#from a literary standpoint

[mrs-jamesbbarnes]

Alright I’m watching Alaric and Jo’s wedding episode and just thinking about HOW EASY it would have been to end the show on this episode. Lily could have succeeded in her suicide attempt the episode before (or been dramatically killed some other way), Kai and the crazies could have stayed trapped, Caroline could have given in and been happy with Stefan, Jo and Ric could’ve lived happily ever after, Damon could’ve taken the cure and been with Elena forever. But instead we got two more miserable seasons of weird storylines and everyone jumping through hoops to get an ending that made sense.

[cemeterything]

hi! do you have any advice/ tips on reading Hamlet/ Shakespeare on your own? I read some in highschool, but it was always with the aid of the teacher and course material. now im older and wanna read Hamlet, but i find it sorta daunting with the old English, heavily symbolism etc. etc. feels like im not completely understanding what im reading. basically, how do you go about reading and annotating Shakespeare? ty in advance!

hmm. well a lot of copies come with footnote annotations that help to translate some of the more unfamiliar words, phrases and things that might not make sense without context that the original audience would have been familiar with but have since been lost, so try to get your hands on one of those if you can. sparknotes also has a very good translation (just search online "sparknotes hamlet translation") into more contemporary english + annotations which can be helpful to bridge the gaps in your understanding of the original text (and there's no shame at all in that; i didn't understand a lot of the original text without guidance the first time i read it). my only other tip is to use a pencil to make any annotations directly onto the text itself if you have a physical copy, so that way if your interpretations change or become more complex as your understanding grows you can easily edit them and don't have to worry about "ruining" the pages with crossings-out or corrections. it can really help you to feel comfortable expressing your thoughts, because you don't have to worry about making mistakes.

[galaxythedragonshifter]

Hvitur deserved better like

I want him to be brought back to life idc how Tui does it. Either that or a Winglet I NEED to know more about this IceWing you have NO idea

He got like

Three or four pages, and then brutally killed by Burn

Also the fact that there's BARELY ANY content on this dragon makes me sad

I've consumed every bit of content I can find

And I'm still not satisfied.

Someone please recommend me something I'm desperate-

[distant-velleity]

im never gonna be normal again

i love when horror blurs the line with physical desire i love when body horror has the same effect as physical intimacy i love when “desire” and “fear” are one and the same i love when being close to someone has the same weight as a secret you’d take to your grave. basically i love when horror fiction is an allegory for intimacy and the vulnerability that comes with it

[butchdykekondraki]

every few days ill open my asks and its like 5 different people going "i tried to read the bible because of you and it was boring how do you find this enjoyable" and it always makes me giggle . my secret is that I Dont . as to why i only read it every couple months ^_^

[asukiess]

was reflecting on why I like melancholy endings so much and then remembered that my fav childhood book was charlotte's web

[throwawaydracula-blog]

So here’s an intriguing thing: Bram Stoker was a Protestant, but we have yet another instance (only a few entries after the presumably Orthodox captain) of someone invoking the saints who is wholly sympathetic.  And not only that, the saints Sister Agatha is invoking make sense—calling on Mary and Joseph to help a young man return to the woman he intends to marry is very appropriate given that they’re the two most prominent saints who form a kind of power couple.  Stoker seems to have put a little thought into this.  Remembering that Gothic fiction as a whole tended to be overtly hostile to Catholicism, and especially the veneration of saints and icons, it’s just kind of interesting. I have more thoughts in this vein but I think I’ll save them for when our favorite Dutch polymath shows up and starts with his antics.

[thefiresofpompeii]

REAL AUTISMGIRL HOURS. REAL ‘OVERBEARING MOTHER RAISED ME COMPLETELY ISOLATED FROM THE WAY THE WORLD WORKS AND I AM NOW UNFIT FOR HUMAN SOCIETY AND WOMANHOOD’ HOURS. PAIN AND SUFFERING. #NORMAL

[sisterdragonwithfeathers]

I think I just read my first tragedy.

It was good.

I do want to fistfight the devil though.

[jojotier]

I think alls well is shaping up to be my favorite shakespeare play gkskkf

[whiskingskin]

Something I love dearly is complaining about the things I love dearly. Fallout I'm talking to u

[prettyboykatsuki]

more than i even like self inserts i love the power of the second person perspective. like from a literary standpoint, the discomfort of you is so deeply appealing to me. it forces the reader to engage with a story in a way it is not required from other perspectives. i like it literature and in video games and in art. i like when a story challenges my concept of self and tells me: forget everything. this is a story about you (disambiguation)

[celestialscreeches]

Thought police? No no no. Nobody's gonna stop you from thinking your weird illegal thoughts, they'll instead sell you quick fixes and pretty shiny things because at the end of the day it's all about mass marketing.

[sneezypeasy]

Why I Deliberately Avoided the "Colonizer" Argument in my Zutara Thesis - and Why I'll Continue to Avoid it Forever

This is a question that occasionally comes up under my Zutara video essay, because somehow in 2 hours worth of content I still didn't manage to address everything (lol.) But this argument specifically is one I made a point of avoiding entirely, and there are some slightly complicated reasons behind that. I figure I'll write them all out here.

From a surface-level perspective, Zuko's whole arc, his raison d'etre, is to be a de-colonizer. Zuko's redemption arc is kinda all about being a de-colonizer, and his redemption arc is probably like the most talked about plot point of ATLA, so from a basic media literacy standpoint, the whole argument is unsound in the first place, and on that basis alone I find it childish to even entertain as an argument worth engaging with, to be honest.

(At least one person in my comments pointed out that if any ship's "political implications" are problematic in some way, it really ought to be Maiko, as Mai herself is never shown or suggested to be a strong candidate for being a de-colonizing co-ruler alongside Zuko. If anything her attitudes towards lording over servants/underlings would make her… a less than suitable choice for this role, but I digress.)

But the reason I avoided rebutting this particular argument in my video goes deeper than that. From what I've observed of fandom discourse, I find that the colonizer argument is usually an attempt to smear the ship as "problematic" - i.e., this ship is an immoral dynamic, which would make it problematic to depict as canon (and by extension, if you ship it regardless, you're probably problematic yourself.)

And here is where I end up taking a stand that differentiates me from the more authoritarian sectors of fandom.

I'm not here to be the fandom morality police. When it comes to lit crit, I'm really just here to talk about good vs. bad writing. (And when I say "good", I mean structurally sound, thematically cohesive, etc; works that are well-written - I don't mean works that are morally virtuous. More on this in a minute.) So the whole colonizer angle isn't something I'm interested in discussing, for the same reason that I actually avoided discussing Katara "mothering" Aang or the "problematic" aspects of the Kataang ship (such as how he kissed her twice without her consent). My whole entire sections on "Kataang bad" or "Maiko bad" in my 2 hour video was specifically, "how are they written in a way that did a disservice to the story", and "how making them false leads would have created valuable meaning". I deliberately avoided making an argument that consisted purely of, "here's how Kataang/Maiko toxic and Zutara wholesome, hence Zutara superiority, the end".

Why am I not willing to be the fandom morality police? Two reasons:

I don't really have a refined take on these subjects anyway. Unless a piece of literature or art happens to touch on a particular issue that resonates with me personally, the moral value of art is something that doesn't usually spark my interest, so I rarely have much to say on it to begin with. On the whole "colonizer ship" subject specifically, other people who have more passion and knowledge than me on the topic can (and have) put their arguments into words far better than I ever could. I'm more than happy to defer to their take(s), because honestly, they can do these subjects justice in a way I can't. Passing the mic over to someone else is the most responsible thing I can do here, lol. But more importantly:

I reject the conflation of literary merit with moral virtue. It is my opinion that a good story well-told is not always, and does not have to be, a story free from moral vices/questionable themes. In my opinion, there are good problematic stories and bad "pure" stories and literally everything in between. To go one step further, I believe that there are ways that a romance can come off "icky", and then there are ways that it might actually be bad for the story, and meming/shitposting aside, the fact that these two things don't always neatly align is not only a truth I recognise about art but also one of those truths that makes art incredibly interesting to me! So on the one hand, I don't think it is either fair or accurate to conflate literary "goodness" with moral "goodness". On a more serious note, I not only find this type of conflation unfair/inaccurate, I also find it potentially dangerous - and this is why I am really critical of this mindset beyond just disagreeing with it factually. What I see is that people who espouse this rhetoric tend to encourage (or even personally engage in) wilful blindness one way or the other, because ultimately, viewing art through these lens ends up boxing all art into either "morally permissible" or "morally impermissible" categories, and shames anyone enjoying art in the "morally impermissible" box. Unfortunately, I see a lot of people responding to this by A) making excuses for art that they guiltily love despite its problematic elements and/or B) denying the value of any art that they are unable to defend as free from moral wickedness.

Now, I'm not saying that media shouldn't be critiqued on its moral virtue. I actually think morally critiquing art has its place, and assuming it's being done in good faith, it absolutely should be done, and probably even more often than it is now.

Because here's the truth: Sometimes, a story can be really good. Sometimes, you can have a genuinely amazing story with well developed characters and powerful themes that resonate deeply with anyone who reads it. Sometimes, a story can be all of these things - and still be problematic.*

(Or, sometimes a story can be all of those things, and still be written by a problematic author.)

That's why I say, when people conflate moral art with good art, they become blind to the possibility that the art they like being potentially immoral (or vice versa). If only "bad art" is immoral, how can the art that tells the story hitting all the right beats and with perfect rhythm and emotional depth, be ever problematic?

(And how can the art I love, be ever problematic?)

This is why I reject the idea that literary merit = moral virtue (or vice versa) - because I do care about holding art accountable. Even the art that is "good art". Actually, especially the art that is "good art". Especially the art that is well loved and respected and appreciated. The failure to distinguish literary critique from moral critique bothers me on a personal level because I think that conflating the two results in the detriment of both - the latter being the most concerning to me, actually.

So while I respect the inherent value of moral criticism, I'm really not a fan of any argument that presents moral criticism as equivalent to literary criticism, and I will call that out when I see it. And from what I've observed, a lot of the "but Zutara is a colonizer ship" tries to do exactly that, which is why I find it a dishonest and frankly harmful media analysis framework to begin with.

But even when it is done in good faith, moral criticism of art is also just something I personally am neither interested nor good at talking about, and I prefer to talk about the things that I am interested and good at talking about.

(And some people are genuinely good at tackling the moral side of things! I mean, I for one really enjoyed Lindsay Ellis's take on Rent contextualising it within the broader political landscape at the time to show how it's not the progressive queer story it might otherwise appear to be. Moral critique has value, and has its place, and there are definitely circumstances where it can lead to societal progress. Just because I'm not personally interested in addressing it doesn't mean nobody else can do it let alone that nobody else should do it, but also, just because it can and should be done, doesn't mean that it's the only "one true way" to approach lit crit by anyone ever. You know, sometimes... two things… can be true… at once?)

Anyway, if anyone reading this far has recognised that this is basically a variant of the proship vs. antiship debate, you're right, it is. And on that note, I'm just going to leave some links here. I've said about as much as I'm willing/able to say on this subject, but in case anyone is interested in delving deeper into the philosophy behind my convictions, including why I believe leftist authoritarian rhetoric is harmful, and why the whole "but it would be problematic in real life" is an anti-ship argument that doesn't always hold up to scrutiny, I highly recommend these posts/threads:

In general this blog is pretty solid; I agree with almost all of their takes - though they focus more specifically on fanfic/fanart than mainstream media, and I think quite a lot of their arguments are at least somewhat appropriate to extrapolate to mainstream media as well.

I also strongly recommend Bob Altemeyer's book "The Authoritarians" which the author, a verified giga chad, actually made free to download as a pdf, here. His work focuses primarily on right-wing authoritarians, but a lot of his research and conclusions are, you guessed it, applicable to left-wing authoritarians also.

And if you're an anti yourself, welp, you won't find support from me here. This is not an anti-ship safe space, sorrynotsorry 👆

In conclusion, honestly any "but Zutara is problematic" argument is one I'm likely to consider unsound to begin with, let alone the "Zutara is a colonizer ship" argument - but even if it wasn't, it's not something I'm interested in discussing, even if I recognise there are contexts where these discussions have value. I resent the idea that just because I have refined opinions on one aspect of a discussion means I must have (and be willing to preach) refined opinions on all aspects of said discussion. (I don't mean to sound reproachful here - actually the vast majority of the comments I get on my video/tumblr are really sweet and respectful, but I do get a handful of silly comments here and there and I'm at the point where I do feel like this is something worth saying.) Anyway, I'm quite happy to defer to other analysts who have the passion and knowledge to give complicated topics the justice they deserve. All I request is that care is taken not to conflate literary criticism with moral criticism to the detriment of both - and I think it's important to acknowledge when that is indeed happening. And respectfully, don't expect me to give my own take on the matter when other people are already willing and able to put their thoughts into words so much better than me. Peace ✌

*P.S. This works for real life too, by the way. There are people out there who are genuinely not only charming and likeable, but also generous, charitable and warm to the vast majority of the people they know. They may also be amazing at their work, and if they have a job that involves saving lives like firefighting or surgery or w.e, they may even be the reason dozens of people are still alive today. They may honestly do a lot of things you'd have to concede are "good" deeds.

They may be all of these things, and still be someone's abuser. 🙃

Two things can be true at once. It's important never to forget that.

[somerandomdudelmao]

hi cass!! i just wanted to tell you just how much I've admired your AU from both literary and artistic standpoints, and how it's been one of the only things keeping me motivated to write and draw lately. so, THANK YOU for being such an amazing artist and storyteller and having such a genuinely entertaining, gorgeous, and beautifully intricate storyline to show and tell and yet asking for nothing in return :) its so inspiring, and I hope you have an amazing day/night

(and and and, here's a little turtle casey doodle because he's been rotating rent-free in my mind and I love your design so so so much)

Hhhhhh thank you so much hjrrrhjiytegv

[hellfire-fist]

ZoLu as a ship, is literal perfection from a literary standpoint, it makes me feel like an elitist rooting for them since day one.