas, and is available for human use. Why can’t humans use resentful energy too?”

The end goal remains the same as the orthodox path's, just with the addition of using the dead's resentment to achieve your own goals in the meantime. To say that Wei Wuxian "creates" the resentment by which he then controls the dead he summons is to ignore that he actually can't create resentment and must rely on the resentment the dead already have. We learn this in the opening chapters of the book at the Mo Mansion where he must summon the corpses of the Mo family to fight because the other walking corpses that were already in the house had too little resentment to be useful. It's even in this very example of him pitching the theoretics of the ghost path: he doesn't say "just dig up any corpse" but specifically that the heads of those executed by the executioner (and therefore who would have resentment remaining in death) should be dug up to deal with the fierce corpse of their killer. And when everyone has burned off their resentment, it goes without saying that it would be easy to liberate them.

Now to address the whole war time torture session stuff: if we remember what I just said about Wei Wuxian being unable to create resentment and that in his speech he believes that the best dead to summon in order to subdue another resentful being are the dead who were killed by the being, then the fates of the Wen involved in the fall of Lotus Pier makes sense. Wei Wuxian does not control any of the dead like puppets, as explained here, so the ghosts got their own revenge themselves. It's not accidental that every Wen supervisory post was covered in ghost repellent talismans where none existed previously. As for the ghoul child and blue-faced woman, they had some sort of history with each other and Wen Chao and Wang Lingjiao that probably wouldn't be too hard to guess:

[Wang Lingjiao] collapsed onto the ground. Back then, the second that she opened the chest, she saw what was inside. There was none of her beloved treasures, only a pale-skinned, curled-up child!

—Chapt. 61: Evil, exr

The ghoul child, however, had bit out an entire chunk of the flesh on his hand and spat it out. He continued to devour the palm. Wen ZhuLiu grabbed the child’s head with his left hand, as though to put so much force on the small, cold head that it exploded. The blue- faced woman threw the bloodstained bandages on the ground and, like a four-limbed creature, she crawled to Wen ZhuLiu’s side almost instantly.

...

Wei WuXian, “Of course it’d be with a certain thing gone.” Jiang Cheng was disgusted, “You’re the one who did it?” Wei WuXian, “It’s nasty if you think about it that way. Of course I wasn’t the one who cut it off. It was bitten off when his woman went mad.”

—Chapt. 62: Evil, exr

"His woman" can't be Wang Lingjiao, because Wang Lingjiao died suffocating on the stool leg she stuffed down her throat. When Jiang Cheng and Lan Wangji find her body, the stool leg is still halfway out of her mouth. "His woman" is the blue-faced woman, who obviously holds extreme enmity towards Wen Chao. It's the same situation when Wei Wuxian resurrects Wen Ning:

Wei WuXian, “Congratulations to you for successfully draining all my patience. Since you don’t want to speak up, let’s let him answer on his own.” As though it’d been waiting for his words for a long time, Wen Ning’s frozen corpse suddenly moved, raising its head. Before the two nearest inspectors could even scream, each of their throats was clenched by a hand as firm as iron. Expressionless, Wen Ning raised up the two short-legged inspectors high in the air. The empty circle around them grew larger and larger. The head inspector shouted, “Young Master Wei! Young Master Wei! Please go easy on us! Doing this in the heat of the moment would lead to irreversible consequences!” The rain fell heavier and heavier. Drops of water trickled incessantly down Wei WuXian’s cheeks. He suddenly spun around, putting his hand on Wen Ning’s shoulder before shouting, “Wen QiongLin!” As if a reply, Wen Ning let out a long, thundering roar. The ears of everyone within the valley ached. Wei WuXian spoke one word at a time, “Whoever caused all of you to be like this, let them meet the same end. I give you the right to do so. Settle everything!”

—Chapt. 72: Recklessness, exr

Wei Wuxian didn't "make" them do anything; he just corralled them and focused their resentment.

While Wei Wuxian is being very glib in his Cloud Recesses discussion—because it was an on-the-fly theory posed specifically to piss Lan Qiren off—the way he uses it in practice is actually much more contained. He also, personally, treats the dead more respectfully than most other cultivators, who react to the presence of non-aggressive dead with violence or disgust (reread how he interacts with the ghoul child and blue-faced woman, or the ghost girls in the restaurant, or the skeleton hand, or A-Qing, etc. etc.). So to answer your question: no, Wei Wuxian's ghost path does not disrespect the dead. It gives those with too much resentment or a who have a grudge too difficult to fulfill another way to burn off their resentment in order to achieve peace. While an individual can use it disrespectfully (Xue Yang, who uses it as a basis for his demonic cultivation), it is not inherently disrespectful in and of itself.

[etoilesombre]

[warrior-cats-rewritten]

If I had to rewrite Changing Skies:

Tawnypelt

The Clans are going to fight the humans.

Tigerstar is too busy leading and keeping everyone calm, so he sends Tawnypelt and whatever friends she wants to go on a mission to find out how they can stop the Twolegs.

Tawnypelt doesn't really WANT to, but does it because she wants her son to know she trusts his judgment.

She brings along Crowfeather (let me cook) and Brambleclaw. (LET ME COOK)

First major event is Crowfeather dying. He gets a terrible wound on his back leg from doing something Tawnypelt TOLD HIM NOT TO, and the infection kills him.

Tawny and Bramble are on their own now, and tensions are high. Not only that, but they have NO CLUE what to do, and the Twolegs are getting closer every day...

The only clue they have is with a strange kittypet named Rufus, wearing a strange bulky collar.

Tawnypelt is getting angry, and tired with Brambleclaw. He isn't the brother she thought he was, and their relationship has been fractured since the reveal that he trained in The Dark Forest. Sure, she supported him during TBC, but that ended up not being HIM and it was a terrible mistake to make...

It's his insistence that she listen to him, that he "prove himself", that he is the choice-maker and... Tawny's had enough.

"Brambleclaw, you're older than most cats around the lake, for Starclan's sake, GROW UP ALREADY!"

He leaves, insisting that he knows what is best, and she'll feel so sorry once he's right! No one ever believes in him, just because of his father!

She finds his body the next day. Rufus helps her bury him, but there isn't time to dwell, she needs to keep going. Rufus keeps walking up to humans wearing sleek white pelts that hild little flashing boxes up to Tawnypelt, he keeps saying it's fine but the way he lets them PICK him UP is going to give her a heart attack!

Kids these days. (Affectionate. Bewildered. 3 seconds from signing adoption papers.)

Leafstar

Leafstar is suffering from depression, and notices that her sight is starting to dim.

Fidgetflake tells her that she is developing cataracts, and Leafstar just takes it as "one more thing to happen to me". Her mate has died, her daughter Stormheart was killed in the horrific war against Splashstar and Berrystar that she herself barely made it out of with her last life... Her children have grown and have kits of their own, they don't need her anymore, cats don't want to talk with her...

She's completely lost her spark, and finds no joy in anything. She's not only losing her vision in a physical sense, but she's lost her 'vision' for Skyclan.

She also needs to hold the election for a new deputy, as Skyclan does things differently, and Hawkwing has been killed by a polluted stream.

The candidates are: Violetshine (who now has trained Beetlepaw instead of Reedclaw), Macgyver, and Rileypool (death swapped with Sagenose and mentored Kitescratch).

Violetshine is selected, and immediately some cats are calling for her to be made leader instead. A vote goes through, but not enough cats vote in the theoretical Violetstar's favour. (She doesn't mind!)

Leafstar is distraught when the construction comes Skyclan's way, poisoning their main stream and leading MANY cats to sickness, including her sweet granddaughter Wrenflight, born of Harrybrook and Bellaleaf.

The others Clans have less sympathy. Skyclan is using kittyp-er Daylight Warriors, they'll be fine if they just go back inside their homes. Maybe Starclan's angry that they're taking resources.

She slams her paw down onto the Moonpool's thin frozen surface, it cracks beneath her paw, the cold water spreading its horrible chill, ignored as Leafstar snarls at Starclan.

"Answer my pleas, stop punishing me, or my Clan, or I am taking us back to The Gorge, Other Clans be damned. Help us, or you will prove to me that you truly are a bunch of useless dead cats parading around with sparkling fur and empty promises!"

A ghostly figure appears, just for a moment, whispering to her.

"You may not have sight any longer, and I know all hope seems lost, Leafstar, but brighter times are coming. Do Not Let The Moon Fall."

Moonpaw

Since the writers wanna be awful about Sunbeam, I'm going to one-up them and do this pre-emptively.

Nightheart brought Sunbeam to Riverclan. He wasn't made Leader or Deputy, no, that was given to Icewing and Minnowtail.

Sunbeam, tragically, passed in childbirth soon after she got pregnant by accident... She left Nightheart with a single kitten, a tiny tortoiseshell tabby molly with a white chest, and wide blue and yellow eyes.

Nightheart, still stubborn about names and meaning and holding a grudge against his mother for not providing him with the Orange Gene, names his daughter Moonkit, determined to constantly remind her how she Doesn't Have To Be Like Sunbeam. She has quite a few friends, some in different Clans!

Moonpaw is apprenticed to Flame. An ex-Kin member that joined Riverclan during WCR!AVOS who Nightheart hates with a passion. Guess why.

Moonpaw is a good kid, but her relationship with her father is strained beyond belief. She wishes he would stop... Acting like this. Like he's the only cat to have ever suffered, stop arguing with her sweet mentor over the pettiest thing, stop comparing her to her mother in the most backwards way he can by trying to push her to somehow be the opposite of a cat she's never met...

She is good friends with Frostfeather and Whistlemoon, especially Whistlemoon, for obvious reasons. Moon buddies!

Moonpaw is dared by an older apprentice, Rapidpaw, to "go spend a night at the Moonpool when it's a new moon with all the ghosts!"

She's scared, not of the dark but if her dad finds out. "Sunbeam LOVED breaking rules!" He would always say, "But you can be good and do what YOU want. Just because your mother liked to stand out, doesn't mean you always have to! You can be special in your way!" She always saw Frostfeather glaring when he said that...

"Rule breaker." Frostfeather would scoff. "Didn't know her at all..."

Anyways, aside from a fright from a possum, she makes her way to the Moonpool with ease.

Too much ease.

She walks around, stepping into the pawprints on the ground, and batting a little plant that's growing at the entrance.

Not scary!

She walks into the main chamber, eyes sparkling and growing bigger as she lays eyes on the Moonpool for the first time.

It's the most beautiful thing she's ever seen.

In awe, Moonpaw slowly steps up to it, looking at her own reflection in the sparkling, crystal water, she pokes a paw in.

The gentle ripples lap at the edges, and Moonpaw swears she can hear a soft whispering.

Immediately though, she is bombarded with noise, giggling kittens, cats chatting with one another, and a soft warning.

"Careful, don't fall in!"

Moonpaw looks around for that voice, softer than any others, yet more clear. She stares into the crystal clear, sparkling water of the Moonpool, deeper, deeper, and deeper, drawing her in and making her more calm than she's ever felt...

She falls into the Moonpool.

[tenok]

Today I saw this ask:

and I want say it without being mean, in absolutely happy tone, because yes thank you I'm overjoed we have this discussion moving: yes!!! Yes you are, you misundestood not only Aziraphale’s, but also Crowley’s character, and that makes them both bland!

The whole point of Good Omens is about shades of grey, remember? We had it stated sever times in canon. It doesen’t mean «pure good Crowley makes pure evil Aziraphale better person». It means that they both are absolutely not perfect, and it’s what makes then human, and it what makes them actually better, because perfection leads to uniformity and they are so so unique!

Crowley’s not jumping to saving every soul he see. Even from the start! Before the beginning? He loves his stars, not concerned for some monkeys that would look at them! (which is absolutely normal! Why he should care?). Adam and Eve? He’s nervous because he wasn’t expecting such harsh punishment for some dumb apple, he thinks it’s unfair, he's willing to discuss it with Aziraphale — which doesen’t want to discuss anything, but he also can’t stand to see humans suffering when he can do something. He’s the one that selflessly and not thinking about how it will hit him back jumps to help! Great Flood? They both stands there, just watching, and yes, Crowley argues that it’s unfair again, but Aziraphale’s not there with «oh it’s actually fine :)» smile as some people insist — he’s worried too and, and things he quote sounds awfully as something heavens would say to the one angel that immediatly asked «but surely we can’t kill everyone??». He’s quoting it because he have nothing else to say, not for Crowley, not for himself. And they both can only watch. Christ? Again, they’re not jumping to save, they watch.

(side note, but I think people just don’t get how important it is. We live in awful times, there’s so much war and death around, and you can do only an itty bitty things to help but it’s not enough, and it can crush you if you’re alone. I would’ve end in hospital or in prison two years ago if there wasn’t a friend that shared all this with me. And they had each other. That's the bond that stronger than any romantic love)

Next three flashback are not about helping anyone (although let’s remember that Arragemet wasn’t some noble plan, it was about two lazy cowokers finding a way to do less work and hang out more! it’s important too! they’re lazy and selfish and want to live in forever vacation, which is mood). Then our favorite Bastillie scene — now they both watch the executioner being dragged to be killed. No one of them did something to stop it, although they could’ve, you know, just leave him there naked or something. Because nah, sometimes they both just don't care (and I want to point it too: kindness, when you do it correctly, shouldn't be only to nice people you like. Sometime you help a nasty person. Or your abusive ex-boss. But also sometime you're there for the date and you don't want to be kind to some dumb human that's so happy to kill others)

Edinburg? Yep. Crowley loves Elspbeth immediatly, because she’s doing something naughty, she’s cheeky and she makes Aziraphale fret. So he helps her… to dig the body. Which is fine, again, he finds it all amusing and he’s not concerned for this girl safety or livehood. He’s in good mood and he wants to party and maybe theoretically discuss God’s cruelty with his angel. But Aziraphale sees the nice poor girl that made choices that can cost her ethernity in afterlife, and he tries to help! And look, he's not saying she just should drop everything and pray, he's actually trying to brainshtorm what she can do insted of evil naughty thins! As living human that needs to eat! Like, he’s there asking absolutely normal questions for someone who didn’t get accustomed to industrialisation and early stage capitalism yet (he’s slow, ok, although I’m mad because remember that this dialog was in book? and it was a thousand years earlier? and it was a Crowley who took a whole year to understant that it’s unfair while Aziraphale knew this and was like, well, it’s party line, what are you expected? why they shifted context so much). In the world where no one was killed Crowley would help her with body and go back to drinking or something, lefting her to dig another body next evening and live like this forever. But Aziraphale’s the one that wants to change that!! Go through episode, read the lines, look at their faces without being attached to fanon Jesus-like Crowley and you’ll see the one being that knows that the system is fucked and doing nothing to change it and the other not understanding system wholly but being willing to bend the rules and eventually risk his life to help — and I want to point it hard — NOT innocent human! She’s a street rat, she’s a grave robber (and Crowley understands why it’s bad more than Aziraphale, until the «it’s different when it’s someone you know» moment, but still he was in favor of digging bodies), she’s not deserving of help by heaven’s standarts, and still Aziraphale’s willing to risk falling, again, for her and her human lover! (THAT'S foreshadowing much, huh? HUH?) And that’s when Crowley understands: oh, shit, it’s not funny for him! It’s not just a lesson on morality! He’s really really can get punished if he do something stupid now!

Remember that second point of season was «stop messing with humans please»? That’s where it’s started, arguably.

So, like, yes, Crowley obliviously wasn’t planning to save Elpsbeth in any way until Aziraphale was willig to do it first. And why you need it to be different? We already know that Crowley’s nice deep inside. He doesn’t do anything bad there, even. It’s not a slander to his character. There’s billions of humans he — or Aziraphale — doesn’t help every day. Crowley accustomed to this, that’s the point. But then Aziraphale’s doing something risky (again, that’s his whole deal: sword, this scene, ditching his platoon and diving on earth, the nimb bomb — all done [or almost done] in defiance of heavens and for the humanity, all by his own, without Crowley’s influence! You don’t need to take this from him and stuff good qualities into Crowley until he’s absolutely flattens, Aziraphale doing something good is not stealing goodness from Crowley!).

Also remember 1941? The ones where Aziraphale wants to take down the nazi spies while Crowley smuggles alcohol? It’s the same pattern! Crowley don’t want to be mistaken for nazi (so he changes his shirt), but he’s not involved in any anti-nazi work (we talks about canon there, you can have headcanons, I sure do). It’s Aziraphale who jumps on chance to do good, again, and Crowley, again, deals with nazi only when they are the treat to Aziraphale. WHICH IS FINE. It doesen’t makes him bad. It shows that he loves his comfortable life and a little of mischieve, while Aziraphale loves his comfortable life and a little of doing good. It’s important that in this scene there’s no visible, like, innocent kid being harmed right now — I’m sure Crowley would’ve go out of his way to help then. But Aziraphale get’s tangled with some spies and suppliers, they doing nazi work indirectly — you need to think strategically to understand why you should help there, which Aziraphale clearly does. It also shows that he willing to work on changing things and not passively wait (or sleep) untill bad times go away, when he gets a chance to do it without miracles (as we saw in Edinburg minisode, he’s afraid that too many miracles or too big miracle used to help wrong people will put him in trouble). Which arguably foreshadows final fifteen again, but it's not the point of this post.

I can go next scene by scene but whatever, I’ll just remind you that’s while stopping the apocalypce was Crowley's idea, he:

— wasn’t concerned for the humans, at least at the start — he was mostly concerned for his earthly life, as much as Aziraphale, which includes humans, but not in oh-I-want-to-save-them way. Which is good! All first season is about how being a little bit egoistical and thinks about yourself can motivate you to change the world because it's YOUR world too!

— was actually working toward apocalypse and looking forward to it, until Antichrist came and he suddenly get that it will happen, like, for real (that’s literally said by word of God, remember?)

— and also, Aziraphale wasn’t opposed to idea of stopping apocalypse, he was sure that there’s no way to stop it and all that they can do is to hope that heavens will win (at least there’s no torture in heavens!… probably)

Like, it wasn’t Crowley explaining to Aziraphale that «apocalypse bad, heavens bad», it was him TEMPTING Aziraphale to give in to urge to stop apocalypse because he loves his earthly life as much as Crowley!!

Anyway, my point is — fandom loves black and white thinking. One should always be right, let’s make another one always wrong. One should always be heroic, let’s make other one villian or damsel in distress. That’s not how it work in real life, that’s not how it work in Good Omens, and Good Omens actually would’ve be really bland if it was the case. Aziraphale changes Crowley as much as he changes Aziraphale, but as everything Aziraphale do, it’s much more subtle. And they both get changed by humanity! (remember, again, the doctor from Edinburg? He sure was an eye-opener for them both)

Another thing, I think, is that people doesen’t want to step into Aziraphale’s shoes. Why would you do it, when there’s Crowley, who’s always right? It’s much more pleasant to be right, and Aziraphale’s always so unsure and his growth is not linear and sometimes he’s even says bad things! Nah, easier to not think from his perspective at all, and easier to not symphatise with him, just patronize at best, to make Crowley a better person for being willing to teach him too (which honestly makes azicrowley looks a little creepy, but you do you, just not in front of my salad please). So people that projects into Crowley, already the ones that unwilling to be not right or not good or not the most hurt party in every fight (again, it's understandble! but really narrows your perspective), gets really uncomfortable if you points that their characterisation of Crowley is not always in line with canon, because a) that makes him wrong or not-perfect sometimes and b) it makes THEM wrong or not-perfect sometimes.

Again, it’s not me picking a fight, and it’s fine if you have another interpretations of anything we saw on screen or any different headcanons. But try to look at what I said not from the point of hostility and character slander but from the point of love, because I LOVE them so much and I love them BECAUSE they both are painted in shades of gray! You don't need to mold Crowley into absolutely different character to love him! Imperfection is fine and good!

[phoenix-flamed]

Another headcanon post? From me??? No way. (Just kidding, I'm predictable :tm: )

Let me preface this one with the fact that I, as always, and obviously, can't speak to what was intended for the actual in-game Elwin. I don't know his actual reasons for doing what he did, if there is anything to elaborate on with them -- and the writers as far as I know haven't expanded on the subject. (Unless there's mention of it somewhere in the Ultimania, or tidbits of info in one of the other non-English versions of the game, in which case omg please tell me because I desperately want to know more about it.)

This is purely my headcanons for my Elwin, specifically. And it's also worth noting that I still don't agree with his decision on this matter; I probably never will agree with it, although I understand theoretically why he did it and why it was a smart move politically.

Now then, onto the actual subject of the post: bringing Jill back to Rosalith with him after the war with the Northern Territories was ended.

My Elwin's big thing is, and always will be, building a better future, one carefully laid brick at a time. A large chunk of the decisions he makes, for better or worse, positive or painful, are driven by this goal.

It's no secret to anyone that Rosaria and the Northern Territories have been at odds for decades or more before the game takes place. Hell, the reason Rosaria lost control of Drake's Breath for the last time to the Iron Kingdom fifty years prior was because Rosaria was preoccupied with fending off the Northern Territories, and the Iron Kingdom took advantage of the situation to take the Mothercrystal for themselves while Rosaria was distracted. My Elwin doesn't particularly like war, despite being a soldier, and despite taking part in or leading many military campaigns across his lifetime. He tries to avoid engaging the duchy in conflicts whenever able, preferring to find peaceable methods of resolution instead of jumping straight to force, and in general displays of power.

War is, and always will be, a last resort during his reign. It's not just for the sake of Rosaria -- it's for the sake of their opposition, too.

When it comes to putting an end to the conflicts with the Northern Territories once and for all, it's about more than simply quelling the fighting. It's also, and perhaps far more importantly, about establishing a relationship with the North. Elwin knows that King Warrick and his people are in dire straights. He understands why they chose to march on Rosarian soil, understands that they are desperate and riled up. Their Mothercrystal is dead, their Eikon hasn't Awakened again as far as anyone is aware, the Blight has consumed most of their land and is still creeping onward...

In spite of the fact that yes, the North is, and historically has been, enemies to Rosaria, Elwin nonetheless refuses to turn his back on them and leave them to suffer and die. Instead, he offers them resources and supplies, and opens the duchy's borders to refugees trying to escape the Blight. (A decision that yes, has negative repercussions over time for the duchy, in that it starts to spread their resources for themselves thinner and thinner, as revealed at the start of the game in the throne room scene.) Regardless of whether or not this is a good or bad decision on his part, he wants a better future for everyone, not just Rosaria -- and I can't overstate that fact. While his political reach only extends as far as Rosaria's borders, that doesn't mean he isn't going to do everything within his power for others in need too.

Now, how does this relate to Jill? I don't know what the canon exchange was like between Elwin and King Warrick, so again, this is all just specific to my muse. He didn't take Jill to Rosalith solely as a means of ensuring that King Warrick wouldn't attack Rosaria again -- there was another reason, a more important reason, or so I would argue.

It was a plan for the future.

My Elwin isn't a fan of arranged marriages, so the intention wasn't to have Jill wed either of the boys -- at least, not unless they themselves chose it. But it was his hope that through forming a friendship and bonds, the children would bring Rosaria and the Northern Territories closer together than he and The Silvermane ever could have. The children are, after all, the future; when it comes time for Joshua to take the throne, it will be their generation's opinions, perceptions, desires, etc. that influence Joshua's decisions and ambitions, and these things will be -- perhaps largely -- shaped by the relationships that he has established on a personal level as well. Jill, too, will have political influence when she is older, albeit on the side of the North, and thus can the same be hoped with her.

His intention was, in short, to start laying down bricks for a foundation for a better relationship between the North and the duchy, and a better future for both nations, with the hope being that the children would pick up on building where he leaves off for them.

The concept of Jill losing her identity as princess of the North, losing touch with her peoples' cultures and traditions, etc., is not Elwin's intention, but yes, it may happen as a consequence of his choice. In truth, though, he personally would encourage her to hold onto those things -- because she is a princess of the North, the daughter of King Geir Warrick. If there are traditions and customs that are valuable to her people, or religious practices that they carry out, or beliefs that they hold onto, then they should all be respected, at least in his eyes.

He does not, by any means, agree that the peoples of the Northern Territories are "savages". And he would very much like to see that opinion of them change, and see their peoples come together in respect and friendship.

It should be noted, though, that no, I still don't agree that he should have forced this on Jill by taking her to Rosalith without her consent, regardless of the nature of the agreement between himself and her father. (Humorously enough, I feel similarly to him with Clive and Joshua, too. His intentions were good! But he placed such a heavy burden on their shoulders by signing them up to continue on his work after he's gone, regardless of whether or not it's what they would want to do. But this is also me being nitpicky. I do get why he did it and why it's such an important legacy to carry on, and I agree with the ambition!)

[knight-a3]

I can't say I expected Tech development in this week's episode of Bad Batch because he usually gets ignored, but I'm happy to see it. He's been the most interesting to me because of how reserved and detached he tends to be.

I don't really have anywhere I'm going with this, I just wanted to spit out some thoughts I've been having about Tech and what this episode has confirmed for me.

I've seen a lot of autistic headcanons for Tech. I don't necessarily disagree with all of them, but when it comes to character analysis, I don’t find it helpful to look at it from a lens of nuerodivergency or mental illness. Instead of increasing understanding of a character, it can lead to people inserting their own preconceived notions about said conditions (either due to stereotypes or personal experiences) and forgetting about the actual character. Or even being disappointed when he doesn't match that expectation of what autism "should" be. People are so eager to be represented that they treat the character as a stand-in for themselves, or a stand-in for the group they think he represents, when that does a disservice to the character and the narrative role that is played.

Whether or not Tech has autism is up to interpretation. Regardless, Tech does not represent autism; that's a broad range of characteristics, and it's not fair to expect him to represent all of that. He is simply himself and he has a few quirks. Autism-coded and autism representation are different things, and that's okay. Besides, I'm not sure how effective it is to imply that he got autism due to prenatal genetic manipulation specifically designed to give him advanced cognitive capabilities...

Some of the headcanons I've seen include Tech struggling to adapt to change, which is a common autistic trait. But it was something he has shown no indication of. If anything, everything he's done has shown the opposite. He's analytical and practical. He prioritizes the situation at hand and remains calm(life support is not affected, we're fine. He says as chaos surrounds them). He takes everything at face value and considers them with the resources at hand, so when complications arise, he's very quick to adapt to a change in plans. He takes in the new information and immediately recalibrates his worldview to accommodate. Facts are facts and reality is reality. He's like a Star Wars Vulcan, in a way. Very logical and practical.

Another headcanon I've seen is an aversion to touch, which Tech has never actually seemed particularly sensitive to. Not any more than the others, at least. He doesn't seem to struggle with any sensory overstimulation issues. If his ability to walk on a broken femur(something that should be completely debilitating) is any indication, I'd say he is unnaturally capable of ignoring sensory input.

Where he struggles is understanding emotions in decision making. Why they let pesky sentimentality get in the way of practicality. He can understand it in a theoretical sense, but it's not something he can really wrap his head around the same way he can with facts and numbers and information and probabilities. Emotions are nebulous and unreliable, so relying on them to make critical decisions is counterintuitive to him. He didn't riot race to save Cid because of any feelings of loyalty to her; he did it because Omega got them wrapped up in her debt problem too. If he didn't race, they would owe money they did not have and suffer the consequences as well. Practical problems.

He has feelings, yes, he just doesn't know how to factor them into solutions or articulate them. And, being the type to use the longest and most technical way to describe things, that's probably deeply frustrating to him. In 2.02, when asked if he was okay, his response was to list his physical condition rather than just say yes or no. (My left femur has been fractured by approximately 150 kilograms of pressure. So... no.) He needed to articulate his reasoning for saying no. He had to process it more like taking stock of his condition before determining whether he qualified as okay. He doesn't trust emotions to determine what is factually true.

He can't understand why Omega is upset about missing Echo, when how he shows he cares is by respecting that choice(understanding you doesn't mean I agree). Because wanting something different than what Echo chose seems counterintuitive to the goal of caring about Echo, in Tech's eyes. Particularly when Echo had logical desires and reasoning that Tech can comprehend.

Tech is focused on the practical problems. The squad is down some manpower, but they can manage. They lost their ship, but they can get another. By stating as much, he may have thought he was being reassuring. Why mourn a brother who isn't lost? What is a home beyond a place you reside? He doesn't understand what he said that was wrong, because factually he is right.

I'm not sure what conclusion I am trying to come to. I'm just feeling validated in my assessment of his character thanks to this episode. He takes change in stride, doesn't know how to articulate feelings, and focuses on solving practical problems.

[nicklloydnow]

“The moment has come to make good a promise I gave. I must substantiate why, according to my firm conviction, torture was the essence of National Socialism - more accurately stated, why it was precisely in torture that the Third Reich materialized in all the density of its being. That torture was, and is, practiced elsewhere has already been dealt with. Certainly. In Vietnam since 1964. Algeria 1957. Russia probably between 1919 and 1953. In Hungary in 1919 the Whites and the Reds tortured. There was torture in Spanish prisons by the Falangists as well as the Republicans. Torturers were at work in the semifascist Eastern European states of the period between the two World Wars, in Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia. Torture was no invention of National Socialism. But it was its apotheosis. The Hitler vassal did not yet achieve his full identity if he was merely as quick as a weasel, tough as leather, hard as Krupp steel. No Golden Party Badge made of him a fully valid representative of the Führer and his ideology, nor did any Blood Order or Iron Cross. He had to torture, destroy, in order to be great in bearing the suffering of others. He had to be capable of handling torture instruments, so that Himmler would assure him his Certificate of Maturity in History; later generations would admire him for having obliterated his feelings of mercy.

Again I hear indignant objection being raised, hear it said that not Hitler embodied torture, but rather something unclear, "totalitarianism." I hear especially the example of Communism being shouted at me. And didn't I myself just say that in the Soviet Union torture was practiced for thirty-four years? And did not already Arthur Koestler . . . ? Oh yes, I know, I know. It is impossible to discuss here in detail the political "Operation Bewilderment" of the postwar period, which defined Communism and National Socialism for us as two not even very different manifestations of one and the same thing. Until it came out of our ears, Hitler and Stalin, Auschwitz, Siberia, the Warsaw Ghetto Wall and the Berlin Ulbricht-Wall were named together, like Goethe and Schiller, Klopstock and Wieland. As a hint, allow me to repeat here in my own name and at the risk of being denounced what Thomas Mann once said in a much attacked interview: namely, that no matter how terrible Communism may at times appear, it still symbolizes an idea of man, whereas Hitler-Fascism was not an idea at all, but depravity. Finally, it is undeniable that Communism could de-Stalinize itself and that today in the Soviet sphere of influence, if we can place trust in concurring reports, torture is no longer practiced. In Hungary a Party First Secretary can preside who was himself once the victim of Stalinist torture. But who is really able to imagine a de-Hitlerized National Socialism and, as a leading politician of a newly ordered Europe, a Röhm follower who in those days had been dragged through torture? No one can imagine it. It would have been impossible. For National Socialism - which, to be sure, could not claim a single idea, but did possess a whole arsenal of confused, crackbrained notions - was the only political system of this century that up to this point had not only practiced the rule of the antiman, as had other Red and White terror regimes also, but had expressly established it as a principle. It hated the word "humanity" like the pious man hates sin, and that is why it spoke of "sentimental humanitarianism." It exterminated and enslaved. This is evidenced not only by the corpora delicti, but also by a sufficient number of theoretical confrmations. The Nazis tortured, as did others, because by means of torture they wanted to obtain information important for national policy. But in addition they tortured with the good conscience of depravity. They martyred their prisoners for definite purposes, which in each instance were exactly specified. Above all, however, they tortured because they were torturers. They placed torture in their service. But even more fervently they were its servants.” - Jean Améry, ‘At the Mind's Limits: Contemplations by a Survivor on Auschwitz and Its Realities’ (1966) [pages 30, 31]

[bopinion]

2023 / 23

Aperçu of the Week:

"Courage is knowing it might hurt, and doing it anyway. Stupidity is the same. And that's why life is hard."

(Jeremy Goldberg, 1958 born English historian at the University of York)

Bad News of the Week - A selection because I could not decide:

The right-wing populist party Alternative for Germany (Alternative für Deutschland / AfD) comes in at 18% in polls for the first time, putting it in second place after the Conservatives and ahead of the Social Democrats. 65% of AfD voters considered immigration to be the biggest current problem - excuse me?1? Germany needs 500,000 migrants - every year. Otherwise our over-aged society will collapse, where no one wants to work at the garbage collection. The alternative? More children of right-wingers? Please don't...

The dam burst, whatever its cause, on the Dnipro River in the southern Ukrainian region of Kherson, is a disaster of inconceivable proportions. Huge masses of water have been pouring out of the destroyed Kakhovka dam since Tuesday, serious environmental destruction is occurring, tens of thousands have to be evacuated, and the regional supply of electricity and drinking water is limited. The suffering adds a new dimension to this war.

I have a high respect for police officers - my stepfather is (was) one. But the East German police are, unfortunately, largely right-wing. That's why a few days ago in Leipzig there were violent riots with the left, who took to the streets after a court ruling against their symbolic figure Lina E. (convicted of attacking right-wing extremists and neo-Nazis). A demonstration that was initially authorized but then withdrawn. According to independent media reports, the escalation was sought by the police and not by the protesters.

An unprecedented scale of wildfires in Canada is not only destroying millions of acres of nature, but affecting people thousands of miles away. In New York City, the sky is orange and the population is told to stay indoors as breathing outside is difficult even for healthy people. In Greenland and Iceland, too, air quality is dropping noticeably, and this weekend the smoke will reach even northern Europe. And no one knows what the situation is like in Siberia right now, where there is equally severe drought.

Small and medium-sized businesses in the European Union are becoming increasingly dependent on the "marketplace" offerings of Amazon, the online retailer that dominates by a wide margin. The analysis of the Dutch think tank Somo, which will be published in a few days, comes to a simple conclusion: effective antitrust proceedings would have to lead to a break-up. Otherwise, healthy competition would fall by the wayside.

Good News of the Week - A selection because I could not decide:

The European Court of Justice has ruled: Poland's judicial reform, which effectively abolishes the independence of the judiciary, violates EU law. Therefore, billions of EU funds remain frozen - and democratic values defended.

Brazil unveils an ambitious plan to combat deforestation of the Amazon rainforest. Already since Lula da Silva took office, the destruction - almost all of it illegal - of one of the world's most important ecosystems has reportedly already fallen by a third.

Former U.S. President Trump has been indicted again. The judiciary accuses him of 37 counts surrounding the classified documents he unlawfully took from the White House. Theoretically, he can be punished with up to ten years in prison in this regard. It's the first federal indictment of an ex-president. And that's a good thing: no one is above the law. That goes for Boris "The haircut" Johnson, too, by the way.

The EU has finally come to a so-called asylum compromise. Even though many aspects of this compromise - such as the treatment of unaccompanied minors from so-called "safe countries of origin," including Kosovo, for example - upset me because of its inhumane harshness, it is better than nothing. Because until now, there was simply no Europe-wide mechanism at all, and the countries at the EU's external borders were simply left to fend for themselves.

"Operation Hope" lived up to its name: after forty days, four children who had gone missing after the crash of a small plane were found by soldiers in the Colombian jungle. They had survived with the help of indigenous people.

Young adults from Germany and France are to travel and get to know their respective neighboring countries in order to strengthen relations between the two countries. To this end, the transport ministers of Germany and France have launched the Franco-German Friendship Pass - 60,000 can travel free of charge for a month.

Personal happy moment of the week:

As a foreigner, my wife regularly has to prove her residence status to various official bodies, including the bank. Last week it was time again. On this occasion, her customer advisor noticed that she has been married to a German since the end of December 2022 - namely to me. Therefore, she was not only warmly congratulated, but also received a gift: a high-quality set of barbecue tools. It was a great pleasure to receive congratulations again. A good 15 months after the wedding.

I couldn't care less...

...that now former US Vice President Mike Pence has also thrown his hat into the ring. Or the ex-governor of New Jersey Chris Christie. Because all observers agree on one thing: the more internal competition there is among the Republicans for the U.S. presidential candidacy, the better for Donald Trump. And the worse for the whole world.

As I write this...

... I'm amazed: The plant fruit Okra is one of the oldest vegetables in the world, cultivated in the highlands of Abyssinia more than 4,000 years ago. The annual harvest yields over 10 million tons - and I first heard about it in a crossword puzzle.

Post Scriptum

On June 5, 1972, World Environment Day was established. Since then, every year on this date, there are different events around the world that aim to raise people's ecological awareness. A total of around 150 countries participate in this day of action. In Germany, this year's motto is "Strengthen nature - protect the climate". Never heard about it? Maybe that's the problem...

[daisyachain]

I saw a critique somewhere once that I really liked of the popular conception of Paradise Lost-type Lucifer as a real paragon. The Christian idea of the relationships between god/humanity/sin is poisonous in that Original Sin means humans deserve to suffer. This means that then the existence of the god is what condemns humans to suffering—there is no sin if there is no perfect being. The god’s all-perfect nature is what leads it to choose to bring down such worldly suffering on humanity, which it deems to be wrong by nature. This for also lends itself to white supremacy and patriarchy, where the perfect god is cast as a man of whatever dominant ethnically European group. Having a perfect god creates a theoretical moral hierarchy, that hierarchy is co-opted by the real actual hierarchies that exist, oppressed groups are framed as ontologically bad.

Therefore, conceptualizing Lucifer as a wronged paragon is not the transgressive move that people see it as. Rather than truly undercutting the oppressive god, it just raises up an equally unfair/hierarchical/white male supremacist figure (after all, when is Lucifer shown as anything but a blond guy?) as a rival to the oppressive god. The trickster Satan of sex, drugs, and goats’ hooves is a more effective folk Christian figure to adopt to undercut the oppressive god. Lucifer represents a challenge to the god as an equally powerful, perfect, judgmental being establishing a rival hierarchy. The Satan-devil-figure represents letting it hang. Satan is a way around the rules of the oppressive god, he is the ability to ignore all hierarchies and hack the system. Magic does exist, it just goes against the divine order. The post-Paradise Lost Lucifer seeks to replace the oppressive god, the Satan figure seeks to make him irrelevant.

That’s an analysis I like and agree with. After all, when is Lucifer portrayed as anything but a blond guy? However, the one thing that is compelling about the pop culture mythos of Lucifer is that it represents some kind of failed effort as the basis of suffering. The figure of Lucifer started a rebellion and was cast out, as opposed to the exogenous Satan who just hangs around tempting. Lucifer has been taken to be the idea of ‘what if someone tried to help humanity, and was punished?’

The Christian mythos’ main sticking point is, again, original sin. Every misfortune is blamed on humanity. Anyone with eyes can see that the people who suffer most in their lives do not do anything to deserve it. It’s impossible to reconcile, and the Christian way of doing so is to just say that life doesn’t matter in the long run. In the year 1400, it’s easier to believe that your cousin got the black plague because he’d screwed your brother’s wife behind his back. In later years, it gets much harder.

So, as much as it has played into white male supremacist ideas of ‘I’m right and I define right and laws like the age of consent are oppressive’, Lucifer has a far more powerful appeal as a story to explain the wrongs in the world. There are so many things going badly, how could the god not be responsible? How could nobody have noticed this was bad? The answer that the pop culture idea of Lucifer presents is: someone noticed, someone tried to help, and the person who tried to help suffered or was corrupted. It’s comforting to think that there was at least some resistance on moral grounds to the tyranny of the god. It’s easier to understand divine entities getting corrupted in a long war than to understand them as corrupt from the start. Me, I like the idea that a divine being trying to do good will be struck down. It resonates with the nature of the world as it shows itself. Rather than the good god which triumphs and the devil which tempts, it’s much easier to imagine the evil god who whacks the mole and the good devil which tries (and fails) to overthrow it.

[denimbex1986]

'Greta Gerwig’s “Barbie” and Christopher Nolan’s “Oppenheimer” were set to be the biggest movies of the year before they even hit theaters. After an inconsistent start to the year, the same-day release of “Barbenheimer” on July 21 made history. Their combined $1.8 billion success comes after three years of cinematic purgatory as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, when many films were released in theaters and streaming platforms simultaneously, which did little to curb the cataclysmic drop in box office performance compared to pre-pandemic levels. Nevertheless, in the wake of a historic calamity, millions of people worldwide flocked to theaters to see an infamous physicist cope with the triumph and tragedy of his era-defining invention, and the world’s most popular doll be driven to confront and finally welcome the onset of her humanity.

Two initially opposing films have become interwoven into a cultural phenomenon that has the potential to change how we ourselves view and respond to change that affects us both as individuals and as a society. “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer” are two very different sides of the same thematic coin, and are reflections of how we as a collective conscience cope with the calamities of our modern day. Rather than being a vehicle of escapism, “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer” as a unit illustrate the consequences of either accepting or denying change, what it means to suffer while conforming to society’s expectations and both how and how not to respond to the many trials and tribulations life throws at us. The combination of these themes make “Barbenheimer” a potent vehicle for social commentary that has broad implications for modern society, specifically regarding technological innovation and its impacts.

As far as the coin is concerned, “Oppenheimer” is certainly the blackened, oxidized and grimy side of the coin. “Oppenheimer” paints the picture of a man who becomes overwhelmed in despair over his actions and the many years he takes to make peace with himself. The naive world of theoretical physics and hypothetical daydreams becomes inescapably intertwined with the cold, hard reality of winning a world war. At its center is J. Robert Oppenheimer (Cillian Murphy, “Peaky Blinders”). The optimism and carefree nature of his young adult life is turned to ash just as quickly as the two cities he is indirectly responsible for leveling. Throughout the film, we see how little and large atomic explosions tear at the fabric of his mental health and life, until he is finally broken in the flash of an enormous mushroom cloud. Surrounded by jubilation, all Oppenheimer can see in his mind’s eye is the searing light and instantaneous devastation of the explosion. In the years after the war’s end, he is more undead than alive, a shell of himself who doesn’t resist the condemnation and the degradation of the very government that entrusted him the leadership of the Manhattan Project.

While director Christopher Nolan makes no mistake in illustrating the categorical deconstruction of a human being, he no less falters in allowing the audience to see the hope in the despair. A chronicle of a man who lived in an era dominated by war and who played a major role in defining the 20th century is no less pertinent in the 21st. In a present world which seems dominated by atomic bombs of bad news, “Oppenheimer” teaches us that letting go of hope only leads to more despair, and that one must find peace with what led to this depression in order to return to happiness. In the same vein, the advent of new technology can never be solely positive or negative. While the atomic bomb had an incredibly negative impact, its underlying technology spurred on major scientific developments in several important fields vital to our understanding of life itself.

Conversely, Barbieland’s side of the coin is unnaturally pristine and, quite literally, plastic. As shown in the film’s marketing, this line rings true: “If you hate Barbie, this movie is for you … If you love Barbie, this movie is for you.” “Barbie” offered a superficial view into the identity crisis of its titular character. Nonetheless, “Barbie” was a pertinent, visually-striking commentary on the Barbieland-esque world of social media, traditional gender roles and body standards. Director Greta Gerwig’s usual feminist commentary permeates the movie, with the Barbie-dominated utopia providing a stark contrast to the male-dominated “Real World,” as depicted in the movie. While both worlds incorporate an element of fantasy, Gerwig uses this dichotomy to highlight the inherent disparities in a system which values one gender over another, regardless of which gender is on top. This all undercuts Barbie (Margot Robbie, “Babylon”) grappling with her new, increasingly human and constantly less perfect identity. After numerous setbacks and pitfalls, Barbie finally comes to terms with the fact that her imperfections are worth cherishing, and that they are what make her truly unique and human.

Although it is sometimes difficult to see through the movie’s glossy pink exterior, just like “Oppenheimer,” The overall message conveyed by “Barbie” is one that is extremely important, one that tells women and girls of the need to value their own identities, given the state of today’s cultural landscape. Our generation’s very own atomic bomb, the internet, has revolutionized how we as a generation interact with our world. First conceived for military purposes in the 1960s, computational developments over the next several decades laid the foundation for its now near unfathomable expanses and fundamental importance to modern society. Key to the internet’s cultural relevance is social media. For roughly 70% of Americans, social media sites have become a regular part of their daily routine, despite the majority maintaining that social media has a negative impact on society. This sentiment is by no means untrue, especially when it comes to young people. Connected to the meteoric rise of social media over the past decade, the past 15 years have seen steady increases in the onset of suicides among individuals between the ages of 10 and 24. Emergency room visits for self-inflicted injuries among ages 10 to 19 have risen sharply among young women. While not exclusively linked to social media, among primarily young teens, there is a distinct correlation between life satisfaction and social media use.

While “Barbie” is just a film, the personal struggle of an individual such as Barbie, who by social media standards is perfect, is precisely the narrative that is often neglected when browsing social media, or when discussing the real-life Barbie doll herself. In an era in which people, particularly young people, are held to impossibly high standards, it becomes increasingly important to deprecate such unrealistic expectations and place a more positive emphasis on the unique imperfections of individuals, which are precisely what make them human. While “Barbie” itself can by no means solve the youth mental health crisis created by social media, it can at the very least bring greater attention to the issue and motivate a shift in the narrative. Considering its box office success, it’s clearly raising awareness, if nothing else.

Audiences have grown tired of the traditional summer blockbuster. It can be seen with the underwhelming performance of once wildly successful franchises, and with the simultaneous success of films such as “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer.” The success of both movies amid an ongoing writers’ and actors’ strike gives Hollywood the perfect opportunity to shift its strategy by bringing innovation back into the fold. Filmgoers are hungry for something that will challenge their expectations and perhaps even motivate them to become passionate about an issue they otherwise wouldn’t have recognized. The power of “Barbenheimer” is fleeting, yet the message it carries and the cultural phenomenon it represents will ensure it remains a staple in cinematic history. For the industry itself, stories that push the envelope of what can be expected from a moviegoing experience and leave audiences with something to reflect on after it’s over are now the zeitgeist.'

[antoniakidman]

watch and review Oppenheimer (film)

WATCH MOVIE

In 1926, 22-year-old doctoral student J. Robert Oppenheimer studies under experimental physicist Patrick Blackett at the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge. Oppenheimer suffers from homesickness and anxiety and struggles doing the required lab work. Oppenheimer, upset with the demanding Blackett, leaves him a poison-laced apple but retrieves it. Visiting scientist Niels Bohr is impressed enough by Oppenheimer's intellect to recommend that he should instead study theoretical physics in Germany, where Oppenheimer completes his PhD. He later meets theoretical physicist Werner Heisenberg at a conference in Switzerland.

Oppenheimer returns to the United States, wanting to expand quantum physics research there. He begins teaching at the University of California, Berkeley and the California Institute of Technology, starting with one student. He meets his future wife, Katherine "Kitty" Puening, a biologist and ex-communist, and also has an intermittent affair with Jean Tatlock, a member of the Communist Party USA, until her suicide a few years later. In 1938, Nazi Germany's progress in nuclear fission research spurs Oppenheimer and his colleagues to replicate their results. Leo Szilard and Albert Einstein then warn President Franklin D. Roosevelt of atomic weaponry's catastrophic potential.

In 1942, amid World War II, U.S. Army General Leslie Groves recruits Oppenheimer to lead the Manhattan Project to develop an atomic bomb after Oppenheimer's assurances he has no communist sympathies. Oppenheimer, who is Jewish, is particularly driven by the Nazis' potentially completing their nuclear weapons program, headed by Heisenberg. Oppenheimer assembles a scientific team including Edward Teller and Isidor Isaac Rabi in Los Alamos, New Mexico and also collaborates with scientists Enrico Fermi and David L. Hill; he and Einstein discuss how an atomic bomb potentially risks triggering an unstoppable chain reaction that could ignite the atmosphere and destroy the world.

After Germany surrenders, some project scientists question the bomb's relevance, while Oppenheimer believes using it will quickly end the ongoing war in the Pacific, saving Allied lives. The Trinity test is successful and President Harry S. Truman orders Hiroshima and Nagasaki to be bombed, forcing Japan's surrender. Oppenheimer is thrust into the public eye as the "father of the atomic bomb", but the immense destruction and mass fatalities haunt him. He urges Truman to restrict further nuclear weapon development. Truman rejects Oppenheimer's advice, considering him weak.

As an advisor to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Oppenheimer advocates against further nuclear research, especially the hydrogen bomb proposed by Edward Teller. Oppenheimer's stance becomes a point of contention amid the tense Cold War with the Soviet Union. AEC Chairman Lewis Strauss deeply resents Oppenheimer after he publicly humiliated him by dismissing his concerns about exporting radioisotopes and also for Oppenheimer recommending arms talks with the Soviet Union.

At a hearing intended to eliminate his political influence, Oppenheimer is betrayed by Teller and other associates. Strauss exploits Oppenheimer's past associations with Communist party members. Despite allies testifying in his defense, Oppenheimer's security clearance is revoked, damaging his public image and neutralizing his policy influence. At Strauss's later Senate confirmation hearing for Secretary of Commerce, Hill testifies about Strauss's personal motives in engineering Oppenheimer's downfall. The U.S. Senate votes against Strauss's nomination. It is revealed that an earlier conversation between Einstein and Oppenheimer, in which Strauss believed Oppenheimer denigrated him, instead concerned nuclear weapons' possible cataclysmic consequences, with Oppenheimer believing they started a chain reaction that may destroy the world.

[david-talks-sw]

Anakin knows what he’s doing is wrong...

Whenever I read people using the idea that “from Anakin’s point of view the Jedi are evil” as the ultimate proof that he felt bullied by them, I roll my eyes. Anakin is intelligent enough to know when he’s wrong.

He doesn’t really think the Jedi are evil, he’s lying to himself, he bought his own con.

Anakin was a good kid to begin with, and with the Jedi training he became a great man. If you look at things objectively, Anakin is 90% of a great Jedi. He’s seemingly learned all the rules, and is wise enough to teach them to others:

Be it by telling Ahsoka that she needs to follow the rules, she can’t just go around and do whatever she feels like, it’ll lead to trouble…

… by encouraging his Padawan not to be too hard on herself…

… or be it by encouraging rational thought over hotheadedness.

In that last image, Anakin is Anakin telling Ahsoka and Rex to stop letting their emotions do the thinking and act logically. He’s telling them to be prudent.

Hell, he even believes that patience is a virtue.

Anakin is a trained Jedi Knight. He has the theoretical know-how to get out of his problems, in ROTS.

In fact, a lot of people forget this, but Anakin’s first instinct, upon finding out Palpatine is, in fact, Darth Sidious, is this:

The Jedi are Anakin’s family. If Palpatine is asking Anakin to choose between the Chancellor and the Jedi, he’ll choose the Jedi every damn time (which is why Palpatine makes Anakin choose between the Jedi and Padmé, instead).

So where’s the problem?

That last 10% of what makes a great Jedi. Introspection, self-control.

Despite being wise, clever and thinking rationally - Anakin has trouble applying those lessons to himself.

When it comes to his own personal problems, he's hard on himself, he’s impatient, he breaks the rules and acts out of emotion instead of thinking things through.

As Obi-Wan puts it:

As a result of this flaw, Anakin keeps choosing the wrong path, despite knowing that it’s the wrong path. The Force puts a lot of tests in front of him, and he keeps choosing the easy way out, rather than the more difficult but ultimately satisfying path.

His mother was killed. He can choose to genocide a whole Tusken village, or be the better man and just walk away. He kills the Tuskens.

Dooku is unarmed and helpless. Anakin can either kill him in a rage, out of revenge, or he can capture him, bring him to justice, and potentially discover the identity of the second Sith Lord. He kills Dooku.

Windu is also helpless (his hand was just cut off by Anakin) and Palpatine is killing him. Anakin can either choose to save Windu and arrest Palpatine (who just revealed that he wasn’t “too weak” after all), or he can let Windu die. He lets Windu die.

Padmé tells him that this isn’t what she wants. He can actually listen to her wishes. Or he can go on a maniacal rant about having ultimate power, ignoring her own opinions completely. He goes on a rant, drunk with power. Then chokes her.

Obi-Wan tells him to stop, tries to reason with him: Chancellor Palpatine is evil. Anakin knows this. He can stop lying to himself and accept his mistakes, ending the fight. Or he can give Obi-Wan his two-cent rationalization about the Jedi being evil (which he doesn’t even really believe in), and keep trying to kill Obi-Wan. He keeps trying to kill Obi-Wan.

The more the War goes on, the more it gets easy for Anakin to take the easy path, over and over. But he knows it’s the wrong thing to do.

In the director’s commentary of Revenge of the Sith, George Lucas said this about the following two scenes:

“I like this scene because he's lying to her and he's rationalizing it at the same time by saying he's doing it all for her. He's loyal to the senate and the chancellor and her. But in the end- I mean, he's twisted every fact to his own rationale to make it seem like it's okay, but in the process of lying to her he's actually just lying to himself and rationalizing his behavior. 'Cause he knows he's wrong, but he won't admit it […] he's too far gone- that he could murder a bunch of kids… and then go and rationalize it to her as just doing his job.”

“The tear [on Anakin’s face] says that he knows what he's done, but he has now committed himself to a path that he may not agree with… but he is going to go on anyway. It's the one moment that says he's self-aware that he's rationalizing all his behavior. He's doing terrible things, but in the end he really knows the truth. He knows that he's evil now, and there's nothing he can do about it.”

Anakin tells himself that he’s doing this for Padmé, he’s doing this because the Jedi betrayed him, blabla.

Truth is? He’s just really really scared. And that made him do really bad things.

There’s this incredible moment in Darth Vader: Lord of the Sith #5.

Vader has taken the lightsaber off a Jedi, and now he has to corrupt the saber’s crystal to get his red blade.

The crystal, and by extension, the Force, showed him a vision, a path where he turned to the Light, defeated the Emperor and put an end to his suffering. A path of redemption. This was his reaction:

Vader refuses to take the hard path and chooses the easy path instead, once again. He rejects the Light and hangs on to the pain… because deep down… below the “they betrayed me” bullshit he keeps telling himself… he thinks he deserves it, because he did the wrong thing.

Anakin knows he’s wrong and he’s still goes forward with doing the wrong thing, no matter what test the Force keeps throwing his way.

And that’s why his sacrifice in Return of the Jedi is so impactful. He finally does the right thing, he accepts that it’ll be hard, that he’ll die if he saves Luke… he doesn’t care. Luke loves him, like Padmé did. He failed once. He won’t fail again.

I’m gonna conclude this with one more quote from Lucas:

“It really has to do with learning. Children teach you compassion. They teach you to love unconditionally. Anakin can’t be redeemed for all the pain and suffering he’s caused. He doesn’t right the wrongs, but he stops the horror. The end of the Saga is simply Anakin saying: ‘I care about this person, regardless of what it means to me. I will throw away everything that I have, everything that I have grown to love - primarily the Emperor - and throw away my life, to save this person. And I’m doing this because he has faith in me, loves me despite all the horrible things I’ve done. I broke his mother’s heart, but he still cares about me, and I can’t let that die’.”

[butwhatifidothis]

Wow, thats a really long drawn out way of saying "I hate Edelgard and don't think she suffers consequences when she dies in all but a single route in the Original 3H and basically has everything she worked for ruined in 3hopes with the addition of being lombotomized."

I never said Edelgard didn't deserve punishment, I said she already GOT her punishment.

Like, do you just think a lobotomy is a LIGHT punishment??? For all intents and purposes the Edelgard that started the war is dead and only gets to temporarily come back because of q deities void magical bullshit. She basically got every

Don't forget, the Bad end of Edelgard's route also has the Alliance betray the empire and subsequently ends in Claudes death which basically cmakes the war last longer. Meanwhile in the Blue Lions route she: has Hubert and possibly Ferdinand murdered off screen, while her empire is basically ran into the ground and suffers the same fate as her father: Becoming a helpless puppet to those who slither in the dark.

And you're telling me she wasn't punished? Really?

Don't hate Edelgard. Like her even - or, like her potential and some aspects of how that's presented, if nothing else. Since that's still something I have to clarify since I dare criticize aspects of her writing lmao.

This isn't about 3H - nothing about your ask suggested it had anything to do with anything other than Hopes, which is why I focused on that game and not 3H.

got long lol under the cut it goes

And mmm, yummy, these words you placed in my mouth are quite something, to be sure, but I never once said that Edelgard didn't face consequences in 3H. Her actions directly lead to her death and the inability to go forward with her dream the way she wanted to, something that she finds so unacceptable that she would rather die than find any other possible alternative to achieve her dreams. That is a consequence that stems directly from her numerous bad actions, and her death AM/SS/VW is narratively satisfying because of it. I said that, in Hopes, she does not face consequences for her horrible/incorrect actions the same way other characters do like Claude. And that is because she does not.

I think something needs to be made clear: bad things happening to a character =/= those things being a consequence of that character's bad actions. Which is to say that saying Edelgard "got her punishment" because she got lobotomized for doing something good is missing the point entirely.

To refer back to Claude as an example of Hopes actually making a character go through the consequences of their actions:

Claude sacrifices Randolph -> this is a narratively bad decision

Fleche is told about this and seeks revenge, hiring Jeralt's Mercenaries to attack Claude, which can result in the lost of Judith -> a negative repercussion that directly results from Claude's bad decision

Let's look at 3H!Edelgard:

Edelgard starts a war and shows no signs of ever willingly stopping it herself -> this is a narratively bad decision

Dimitri/Byleth/(theoretically) Claude fight back against Edelgard's war and kill her to put an end to it -> a negative repercussion that directly results from Edelgard's bad decision

Hell, let’s look at 3H!Dimitri, cuz why not?

Dimitri chases after vengeance to the expense of his people and his friends - this is a narratively bad decision

Dimitri’s chase for vengeance leads to his own violent death in VW/(implicitly) SS and the death of his father figure Rodrigue in AM - a negative repercussion that directly results from Dimitri’s bad decision

But when looking at Hopes!Edelgard?

Edelgard protects Dimitri, reveals to him that Thales is the one that committed the Tragedy, before going on to fight against Thales -> these are all narratively good decisions

Thales whips out dark magic that reduces Edelgard's mind to that of a gullible child, before going on to use her face and voice to inflict irreparable harm to Edelgard's friends and country -> a negative repercussion that happened despite Edelgard's good decisions.

Before Edelgard could face the consequences of her actions, she is punished for doing the right thing before being placed in a state where she literally can't understand anything going on around her - she cannot properly face any consequences of her actions because she cannot understand them as consequences to begin with. And, again, this isn’t a result of her throwing war at everyone - her narratively bad decision - but because she was doing the right thing. She's not living with the consequences of her actions, she's been made into a victim.

"Like, do you just think a lobotomy is a LIGHT punishment??? For all intents and purposes the Edelgard that started the war is dead and only gets to temporarily come back because of q deities void magical bullshit. She basically got every" (I’m assuming this just got cut off in the ask somehow, rip) 

More words in my mouth: I never said what happened to her wasn't bad. Of fuckin' course it's bad, it's horrific. What I'm saying is that it's not a result of her doing anything to “earn” it (insofar as “this character did a bad thing and so a bad thing happened to them as a result”) when it was done to her. That it's a result of her doing something inarguably good, and given by someone who was inarguably bad.

Did she get lobotomized because of her violent invasion into the Kingdom? No. Did she get lobotomized because of the ruination she brought to countless people's lives? No. Did she get lobotomized by anyone who was negatively affected by her violent invasion? No. Did she do something bad to earn this bad thing happening to her? No. A bad thing happened to her because she stood up to a bad guy - that is not a consequence by any stretch of the imagination. 

Yes, she’s “punished”... for standing up against Thales. She was punished by Thales - the one who victimized her first when she was a child - and not the numerous people she victimized by forcing them all to go through war. Meaning that instead of having to face justice for all of the death and harm she’s caused the people of Fodlan, she gets to be looked as a poor little victim who should have every single one of her decisions that she willingly and independently made BEFORE she was lobotomized be completely overlooked and ignored. Because she’s “already going through so much.” 

When I said it was bad “for others,” I meant that only those on the outside know that this is bad. Lobotogard thinks that nothing is wrong with her. She cannot register that anything was done to her. Does that erase the fact that this was still a horrible thing to happen to her? No. Does it take a double-barrel shotgun to Edelgard’s agency in its entirety, up to and including any potential growth she could have as a character? Yes. Because the narrative wants so badly for Edelgard to always be seen in a good light that it would rather her be reduced to a child than even hint at the idea that if Edelgard does something bad, there ought to be consequences for doing something bad.

To put it simply, she doesn’t end her part in AG as the aggressor of a violent war who has faced justice and is awaiting what that entails, she ends it as just another victim who should have nothing but sympathy given to her. Unlike in non-CF routes in 3H where, if nothing else, she ends her part in AM/SS/VW as someone who might be sympathetic but still nonetheless needed to be taken down. A non-CF Edelgard faces some form of consequence for her bad actions by the end of the route; an AG Edelgard gets her life ruined for doing the right thing. These two things are nowhere near similar to each other in the slightest.

"Don't forget, the Bad end of Edelgard's route also has the Alliance betray the empire and subsequently ends in Claudes death which basically makes the war last longer."

The betrayal of Claude, which resulted in... Edelgard’s war, that she was already canonically willing to spend years on, going on for a bit longer than she might’ve liked in Hopes. For an amount of time that’s literally unquantifiable. And also the (likely) death of... the leader of one of the factions she was going to conquer anyway one way or the other. Wow, this totally has the same weight as losing someone you consider family or dying yourself, this slight setback that she can easily get over and results in the loss of exactly nothing precious to her as a character. To say nothing of the fact that everyone and their mom shits on Claude to his face for *checks note* turning his back on the woman who literally invaded his lands and tried to kill him not that long ago, his name slathered with ass-grease for daring to turn his back on the imperialist warmonger. Again, with the characters having absolutely nothing akin to this to say to Edelgard’s face, ever, at any point.

Oh how could silly ol’ me forget to mention this, it refutes my point oh so much.

“Meanwhile in the Blue Lions route she: “ - Imma stop ya right there. Everything bad that happened to her in AG that either is or results from the dark magic put on her has nothing to do with her starting the war. That is the problem. Everything you listed happens after Edelgard is punished for doing nothing wrong and everything right. Because Thales didn’t give a shit that she started a war, he gave a shit because she stood up against him - the war was literally no factor at all in him poofing Lobotogard into existence. If fuckin’ anything, he’d be upset that Edelgard didn’t keep their allyship with each other up for the war. So, another narratively good decision that Edelgard would be wrongly punished for doing. Another thing that makes her a ~victim of the cruel world around her~ and not something that resulted because she killed thousands through her war of conquest.

So to say it again: nothing was given regarding Edelgard facing consequences. Everything that was done to her in Hopes that could be considered bad isn’t “wow, she sure got her comeuppance for doing all of those shitty things!” it’s “wow, she sure got fucked for like, no reason, poor her!” Unlike in 3H, where for all the game still doesn’t really give her the flack she earns it still shows her facing consequences by killing her directly due to her starting the war, Hopes does everything in its power to have the player ignore the fact that she started a war in favor of making sure she comes off as “nicely” as possible. 

So, no, when I say Edelgard “wasn’t punished,” I don’t literally mean that literally nothing bad ever happens to Edelgard - I mean that none of that punishment came from her worryingly large amount of fucked up shit she did to the people of Fodlan, but the game trying its damnedest to make her as pitiable as possible. If me pointing that out is me “hating Edelgard” in your eyes, welp, nothin’ I can do for ya then

[theviolenttomboy]

How would you like Pokespe to handle PLA?

I did say it a lot before, and I still stand by it: a PokeSpe PLA adaption has to be Doomed by Canon and end in tragedy.

So the following is a rough outline of a theoretical fanfic I’d write if I had the time/energy/motivation to do so (full disclosure, I don’t have any of those three things):

The event that led to Arceus officially noping out of Hisui was also what caused the destruction of the Celestica civilization; there was either a civil war or an invasion. Most of the people died and the survivors left. Some of the survivors ended up in Johto where they built the Sinjoh Ruins, in hopes that one day Arceus would return. They brought the Plates with them, but something caused the Plates to be scattered across Johto.

The Diamond and Pearl Clans eventually settled in and appropriated the Celestica culture without getting the full picture. They warred over their incorrect beliefs of Almighty Sinnoh, until Kamado and the Galaxy Team essentially forced them into a peace treaty. Tensions remained high, leading all three unable to work together when shit goes down.

Arceus never sent a human back in time. Ingo's still there and suffering because he fell in a rift (or maybe even through the Cave of Being).

We got Rei (representing emotion) and Akari (representing knowledge) (hey, the Rangers got to keep their canon names) paralleling their descendants, Diamond and Platinum. Unfortunately, in a cruel call-forward, Pearl's ancestor (representing willpower) isn't here, so the human spirit is incomplete, foreshadowing their future failure.

Most of the gameplay is dedicated to catching Pokemon, gathering resources, and throwing bags of food. That’d be tedious to go into detail in manga form and I’m assuming we’d work with less than 3 volumes of content. I’m kicking the frenzied Noble plot out entirely. The Plates also don’t factor in because they’re in Johto. Instead most of the time is dedicated to Akari exploring ruins with Volo while doing her fieldwork. She’s as hungry for knowledge as her descendant, and Volo has managed to convince her that if they find out the truth of Almighty Sinnoh, the Diamond and Pearl Clans will stop feuding and things will be more peaceful.

To mush the main game and post game plots into one, Volo's plan here is to create/find the Red Chain as to force Dialga and Palkia to fight, so that a space-time rift for Giratina to come through will be formed. He figures Giratina appearing will compel Arceus to come back to Hisui.

After some adventures and trials, Akari gets the Red Chain, only for Volo to knock her out, steal the Chain, and head up to the Temple of Sinnoh by himself.

The ensuing space-time distortions caused by the fight threaten to destroy all of Hisui. Some people nearby manage to get a glimpse of the battle, which gets them to building the Eterna Statue years later.

Rei and Akari try to battle Volo to get past him, but they’re not strong enough to beat him.

Dialga and Palkia break free of Volo’s control due to him having only one chain, but not before Giratina shows up. They all duke it out and kill each other, stopping the distortions...and Arceus still doesn't come down. Volo realizes despite everything he's done, all he’s suffered, it was all for naught. And his spirit breaks.

Shit, not even the bad guy gets out of having a bad ending here.

Cue epilogue, with everyone being miserable and traumatized. The Diamond and Pearl clans know about Dialga and Palkia now but they’re dead, Volo is wandering alone aimlessly, leaving things open ended enough for him to come back/have kids but it’s clear how broken he is, Akari is still shaken up by Volo’s betrayal, and Cyllene vows to be more proactive in protecting Hisui, which unfortunately leads to a cycle of abuse in her descendants that eventually ends in Cyrus’ myriad of issues.

The only things stopping this from being a full blown angst-fest (for the readers) is the knowledge that by present day, Arceus eventually did get its heart healed and the Creation Trio gets revived.

The Sinnoh Trio, in modern day, read all/most of this in old diaries/records that they find in the Berlitz personal library. Moon's there too.

[the-lightning-strikes-again]

If the S6 twist didn't happened, I'd like to think that Lance, Pidge and Hunk would talk about the first thing they'd do when they get back to Earth, forgetting that Allura and Lotor already returned. So the two are hearing "Carnivals", "Cakes" and all these different things to which it sparks curiosity in them to ask what those are!

Ah I can imagine Lotor trying to take notes as Allura just stares at them in confusion.

I wish they ended on a fun comedy relief note. What do you think would happen if the whole S6 twist didn't happen?

Hi, anon! Aww, that would have been cute to see the space elves interacting more with positive human culture, etc.

If the whole s6 twist didn't happen, I would have liked to see Lotor's "free quintessence for everyone" idea taken to its natural end. The chaos could have easily sustained the show to its contracted 78 episodes.

Per the s3 finale, VLD's entire conflict began with energy crises/limited resources and destructive quintessence rifts/creatures. And yet somehow this core baseline got completely forgotten. So, I think the show had the opportunity to take energy crises/rifts as the final arc for symmetry.

Before they ever entered the rift, at least Coran should have been concerned about what raw quintessence can do to a person. Maybe someone would have to cure quintessence madness or create armor against it? Maybe in a better character arc, Haggar/Honerva might have been instrumental in figuring that out, given her previous season development? (Theoretically, they could have even had a quintessence-mad!Lotor without any of the colony plot at all, although I suppose that would still conflict with his previously stated immunity to the stuff.)

There should have been concern regarding the rift creatures who originally invaded Daibazaal, lurking in the rift. So, we could have had interdimensional creature/Stranger Things battles if the rift creatures reared their head again. Or oop, what would have happened if some escaped, even while the rift was supposedly turned off? Like, the rift creatures could have been more of a villain in later seasons. Maybe we would have seen the Sincline mecha and other mechas rise up to help stop them. 

We could have had more exploration of the quintessence field itself. What if other things or people had made it there? What if we could have learned more about the original comets? What if the field itself had some other weird stuff about it that would make it not the perfect energy-crisis answer everyone was hoping for?

And then from a more practical perspective, I feel that Lotor and Team Voltron were both very naïve to think that simply having access to unlimited quintessence would quell the suffering and colonization.

The fracturing of the empire should have been more front and center instead of squished as just an s7 side-note, with competing factions like the Fires of Purification battling to maintain control of the gate leading to the quintessence field. Whoever controls that gate still has the power to decide the fate of the universe, and I doubt people would just be excited to have only Lotor and the Paladins controlling it and handing out allotments.

The wars would have adjusted to hone in on that gate, with competing factions like the Fires of Purification probably attempting to build their own. Maybe Sendak would have even targeted Honerva as someone to build a gate for him.

Instead of just a paltry and strange band-aid of “democracy” on the empire, I think we also should have seen the Galra empire actively dismantling and freeing previously colonized planets, who would then perhaps ally with Voltron and a reformed Galra government to stop the Fires of Purification. The whole beginning conflict of VLD was to question Unsustainability, so it would have been interesting to explore what it means to reset the universe to what it should have been. Or what it could still be.

Within all of this, I think we could have had a lot of positive messages about trying to connect with others, respecting different cultures, and seeing people come together as a found family. That would have still supported the early-season message of Strength in Unity as well.

[transmalewife]

Alright, let's talk about attachment

I can’t find clear information on when exactly the non-attachment rule was added to the code. It was either soon before or soon after the great sith war. Either way, for the VAST majority of the existence of the Jedi, it wasn’t a thing. Jedi got married and had families for over 20000 years, then added the non-attachment rule, which ultimately led to their destruction. And before anyone tries to tell me I believe they deserved to be genocided, I don’t. I have never actually seen anyone say that, but I see people argue against it constantly, and imply anyone who doesn’t think the Jedi were perfect and blameless thinks that. I don’t think they deserved to die, I think they needed to change. And Yoda says that himself, many times. The Jedi weren’t prepared for the return of the sith, or the war. They had separated from the military 1000 years before, and the galaxy was in relative peace all this time, so the order’s role changed to one that worked very well with their rules. Detachment meant they could be impartial when overseeing political disagreements, lack of possessions meant they would be focused on the mission at hand and not prone to taking bribes, and distancing themselves from the general population meant they were more or less uniform, and could be trusted not to side with someone for personal reasons.

All of this falls apart once they become an army again. Impartiality is a flaw when they have to defend one side at all cost and not even allow themselves to consider compromise. Lack of possessions and attachment to people means they are prone to taking unnecessary risks, because they have nothing to lose, and do things like send 14 year olds into battle, thinking of the “greater good” over the safety of children. And the order being a monolith, with set rules and philosophy distinct from the rest of the population meant the Jedi trusted Dooku long after they should have stopped, because he used to be a Jedi after all, surely he still follows the code.

Now, I am not saying non-attachment is always bad, I think it served a very specific purpose in the order, and to some extent worked for many years. However.

Humans are a social species. Human babies NEED physical contact and affection to develop physically. Children need a stable, strong, and supportive relationship to their caregiver to properly develop psychologically. And after last year I don’t think anyone will argue that adults don't need connection with other people just as much. And not just shallow interactions, but open affection and love. Love of any kind, because claiming that the Jedi only forbid romantic love is just untrue. I think people tend to forget that "Compassion, which I would define as unconditional love, is essential to a Jedi's life. So you might say, that we are encouraged to love." isn’t the actual doctrine, it’s a literal pick up line that Anakin uses on Padme.

Ahsoka and Obi-Wan both get criticized by other Jedi for their entirely platonic attachment to Anakin, and vice versa. Now, humans are the most common species in the galaxy, and in the Jedi order. Many other species are near-human, so it’s safe to assume at least some, if not most of them also need that companionship and affection to develop and live happy and stable lives. I do believe that non-attachment is a valid philosophy and chosen path in life if done carefully and within reason, I just don’t think we have a single major character that actually applies to. And chosen is an important word here. Jedi don’t get much of a choice. I’m not trying to start the baby-stealing debate here. I hear the argument of ‘force sensitives are dangerous if left untrained, and said training should start as early as possible’. I think finding a way to deal with that problem was an insanely complicated decision, and taking children into the temple as young as possible is not a bad solution. I don’t entirely agree with not letting them see their families later, (especially since in legends Obi-Wan was allowed to visit his family, which implies Anakin couldn’t go free his mother specifically because he was already too attached), but the idea is sound. I do also understand that no one is forcing Jedi to stay in the order and they can leave for whatever reason at any time. But that isn’t exactly a free choice either. Leaving the order means leaving the only home you remember, the only people you know to make your own way in the galaxy, and staying with those people means you can never fully love them. It’s a difficult solution to a complicated question, and for the most part, it worked (not always, and not exactly as intended, but I’ll come back to that.) Children grew up in the order, were trained to control themselves and the force, and became Jedi who were impartial, patient, and balanced. But everything falls apart when you introduce someone who wasn’t raised in the temple.

In The Rising Force, 13 year old Obi-Wan had barely been off Coruscant in his life. He describes himself as sheltered and unaware of all the pain in the galaxy, and says it was done on purpose, so younglings wouldn’t have to face the dark side before they were ready for it. But Anakin had seen nothing but darkness, pain and injustice before he joined the order. He was severely traumatized, and while the temple might have had some ways of dealing with trauma and PTSD in adults, they had no experience in treating the same in a child, because their children were kept safe and protected. The idea of letting go of your pain and fear only works if you know you have a safe place to come back to, if you’ve spent the first decade or so of your life in the most protected place in the galaxy. Anakin spent the first decade of his life as a slave. He couldn’t let go of his fear, because fear was what kept him alive. Fear is not irrational if you are constantly in danger, it’s what protects you, keeps you aware of the limits you can push before you get punished. And that mindset doesn’t fade just because you’re out of that situation, especially if your only family, the closest person to you, is still facing that danger every day.

I’ve seen people use every excuse possible to explain why Anakin didn’t see his mother again to avoid blaming the council, including, and I shit you not, “He just didn’t have her comm number”. But to me that seems disingenuous, when we see in his first meeting with the council that they already consider him too attached. It's one of the main reasons they don’t want him to be trained, so it seems logical that they wouldn’t allow him to see her once he became a padawan. I also want to mention that what Yoda says, “Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.” Is just… blatant catastrophizing. Right? Like we can all see that the escalation is not rational there at all. Maybe it could apply to something else, but not to a child who just left his mother for the first time in his life and went from a tiny dustball in the middle of nowhere to the most populated planet in the galaxy, and is now being tested by a bunch of old people with the power to decide his future. Obviously he’s afraid, and obviously he’s not dealing with it the way Jedi younglings do. That, in and of itself doesn't doom him to fall. Also what Yoda misses there is that suffering leads to fear. This is a closed loop, and one that has defined Anakin’s entire childhood.

Let’s come back to how the system doesn’t always work. The way I see it, most of the characters we see are attached. Obi-Wan is considered one of the greatest Jedi of his time. Windu describes him as “our most cunning and insightful Master—and our most tenacious”. And yet, he was not insightful enough to look past his love for Anakin, his attachment, and see how close to falling he was. Ahsoka was so attached to Anakin she refused to listen to Maul on Mandalore, refused to even consider the posibility he could fall. She was arguably the person with the best shot at preventing the empire forming at that point, and she loved anakin so much she doomed him and the entire galaxy. Aayla admitted to thinking of Quinlan as her father, and also, apparently in legends had a long relationship with Kit. Even Mace didn’t follow the code when he decided to kill Palpatine, which directly led to his death and the empire. He also indirectly caused the war to start. According to wookiepedia “Windu viewed Dooku as the shatterpoint of the entire Separatist movement, which meant striking Dooku down would theoretically end the imminent clone war before it even began. However, Windu's prior attachments to Dooku clouded his judgment.” I’m not even going to mention Kanan and Ezra, who are obviously family.

So basically everyone is attached and lying about it. How has no one thought that maybe this isn’t the healthiest way to live and tried to change the code? Well, I have a theory, and it’s Yoda. He was 900 years old when he died, and was on the council for the vast majority of his life. I can’t find when exactly he became grand master, but it’s safe to assume he held some degree of power over the entire order for most of a millennium. At the end of TPM he tells Obi-Wan “Confer on you the level of Jedi knight, the council does. But agree with your taking this boy as your padawan learner, I do not.” Then he reverses that decision by himself. So either he has the power to veto the council’s word, or who gets trained is entirely up to him. Either way, not great, considering his lifespan is so much longer than most Jedi, and therefore his approach to life is vastly different. Humans need love and closeness to live. However, while we don’t know much about Yoda’s species, it probably isn’t a social one. You could count all the characters of this species on two (human) hands, and Yoda lived in complete isolation for 20 years on Dagobah, and only went a little bit insane. They are naturally rare, and therefore probably lead solitary lives in nature. Moreover, Yoda outlived every master who trained him, and almost every padawan he trained himself, (there’s a great post about that here) so even if he wasn’t naturally predisposed to non-attachment, he would have had to learn it to deal with all the loss he had to live through over the years.

A lot of people think that Anakin fell because he had attachments, which is not true. He fell because of how his attachments played out and/or ended. The most obvious example being Palpatine, who used Anakin’s trust and friendship to groom him for over a decade and actively undermine Anakin’s trust towards anyone else, especially the order. (more on that here). Obi-Wan refused to take on the role of a father figure that Anakin tried to shove him into, so he turned to someone who did accept it. It’s not Anakin’s fault that it turned out to be the worst person alive, nor can we expect him to notice when he’s known Palpatine since he was a child. Another failure of jedi non-attachment, because a loving parent or guardian would not let their child be used as a bargaining chip when the most powerful politician in the galaxy blackmailed the order into allowing him to meet Anakin regularly, but a distant teacher and detached knight thinking of the greater good might. The other attachments Anakin had were taken from him (Shmi and Ahsoka, the last orchestrated by Palpatine who was fully ready to give her the death penalty to make Anakin more unstable), or he was forced to lie and hide them, compromising his vows as a Jedi (Padme) or refused to choose Anakin over the order/their principles (Obi-Wan, and again Ahsoka, and to some extent Padme, but he’d already fallen then). All these people had every right to make the choices they made, but it wasn’t the act of loving them that made Anakin turn to the dark side, it was how those attachments played out.

I think everyone agrees that Yoda is as detached as a Jedi should, if not can, be, and that didn’t prevent Dooku from falling. We see that explored in more detail with Barriss and Luminara. Luminara is detached and distant, she’s fond of Barriss, but their relationship is not familial in the slightest, and she repeatedly shows her willingness to put the greater good and the mission before Barriss’ safety and even life. And yet Barriss still falls. A complex combination of events and choices caused each of those characters to fall, not the simple presence or absence of attachment.

And lastly, just as attachment can make you unstable if your relationship with that person is unstable, it can also make you stronger. There is a reason Anakin and Obi-Wan were the face of the army. Not only did their obvious attachment (the strongest between two jedi we are shown) make them more relatable to the public, but they, when working as a team, are shown repeatedly to be more or less undefeatable. They spend half of aotc flinging themselves off great heights because they know the other will be there to catch them. They know from years of experience that they have backup and they know each other well enough (or force bond communicate) that they can trust the other will be where he needs to be to help/save them. Contrast that to how Windu and Palpatine fight in rots once the window breaks- very carefully, clearly holding back to keep themselves safe. Neither of them has backup until Anakin arrives, but until the last second they can't be sure which one he will choose. Anakin and Obi-Wan fight the same way on Mustafar, especially when balancing on that thin bridge. No acrobatics, swinging arms to keep balance, keeping their distance, being almost uncharacteristically careful compared to how they treated heights in aotc, in tcw, and on the invisible hand in rots, because they both know the other won't catch them if they fall this time.