#good faith approaches only even if you disagree with me | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

transmutationisms · 1 year

Note

serious question but do you personally believe there is a way to approach psychiatry in a way that uplifts and upholds patient autonomy and wellness or is the entire trade essentially fucked haha. Btw this is an ask coming from a 3rd year med student—with a background of severe mental illness—who is considering a residency in psychiatry after receiving life-saving care in high school pertaining to said conditions. (I have peers who have been involuntarily hospitalized and treated horribly in psych wards, with approaches i patently disagree with, but was lucky not to experience. I don’t like modern american medicine’s approach to mental illness; “throw pills” at it to “make it go away” ie. a problem of overprescribing, inadequate and non-holistic approach to mental health, and i feel a lot of that can be attributed to the capitalistic framework. I also def agree with you that so much of what can be considered normal human responses to traumatic events/normal human suffering can be unnecessarily pathologized—a great example being the whole “chemical imbalances in the brain is the ONLY reason why im like this” argument that ive unfortunately fallen hard for when i was younger and am still currently dismantling within myself…and like dont even get me started on this field’s history of demonizing POC, women, LGBT, etc). Like i deeply love my psych rotations so far, and i utterly feel in my gut that this is the manner in which i would like to help people—a lot of whom are just like me—but im wondering if there is a way to reconcile these aspects in a way that one can feel morally okay participating within such an imperfect system, in ur opinion… ngghhhhhh i just want to be a good doctor to my patients…

(ps i love all ur writing and analysis on succession!! big fan mwah <333)

i don't mean to sound unduly pissy at you, specifically, but i do have to say: every single time i've talked about antipsych or broader criticism of medicine on this website, i immediately get a wave of responses like this, from doctors/nurses/psychs/students of the above, asking me to, like, reassure them that they're not doing something immoral or un-communist or whatever by having or pursuing these jobs. and it's honestly frustrating. why is it that these conversations get re-framed around this particular line of inquiry and medical ego-soothing? why is it that when i say "the medical encounter is not structured to protect patient autonomy or well-being," so many people hear something more along the lines of "doctors are mean and i wish they were nicer"? why is it that it's impossible to discuss the philosophical and structural violence of academic and clinical medicine without it becoming a referendum on the individual morality of doctors?

i'm choosing to read you in good faith because i think it's possible to re-re-frame this line of questioning to demonstrate to you the sorts of critiques and inquiries i find more interesting and more conducive to patient autonomy and liberation. so, let me pick apart a few lines of this ask.

"is the entire trade essentially fucked?"

if you're thinking of trying to 'reform' the project of medical psychology within existing infrastructures and institutions, then yeah, it's fucked. if you're still assuming that affective distress can only be 'treated' within this medical apparatus (despite, again, no psychiatric dx satisfying any pathologist's understanding of a 'disease' ie an aberration from 'normal' physiological functioning) then you're not challenging the things that actually make psychiatry violent. you're simply fantasising about making the violence nicer.

"I don’t like modern american medicine’s approach to mental illness; “throw pills” at it to “make it go away” ie. a problem of overprescribing, inadequate and non-holistic approach to mental health, and i feel a lot of that can be attributed to the capitalistic framework."

i hate when i talk about psychotropic drugs being marketed to patients using lies like the chemical imbalance myth, and then pushed on patients—including through outright force—by psychiatrists, and the discussion gets re-framed as one about 'overprescribing'. my problem is not with people taking drugs. i am, in fact, so pro-drugs that i think even the ones administered in a clinical setting sometimes have value. my issue is with, again, the provision of misleading or outright false information, the use of force and coercion to put patients on such drugs in order to force social conformity and employability, and the general model of medicine and medical psychology that assumes patients ought to be passive recipients of medical enlightenment rather than active participants in their own treatment who are given the agency to decide when and how to engage with any form of curative or meliorative intervention.

'holistic' medicine and psychiatry do not solve this problem! they are not a paradigm shift because they continue to locate expertise and epistemological authority with the credentialed physician, and to position patients as too sick, stupid, or helpless to do anything but receive and comply with the medical interventions. there are certainly psychotropic drugs that are demonstrably more harmful than others (antipsychotics, for example), and some that are demonstrably prescribed to patients who do not benefit from them and are even harmed by them. conversely, there are certainly forms of intervention besides pharmaceuticals that people may find helpful. but my general critique here is aimed less at haggling over specific methods of intervention, and more at the ideological and philosophical tenets of medicine that cause any interventions to be imposed by force or coercion on patients, then framed as being 'for their own good'. were suffering people given the information and autonomy to actually choose whether and how to engage in any kind of intervention, some might still choose drugs! my position here is not one of moralising drugs, but making the act of taking them one that is freely chosen and available as an option without relying on physician determination of a patient's interests over their own assessment of their needs and wants.

"so much of what can be considered normal human responses to traumatic events/normal human suffering can be unnecessarily pathologized"

true, but don't misunderstand me as saying that drugs or any other form of intervention should be forcibly withheld from those who do want them and are made fully aware of what risks and harms seeking them could entail. again, this would still be an authoritarian model; my critique is aimed at increasing patient autonomy, not at creating equally authoritarian and empowered doctors who just have slightly different treatment philosophies.

"dont even get me started on this field’s history of demonizing POC, women, LGBT, etc"

ok, framing this as "demonisation" tells me that you're not understanding that, again, this is a systemic and structural critique. it is certainly true that a great many doctors currently are, and have historically have been, outright racist, trans/misogynist, ableist, and so on. framing this as a problem of a well-intentioned discipline being corrupted by some assholes is getting it backwards. medicine attracts prejudiced people, not to mention strengthens and promotes these prejudices in its entire training and practice infrastructures, because of its underlying philosophical orientation toward enforcing 'normality' as defined by 18th-century statistics and 19th-century human sciences that explicitly place white, cis, able-bodied european men as the normal ideal that everyone else is inferior to or failing to live up to. doctors who really nicely tell you that you're too fat are still using bmi charts that come from the statistical anthropometry of adolphe quételet and the flawed actuarial calculations of metlife insurance. doctors who really nicely deny you access to transition surgery are still operating under a paradigm that gives the practitioner authority over expressions and embodiments of gender. the issue isn't 'demonisation', it's that medicine and psychiatry explicitly attempt to render judgments about who and what is 'normal' and therefore socially 'healthy', and enforce those standards on patients. this is not a promotion of patient well-being, but of social conformity.

"i deeply love my psych rotations so far, and i utterly feel in my gut that this is the manner in which i would like to help people"

let me ask you a few questions. you say that you like your psych rotations... but how do your patients feel about them? is their autonomy protected? are they in treatment by free choice, and free to leave any time they wish? are they treated as human beings with full self-determination? if you witnessed a situation in which a patient was coerced or forced into a certain treatment, or in which you were not sure whether they were consenting with full knowledge or freedom, would you feel empowered to intervene? or would doing so threaten your career by exposing you to anger and retaliation from your higher-ups? what higher-ups will you be exposed to as a resident, and then as a practicing physician? could you practice in a way that committed fully, 100%, to patient autonomy if you were working at someone else's practice, or in a hospital or clinic? could you, according to current medical guidelines, even if you had your own practice?

when you say "this is the manner in which i would like to help people", what do you mean by "this"? can you define your philosophy of treatment, and the relationship and power dynamic you want to have with any future patients? is it one in which you hold authority over them and see yourself as determining what's in their 'best interests', even over their own expressed wishes? have you connected with patient advocates, psych survivors (other than your friends), and radical psychiatrists and anti-psychiatrists who may espouse heterodox treatment philosophies that you could consider? do you think such philosophies are sufficient for protecting patient autonomy and well-being, or are they still models that position the physician's judgment and authority over that of the patient?

"im wondering if there is a way to reconcile these aspects in a way that one can feel morally okay participating within such an imperfect system"

and here is the crux of the problem with this entire ask. you are wondering how to sleep at night, if you are participating in a career you find morally distasteful. where, though, do your patients enter into that equation? do you worry about how they sleep at night, after having interacted with a system of social violence that may very well have traumatised them under the guise of providing help? why does your own guilty conscience worry you more than violations of your patients' bodies, minds, and basic self-determination?

i can't tell you whether your career path is morally acceptable to you. i don't think this type of guilt or self-flagellation is fruitful and i don't think it helps protect patients. i don't, frankly, have a handy roadmap sitting around for creating a new system of medicine and health care that rests on patient autonomy. affective distress is real, and is not something we should have to bear alone or with the risk of having violence inflicted upon us. what you need to ask yourself is: how does the medical model and establishment serve people experiencing such distress? how does it perpetuate violence against them? and how do you see yourself countering, or perpetuating, such violence as someone operating within this discipline? what would it mean to be a 'good' actor within a violent system, if you do indeed believe that such a thing is ontologically possible?

#sorry for LONG ASS POST #psychiatry

714 notes · View notes

myfandomrealitea · 4 months

Note

I really wanted to ask you about this:

Do you have any advice of how to develop critical thinking and media literacy?

There are many, many ways you can practice critical thinking, evaluation and media literacy. At its most basic, you can access student resources for lower levels of education like earlier high school years and look at the examples and guidance given there. Rehashing this will often give you a good foundation to build off of and apply.

One of the main aspects of critical thinking involves discerning what is fact and what is opinion. A good portion of media analytics is opinion. What is 'bad' by one person's standards is 'sub-par' or even 'great' by another's. Similarly, the majority of fandom space is opinion-based. The main pitfall of fandom spaces is that everyone wants their opinion to be taken as fact, which is where critical thinking and even basic communication begin to fall away.

"I'm right and you're wrong" and "this is the way it should be, if you do it or think differently, you're wrong" are common roadblocks people run into when engaging with things like media analysis and even basic fandom activities like fanfiction.

'Mischaracterisation' is fanfiction is one popular topic, especially here on Tumblr. What people often fail to recognize is the true creative depth of fanfiction and using someone else's pre-existing characters. Characters as they are in the source material may not make the choices or behave in the ways necessary to activate or validate certain plot material or author intentions in fanfiction. Which is, inherently, one of the main points of fanfiction. Exploring the alternate.

While you might immediately recoil and say "he'd never do that!" you then have to sit back and recognise that that's exactly the point. That this iteration of that character is not meant to directly reflect the source material. Its a re-imagining, a re-interpretation. That doesn't mean its bad. Its simply different.

'Mischaracterisation' is only actually applicable in fandom spaces when someone is trying to insist as a blanket fact that a character would do something or behave in a way that blatantly contradicts their canon behavior, opinions, morals and perspective or deliberately interpreting an action in biased bad faith. It is not actually applicable to fanfiction where creative liberty dictates you can do whatever the fuck you want with a character because you're not trying to claim it as part of the source content.

Questions To Ask Yourself

Am I reacting to [media] emotionally instead of rationally? Is my emotional response to [media] blinding me to the rational or critical approach(es)?

Am I allowing my expectations to get in the way of me understanding [media] fully? Am I forming a biased negative opinion of [media] because it isn't meeting my expectations?

Even if I disagree with [media], do I actually understand it? Can I recognise the reasoning behind choices made or actions even if I don't agree with them?

Am I searching too hard to hidden meaning or purpose in absolutely everything? Can I recognise what is simply passive information/detail and what is active information/detail? (E.g; English tutors saying a character's curtains are blue because they're depressed when throughout the literature its passively reinforced that blue is the character's favorite color.)

Even though I disagree with the statement or opinion shown, is it necessary to argue against it? Is there any benefit to making my counter-opinion known or is it simply a no-end argument? Am I just using arguing as a means of release/fulfilment? Am I treating this person poorly because of their opinion/statement?

Resources

Critical Thinking Exercises & Explanations #1 The Critical Thinking Activity Workbook Early Stage Critical Thinking Games Five Media Literacy Activities Six Media Literacy Ideas

#myfandomrealitea #sephiroth speaks #fandom #reality #fanfiction #fanfic #fan fic #literature #media literacy #critical thinking #education #fandom culture #activities #games #fiction #ao3

93 notes · View notes

tofixtheshadows · 14 days

Note

okay, if you're open to discussion, here's my view on why i think your mithrun take is somewhat reductive - prefacing this with yes, i understand you're talking about thematic positioning and not individual character motivations or goodness/badness, and no im not a particular stan of him or a kbms shipper or anything, if that helps you take this as discussion in good faith. (anon because i'll admit all the "ugh everyone who disagrees with me DOESNT KNOW HOW TO READ" does discourage from directly engaging!) yes, the elves are imperialist and yes the canaries are the primary arm we see of that in the story. yes, To A Point the violent manner that they, including mithrun, approach the problem of the dungeon is a reflection of this - it's not a coincidence that kui put this character ON this team. but when the discussion of it comes down to mithrun as the "representative" of this is where you lose me. in certain moments you could say he Acts as that, but it's not really the whole story of what his character is about or how he fits into the overall picture. multiple key moments are when mithrun notably acts AGAINST what the rest of the canaries would do, choosing to put (some amount of) trust in a tallman - we can have different reads on how much trust it is, but the effect definitely is that their approach is given a chance when normally the canaries do not allow that. the moment of asking kabru what he wants to do and following after laios, and Especially the moment of giving laios the go-ahead to try and defeat the demon, very much coming into conflict with flamela over it - in both of these scenes the other canaries represent the normal elven imperialist approach, and mithrun deviates from it. sure he thinks he regrets it a few minutes after the second one (because it did look like it failed, and because he's not exactly completely anti-imperialist either) - but in terms of what his character represents in the story, those moments are crucial to the ultimate "happy ending", and they're important TO the anti-imperialist theme that mithrun, the one with more personal reasons for being in the dungeon rather than simply being a canary & carrying out the empire's will because it's their job like the others, ISN'T acting on its side the whole time.

See this mentality is a little puzzling to me, because it treats my + others' speculation on the threat of imperialism in the story and Mithrun's role in it as if we created some sort of strict binary? As if he represents only this one singular thing, and doesn't share that role with anyone else, or that he needs to be condemned for it, etc. I don't think they're all passing around a "who represents imperialism and who subverts it" stick.

I mean, the story isn't very interested in that, is it? I believe in meeting a piece of media where it's at, which is why I'm not trying to hashtag cancel anyone over liking the elves or whatever. Dungeon Meshi is a story about ecosystems and food and hunger. It is very aware of the forces that create the situations around hunger, but ultimately it is mostly interested in food as the great leveler. We all need to eat and we all deserve to do so, even the people we might have considered enemies an hour ago.

The Canaries all get a seat at the literal and metaphorical table, even though, textually, they represent a world power whose monarch says, on page, that they are going to continue to monitor Melini and the people involved (this is a threat). Another story might not be forgiving of this. But Dungeon Meshi is not trying to be a political thriller, though as I've said, it is very aware of these things.

I, personally, am interested in the way Mithrun's story arc functions. If I talk about Mithrun, it's because he is a main character. Fleki, for example, is not a main character. Neither is Flamela. The Canaries are an antagonistic force (and not in a traditional "evil that needs to be defeated way", but antagonistic nonetheless!), but Mithrun is literally the representative of this force as the only one among them given a focus. And also because he is the captain of their squad. Even Flamela is only vice captain. Mithrun's motivations drive the Canaries as an entity in the story the same way his orders as their superior officer drive them as people.

So I am mostly interested in talking about violence, and to do that, I would be remiss to not touch on the circumstances that empower that violence. I cannot pretend like Mithrun does not arrive in the dungeon as the military officer of a first world power whose squad has the ability to arrest (and potentially execute) anyone they want, or that their success won't spell a de facto takeover of the region.

Does Mithrun care about that? No. I mean, I don't even think the other elves really care about that. It's kind of a moot point. They have a genuinely good reason for being in the dungeon and doing what they do, but they are still dangerous.

So when I touch on imperialism, which, again, is textually a part of the background of Dungeon Meshi, what I mean is: Mithrun's actions serve imperial interests regardless of his personal feelings, and they align with the threat of imperialism because oppression is inherently violent. That is where the comparison comes in.

If I were writing some sort of thesis on colonialism in Dunmeshi, I would say that the way Mithrun literally objectifies people- grabbing Kabru, ignoring his consent, using him as a projectile, brutalizing Thistle and Marcille- are physical manifestations of that inherent violence. The complacency of the other elves- their very punch clock villain natures- also serve the interests of imperialism. They're all in it together, they just disagree sometimes on the method. If Mithrun had gotten his way, the elves would have taken over the dungeon.

You are right that Mithrun comes into conflict with the other Canaries, and this is because Mithrun barely cares about sealing the dungeon. His one desire is his quest against the demon. This superficially aligns with the Canary's overall mission, but he will jeopardize that mission, the way he jeopardizes lives, for his personal goal. I don't really consider this an anti-imperialist metaphor even if it does eventually lead him to go against the Canaries' interests in trusting Laios. It's good he does that. It fits with the overall theme of disparate peoples uniting for the great leveler of hunger. Because, crucially, Mithrun agrees to it when Laios insists that he can defeat the demon. He isn't swayed by anything else. I do also think it's important that the one time he doesn't escalate to violence represents a moment of cooperation among these groups of people. We can say that Mithrun's self interest is better served by community than by state-sanctioned violence (and I do) but it doesn't cancel the rest of it out.

I'm also going to have to disagree with how much he trusts or respects Kabru. I would love if Mithrun did either, but the more I re-read the manga the less I'm sure of that. I think he sees Kabru as a useful tool. Again, I do not say this as a condemnation. I think Mithrun is nearly incapable of caring about anything else before the end of the story: I think his desire for the demon, his helpless hatred and self-immolating revenge, is so big that it blots out everything else for him. It's a tragedy. Mithrun is not entirely a rational actor, the way that someone in the grips of a debilitating addiction isn't.

You are free to disagree with me on this. I think I have an accurate reading on it, but I realize there is a lot of wiggle room.

My personal conclusion is that this

is a very long joke.

It sets you up to think that Kabru got through to him, that they are united against Laios, that they might have even achieved some level of camaraderie after their bottle episode.

Then Kabru and the Canaries show back up, and Kabru is ... handcuffed.

I didn't notice this the first time I read the manga! Kui does not draw any attention to the tiny magical cuffs, and the deliberately awkward way he holds his wrists for the next ten chapters didn't really hit for me until I had gone back over it. At this point I think it's supposed to tease how much Kabru is cooperating with the Canaries and how much of a threat he'll still poses to Laios.

It did not hit me until a second read that the punchline to this little arc is that Mithrun agreed to Kabru's idea because he had decided to use Kabru as bait. This is the equivalent of staking Kabru out to lure Laios and the others so that they'd let their guards down. Kabru looks very put out by it, he's still handcuffed, and he's got the surveillance state bird keeping him in line. This is not the situation of a guy who is trusted and respected by the person who put him in this situation. In hindsight, it almost makes Mithrun's agreement a joke in itself. "Oh, you wanna talk to Laios? Sure. Let's go do that. Hold still."

It recontextualized their time together for me. Made me notice how interested Mithrun was specifically in what Kabru had to say about this Laios guy.

You can kind of see the gears turning in his head. He correctly deduces that Laios is closest to the dungeon's heart. Therefore, reaching Laios will take him right to the demon. I don't think he actually cares about what Kabru wants. After all, Kabru says he wants to talk to Laios, and Mithrun doesn't let Kabru do that. He doesn't want to try Kabru's methods. He barely seems to think about Kabru at all.

We are treated to a three-chapter sequence of Mithrun and the other Canaries cornering a group of people they intend to arrest, interrogating them, intimidating them, and then Mithrun, especially, escalating the situation to near-lethal violence. Marcille releases the Winged Lion because she is menaced, talked down to, terrified, and injured. Even the other elves are appalled by how brutal and erratic Mithrun acts.

And that's what Mithrun's story is to me, actually. It's the very dark spiral that pain can send you down. It's about how his obsession is killing him. How it's keeping him from forming meaningful relationships. How it hurts the people around him and causes him to act cruelly. He cannot be reasoned with before he crashes and burns. If he had grown or changed as a person at all before the climax, his character arc would be less impactful. He has to tear through everything to get to the demon, look the demon in the face and be told point blank that he doesn't matter to it. He has to put all his energy into this path of violence to show how utterly impotent and self-destructive it is.

Dungeon Meshi understands the violence we all must do as living creatures. The inherent selfishness of killing and eating in order to survive, or fighting to protect yourself. It doesn't condemn that. It doesn't condemn the violence you do when you feel backed up against a wall either. But it does not reward this. Mithrun's all-consuming desire for revenge- and it is revenge, this is functionally a flailing quest for revenge even if he also wants to be finished off as a result- is as poisonous to him as the demon's bottomless appetite was to it.

Mithrun does not once stop to help anyone else during the climax. All the other characters converge to work together, even to put aside their enmity (like the elves and the orcs) to try and stop the threat. He doesn't turn away from his single-minded pursuit to help anyone, protect anyone, or heal anyone, though it's obvious that he could have done more good fighting by the others' sides rather than throwing himself at the demon over and over. Even the idea that he might help someone- the moment where he slaps Kabru out of a panic attack, but only because he genuinely wants to punish him- is treated as a joke.

It's only after all of this has occurred, and left him utterly empty, that Mithrun can stand up again as a new person. After he's looked into that yawning void straight on and realized what it meant to pursue it, where it was leading him. He gets up again because he agrees to share a meal. And because he agrees to help feed others.

Rage doesn't serve you. Community does. That's where his happy ending comes from. And maybe this is not the most thorough exploration of even this single topic, but I don't think I'm being reductive.

If I seem frustrated, it's because people have turned me into a ridiculous strawman because of these ideas, and then spent months shadowboxing that strawman while calling me a dumb pretentious cunt over it. This is often very funny, but even I have a tipping point. Good night.

#Dea's anonymous friends #Dea answers #dungeonposting #I took adderall for the first time right before this ask appeared. hi.#I would have written all of this without it ... probably #IF YOU SAW THIS BEFORE I WAS DONE WRITING ... I HIT SOMETHING ON MY KEYBOARD OML #thank fuck it didn't delete everything or I would have died #it is 1:30 AM #musings with Dea #I'll probably never make this rebloggable because I don't want to be adversarial to the asker #and I'd still rather make a formal post about these ideas without any connection to my personal bullshit

36 notes · View notes

aqours · 11 months

Text

i've shared my thoughts on this in dms with like 3 people so i wanted to put it on paper so i can always get it

so i think one of the biggest questions that goes around tcoaatl is regarding it's incest, asked in both good faith and by annoying antis: "so is the incest... actually like portrayed as bad? or is it just hot and fetishized and romanticized?" and y'know, i think the most genuinely HONEST answer regarding that is this: "it's both." (the later mostly romanticized)

the Graves siblings have a horrifically co-dependent relationship which even the steam page is very happy to make you remember, multiple characters acknowledge it, it's a fucking awful terrible thing and you can make decisions that acknowledge it and its obvious to anyone with two eyes and a brain capable of basic critical thought that realistically while you can do w/e you want in a fanfic in a canon sense there's no way gravecest cannot result in what will ultimately be a lifetime of suffering even if both parties don't want to admit it. you're condemning them both to a chance of ever finding real genuine happiness that can exist without the other

that being said? they're both conventionally attractive and the game doesn't really shy from making its physical intimacy look hot and it's clear that nemlei doesn't want that physical intimacy to be disgusting or something that will make you feel ashamed if you intentionally pursued

i feel like this is the aspect of tcoaal that is debated the most on all sides of the fandom and i just wanted to post my own two cents in that i think the answer is "its both." the extent of how co-dependent these two are is very clear that it's not good and that most likely in the final release the best outcome for these two will probably involve acknowledging it

but also if you were to approach nemlei and just told her "listen i just think it's hot i don't give a shit about any of that other stuff i just wanna ship them." i think nemlei herself would nod and respect your decision completely. probably feed you even more if anything

you're free to disagree with me, i just wanna state my own thoughts somewhere, so i think the answer is a very solid "it's both" when it comes to this. tcoaal portrays the incest as horribly psychologically damaging for these two but also at the same time it's obviously not gonna judge you for liking it and if you find it hot nemlei would never judge you for it i think

but i just cannot in any capacity really take the argument it's a hard one or another seriously. i think if tcoaal wanted gravecest to only be seen as bad and horrifying that nemlei would've made different decisions in writing it bc it's obvious she COULD have if she wanted to, but also it's not fair to say it just makes incest look hot and sexy when it does show how fucked up it's characters are because of it

so... just wanted to say yeah- i think it's both

#starposts #you are completely free to disagree with me i just want this written down #so i don't have to rewrite this 20 times bc i've already had to rewrite this like 3 times in private conversations #the coffin of andy and leyley #tcoaal #andrew graves #ashley graves #gravecest #coffincest #discourse cw #long post #nemlei #also its to my understanding nemlei uses she/her if i'm incorrect please let me know and i'll edit this asap

159 notes · View notes

mdhwrites · 8 months

Note

Can you explain to me how the Titan enforces Christian Fundamentalism?

The Titan makes the only crime Belos committed be that he was a false prophet. Luz is beyond reproach though because she is a true prophet and a true believer. She is then sent to murder a men, blessed with holy power and strength in her convictions, by that God... And we are supposed to cheer.

This isn't even much of an exaggeration or dramatization. The Titan's answer to Luz's fears about justifying horrible acts in the name of protecting others is essentially this. That Belos' true crime wasn't in wanting to kill, oppress or lie. It's that he did it for selfish, self aggrandizing reasons. That if he'd simply been honest and earnest, he might feel a little bad for a mistake or two here or there, like the Titan is about the Collector, but he would have been entirely justified in his genocide. Just like they are beyond approach for wanting this man dead.

As the show says "He wants to be a hero and have the power," but then Luz comes in, trying to have a badass one liner for her return and even says "Darn it, I still can't think of what to say" which isn't even a reference to an earlier part of the show (I don't think at least). It implies Luz waited to come back when it would be the most dramatic and when she was most ready to look the part of the hero. She even references Azura, the FICTIONAL HERO, in her last speech and goes back to the catchphrase she wanted for a hero just nuking a bitch. She TOOOOTALLY doesn't care about being a hero though and because of that, she's all good to be doing all of this. That's what the Titan claimed at least.

Worse yet is that we only really have the Titan's word for glory and power being all Belos cared about. The fucker spent CENTURIES on the Isles. He deformed his body and probably doesn't believe he'll go to Heaven anymore with how much magic he had to internalize in order to pursue the goal of genocide. Even when alone, with no one to prove anything to, he still talks about saving souls and just needing to survive to do this. He's okay with dying afterwards because he DOESN'T care about the glory. Literally the only time he seems to give a shit about other people's approval and the status this might get him is the Witch Hunter General lines and you know what, I don't think it's entirely unfair for him to hope to get some recognition out of four hundred years of work, even if that work was pure evil. You could maybe say Philip's journal shows a hero complex but A: that still doesn't make his belief in protecting others a lie, just means that he has an ego about it, and B: is from hundreds of years ago and he literally abandoned the journal eventually. Abandoned his own heroic tale. By the finale... His intentions are pure. At bare minimum, that's how they are framed by the show itself with his desperation to do this, even at the cost of ending himself. So why does he deserve to die by the show's logic?

Well... He doesn't. He doesn't even deserve to be stopped because his faith is earnest. Except... It's not the right faith, is it? Belos doesn't believe in magic. Doesn't believe in the Titan. He is a blasphemer and false prophet. But now Luz has actually spoken with the Titan, been friends with his son and spread her ideals across the Isles, ideals which are strictly not the Isle's ways but that do theoretically make the basis of the Titan claiming she's a good witch (which is also referencing Azura potentially). The literal first person we meet on the Isles doesn't give a shit about things like lying, cheating, etc. and the early episodes give the impression that no one here does. That Belos doesn't force conformity on that matter even, making it so that these baseline morals that Luz disagrees with are earnest and honest. And yet, none of them are allowed to stay that way. They all enter her fold and listen to explicitly her morality. A morality that happens to line up with Christian morals and that the Titan seems to approve of.

And again, that's not interpretation. The finale actually straight up confirms this isn't the Isle's morality and REVELS in that fact. Belos begs for his life, saying they are not murderers, scoundrels and killers. That their culture demands better of them because they're human. Luz doesn't disagree... But she also doesn't do the act herself (unless you want to say she brought on the rain, but then you have her boiling a man to death which is just HORRIFYING.) Then, in a moment we're supposed to cheer for, Luz's closest connections with the Isles, and Raine tacked on, show up, proudly say they're not better than murderers, and stomp the fucker out. Not a quick mercy killing like a blast of magic or a magic scream might have done. Not the eviscerating explosion Luz had to do as a part of stopping him. No, instead, they brutally stomp out a defenseless, dying man before Raine literally says, "That was satisfying."

Our. Heroes.

And don't get me wrong: Belos needed to die. Thematically it's correct and narratively it's correct. The problem is how the show frames this final conflict. It literally asks if it's okay to kill him. What is a reasonable justification for murder. For even wanting another person to die. For a lot of kids, this might be the first time they hear ANY nuance on this topic. So what is the lesson imparted? Is it that sometimes force is necessary but we should only do it when we are certain that more lives will be lost otherwise and that there is no other option? That'd be a great way to show the Titan actually learned something from his mistake with the Collector. Is it that we can't show tolerance to the intolerant because they will only ever take and destroy? Refute an argument that modern racists use to allow hate speech and actions against others. Is it the simple fact that because Luz actually fears being monstrous, she won't end up the same way because that fear and hesitation will never let her commit the sort of genocide that Belos desires? Or heck, say they aren't racist without saying the word by going "We judge him for his actions and the cruelties he has committed, not by the cruelties of a people or the circumstances of their birth." All of which would be varying degrees of fine morality wise and are genuinely ways good people cope with having to commit horrific violence.

No. Instead, it's just that one did it while excusing it with lies while Luz will do it with pure faith in her heart. You... You do know that the VAST majority of Christians literally use this as a way to dismiss bad actors in the church itself? "He doesn't represent all Christians! He didn't actually hold the faith!" Do you think every brimstone and fire preacher is just a complete liar and not a SINGLE one of them genuinely believes what they preach? Because I'm sorry to break it to you but even as far back as the fucking Crusades, while sure the leaders were corrupt, secular men, most of the soldiers were genuinely god fearing people, terrified for their souls and seeking this as their only form of penance, especially as they saw it as protecting Christianity. It's one of the reasons they were able to do so much damage because the goal for the common soldier wasn't conquest or national pride. It was to murder the other culture who had taken sacred land. They believed earnestly... So were they justified in the massacres of civilians that they committed?

And this is without getting into how we have literally a Holy Trinity of the father (the Titan's corpse), the son (King, who is exceptionally self sacrificing eventually), and the holy ghost, in a very literal sense. Or how about the glyphs being called the Titan's Language and given to Luz to empower her? How invoking simply his words grants one exceptional power? The Hexside Squad in the finale use glyphs, half of them for the first time, to supplement their powers while dead exhausted and it doesn't seem to just be able to help them, it is still keeping them close to their normal power level and potentially energizing them with how not tired they appear to be while doing this. Almost like they're prayers, pulling on the power of a higher being.

But those elements don't matter. For the sake of the Titan supporting Christian Fundamentalism, all that matters is that he puts faith above what is morally correct. That you can excuse any action so long as you are genuine in the belief that you are doing it for the right reasons. Eda could be making this same argument and it would still be wrong and morally reprehensible.

It's literally "The ends justify the means," and how is that your final lesson, for your main character, in a KID'S SHOW? Let alone when that is EXACTLY the argument Belos, THE VILLAIN, has always made. Not just with wiping out witches but with petrification, lying to Lilith, manipulating Hunter, etc. etc. That it was all justified for his grand, 'good' ends.

I already stated arguments that could have been made, that wouldn't have taken much more time to do (if any), that would fix this so don't you DARE even consider bringing up the shortening with this. It is one scene that does the vast majority of this. Arguably, like five lines tops. Five lines that destroy the morality of your very show and any chance at saying Christian Fundamentalism is wrong.

All because its last message wasn't that prophets should be questioned. Only that there are prophets to listen to explicitly and that you should avoid false prophets... Somehow. Maybe just ask if they like anime I guess?

======+++++======

This was first written before I saw the finale, then I tried to make minor adjustments because of the better absorption of events but ended up rewriting the whole thing because I wanted to better focus on just the hypocrisy and god awful morals than talking about if the Titan counted as God or god.

Also, just for those curious: I was raised on Christian morals and did go to church when I was VERY young. My faith nowadays is that I consider there to be comfort in there being a higher power but that I do not care what form they take, nor do I really like organized religion as while it brings comfort and community to many, it also is all too easy to corrupt with personal greed and anger. I've been told the closest label to this is agnostic.

I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!

I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past. I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead. If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.

A Twitter you can follow too

And a Kofi if you like what I do and want to help out with the fact that disability doesn’t pay much.

#the owl house criticism #toh critical #toh #the owl house #the titan toh

77 notes · View notes

sideprince · 7 months

Text

I wrote a reply to this post but OP has deleted it and even though I should probably leave well enough alone, it got to me that I could have sworn I saw this post months ago and then realized it was actually from yesterday. This is a long reply so I'm putting it under a cut, but after I went to OP's blog and saw a post from them complaining how mean everyone was to them on this post, I replied to say I'm sorry if they got any anon hate I don't know about but otherwise none of the comments on this post were mean or hateful, they just disagreed with OP. I pointed out that this is partly because they cited non-canon events as canon, and OP immediately blocked me (this may be why I can't reblog the post even from another user, though that's not how tumblr usually works so who knows). I can't help but feel that OP's post was made in bad faith, as a result, and I've seen enough people on this hellsite who are more interested in protecting their egos than admit when they could have been approached something more thoughtfully, so I'm diving in. If you're going to say a character "is very interesting to study" while doing the exact opposite, then you'd better have the critical analysis skills and textual evidence to back it up.

I think OP has some misconceptions that are frustratingly common, and seem to stem from people not having read the books, or not read them for a long time, and conflating the movies with canon. While I mostly agree with the replies above, I want to take this opportunity to cite the text to refute some of OP's points. I often forget details from the text, but I choose to either look them up before asserting unconfirmed points as fact (Potter Search is a great tool, or you can just do a ctrl+F search if you have the books digitally), or else I usually state clearly that I'm not sure if I remember something correctly and don't have the spoons to look it up.

I saw OP say in the comments in response to someone arguing their points:

"that's your interpretation, I have mine, I think both can coexist within the material we are given."

It doesn't sit right with me that so many people think that referring to their subjective memory of what the text meant to them is the same as actually citing it and offering an explanation. OP's interpretation can't exist within the material given, because some of it doesn't exist in the material at all, and you can't interpret what isn't there. OP is essentially claiming to have done critical analysis, and although no one is required to always critique a text analytically on a tumblr post, I find it upsetting when people claim to do so while failing to cite a single source to support their argument. To me it sounds like someone trying to pass off a creative writing essay as an academic research paper, and in an age of rampant propaganda and knee-jerk reblogs that eschew critical thinking, I feel an almost compulsive need to go through OP's reply and argue it with the textual evidence they conveniently avoided, if for no other reason than to show why it's important to discern between loosely formed opinions and informed ones.

I also want to explain why I don't accept the films as canon, because while I do think that canon can exist across several mediums (such as with Good Omens, in which at least one of the writers of the text is directly involved in writing the TV series), I don't think that applies to Harry Potter because the original author was only marginally involved in the films, in only a consultant role, and had little input on the writing. The HP films are an interpretation as written from the perspective of Steve Kloves, except for OoTP, which was written by Michael Goldenberg. I've gone into it on other posts, but suffice to say these interpretations did not prioritize story and character development and were often influenced by pressure from the studio to prioritize marketing opportunities over storytelling. Important elements like foreshadowing and themes were not carried over from the text to the screen. These changes affected the storytelling significantly and left out crucial elements. This, combined with the films having been written with little to no involvement from the original author, is why I feel the films can't be taken as canon. This doesn't mean they can't be enjoyed by any means, just that they scenes that appear in the films but not in the text, or are presented differently on screen than in the text, are not a reasonable basis for character analysis.

And now, on to OP's ask:

"I think he is a very good representation of a man who felt insecure in his manhood; his male ego was permanently wounded by James' bullying and he decided to make it everyone else's problem by being the most insufferable teacher at Hogwarts."

The first thing we have to establish is that the books are told from Harry's perspective, so we have to take narrative bias into account. Calling Snape "the most insufferable teacher at Hogwarts" is a subjective statement and I can only assume it's based in Harry's biased perspective as narrator, given that he and Snape have a bad relationship from the outset. I have a brief analysis here about how Snape dislikes Harry because in their first class together he interprets Harry's ignorance of the course material as a lack of curiosity and appreciation for his gifts as a wizard, while also recognizing something of his own experiences with childhood poverty and abuse in Harry. Harry, being ignorant of these factors, just feels singled out for hate by a strict teacher, and their relationship deteriorates throughout the rest of the series, until the end of the final book.

To pull back from the narrative bias, let's look at some of the other teachers are Hogwarts:

McGonagall:

“Miss Granger, you foolish girl, how could you think of tackling a mountain troll on your own?” Hermione hung her head. Harry was speechless. Hermione was the last person to do anything against the rules, and here she was, pretending she had, to get them out of trouble. It was as if Snape had started handing out sweets. “Miss Granger, five points will be taken from Gryffindor for this,” said Professor McGonagall. “I’m very disappointed in you. If you’re not hurt at all, you’d better get off to Gryffindor Tower. Students are finishing the feast in their Houses.”

Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 10.

“I’m disgusted,” said Professor McGonagall. “Four students out of bed in one night! I’ve never heard of such a thing before! You, Miss Granger, I thought you had more sense. As for you, Mr. Potter, I thought Gryffindor meant more to you than this. All three of you will receive detentions — yes, you too, Mr. Longbottom, nothing gives you the right to walk around school at night, especially these days, it’s very dangerous — and fifty points will be taken from Gryffindor.” “Fifty?” Harry gasped — they would lose the lead, the lead he’d won in the last Quidditch match. “Fifty points each,” said Professor McGonagall, breathing heavily through her long, pointed nose.

Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 15

In just the first book we see McGonagall punish Hermione for successfully defending herself against a troll and take house points, then sends her back to her common room without getting medical attention, as if a ten year old can be responsible for assessing how badly they're hurt. A few chapters later McGonagall takes several hundred points from students in her own house (more than we see any other teacher do at one time throughout the series), and assigns the students detention on top of it. As we later see in the same chapter, the detentions aren't even served with her directly, but instead the children - again, ten years old - are sent into the Forbidden Forest at night with only Hagrid to protect them, to hunt down whatever creature is vicious and cunning enough to kill unicorns.

Although it's said that Snape favors the students in his own house, he doesn't seem to be the only one:

“Potter's been sent a broomstick, Professor,” said Malfoy quickly. “Yes, yes, that’s right,” said Professor Flitwick, beaming at Harry. “Professor McGonagall told me all about the special circumstances, Potter. And what model is it?” “A Nimbus Two Thousand, sir,” said Harry, fighting not to laugh at the look of horror on Malfoy’s face. “And it’s really thanks to Malfoy here that I’ve got it,” he added.

Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 10

Not only did McGonagall make an exception to school practices and allow Harry on his house Quidditch team despite being a first year, she used either school funds or her own (unclear) to purchase a first-rate broom for him. We know the school has brooms, as first years are not allowed their own and they are provided for flying lessons, and because “Harry had heard Fred and George Weasley complain about the school brooms” (PS ch. 9). And yet, McGonagall ensures Harry has his own broom, and an expensive one, new enough to be the show model in a shop window in Diagon Alley a few months earlier:

“Several boys of about Harry’s age had their noses pressed against a window with broomsticks in it. ‘Look,’ Harry heard one of them say, ‘the new Nimbus Two Thousand - fastest ever -”

-Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 5

If we're discussing which teachers are Hogwarts are the most "insufferable" then we also have to talk about Hagrid, who might mean well and be affectionate, but is also irresponsible and dangerous.

In Philosopher's Stone, Hagrid:

Punishes Dudley, a child, for his parents' offenses, the final straw being his father insulting Dumbledore (Ch. 4). While Hagrid acknowledges that he shouldn't have lost his temper, he also admits that his intention had been to turn Dudley fully into a pig.

Hatches a dragon in his cabin (Ch. 14), tries to raise it illegally and against the animal's need of care, and Harry, Ron, and Hermione (again, ten year olds) have to fix the situation and get Ron's brother to find some friends to take the dragon away safely and prevent Hagrid losing his job (Ch. 14). In the process Hagrid endangers himself as well as the children, and it's because of this that McGonagall gives them detention and deducts hundreds of house points. Hagrid not only allows the children to endanger themselves for his sake, but to be punished and subsequently ostracized by their peers also for his sake.

The reason he even has a dragon is, as we find out in Ch. 16, because he was foolish enough to accept it from a faceless stranger in exchange for unwittingly divulging the secret to getting past the three headed dog guarding the Philosopher's Stone (and the stranger later turns out to be Quirrel/Voldemort).

In Prisoner of Azkaban, Hagrid:

Starts his first lesson with a volatile creature (Ch. 6) and, although Malfoy acted irresponsibly, Hagrid was nevertheless the teacher and responsible for providing course material consistent with the experience level and maturity of his students' age.

Gets drunk and has to be taken care of by Harry, Ron, and Hermione (again, children) (Ch. 6)

Skipping ahead to Order of the Phoenix ch. 30, we find out Hagrid

Compromised his return from the mission Dumbledore sent him on by bringing a giant back to England.

Brought said giant into the school grounds and left him in the Forbidden Forest.

Asks Harry and Hermione (still children) to look after him if Hagrid is sacked.

Although Hagrid means well, his actions are consistently thoughtless and irresponsible, requiring those around him - often Harry, Ron, and Hermione - to fix the damage he causes. Although I think it remains subjective which teacher at Hogwarts is the "most insufferable" I think Hagrid is a strong enough candidate to qualify OP's interpretation of Snape holding that title as extremely contestable. Of course, since the books are presented through the lens of Harry's narrative bias, and he's fond of Hagrid, respects McGonagall, and dislikes Snape, an uncritical reading could lead one to OP's conclusions. However, a more objective analysis of the text shows that many teachers at Hogwarts are strict, punitive, biased, and wreak havoc on students in ways that make the Snape's actions look fairly tame, or at least the norm. And this is excluding an analysis of various DADA professors like Lockhart and Crouch/Moody, who were insufferable in their own rights (Lockhart was smarmy and dishonest to the point it risked students' lives; Crouch/Moodly transfigured a child into a ferret and humiliated him with torture as a disciplinary measure and deliberately triggered Neville's trauma in class).

OP continues their reply to say:

Add to this that he is a halfblood and only his mother was around, iirc?

They don't recall correctly. Snape, whose father was a muggle and whose mother was a witch, was indeed a half-blood (as is evidenced by him being revealed to be the Half-Blood Prince - I assume I don't need to cite a source as this is a pretty well-known fact and the literal title of an entire HP book, but should you need a reference it's in Ch. 28 of HBP). Both his parents were around in his childhood:

Snape staggered - his wand flew upwards, away from Harry - and suddenly Harry’s mind was teeming with memories that were not his: a hook-nosed man was shouting at a cowering woman, while a small dark-haired boy cried in a corner …

-Order of the Phoenix, Ch. 26

‘How are things at your house?’ Lily asked. A little crease appeared between his eyes. ‘Fine,’ he said. ‘They’re not arguing any more?’ ‘Oh, yes, they’re arguing,’ said Snape. He picked up a fistful of leaves and began tearing them apart, apparently unaware of what he was doing. ‘But it won’t be that long and I’ll be gone.’ ‘Doesn’t your dad like magic?’ ‘He doesn’t like anything, much,’ said Snape.

-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33

We know that Snape's father was around because he's mentioned both in Snape's memories in OoTP that Harry accidentally invades during an Occlumency lesson, and when we see in Snape's memories that he gives Harry as he dies. Lily asks about his home life by referring to both his parents, implying that his dad is a consistent presence at home. We also know from JK Rowling that Snape's father "didn't hold back when it came to the whip" but this is supplementary and not mentioned in canon, so I don't expect anyone to refer to it when analyzing the text, I'm just adding it as bonus material.

Continuing on with OP's reply:

Snape, Voldemort and Harry all act like foils of each other in that sense, but whereas Voldemort fixated on his blood status as the main reason for his insecurities, Snape fixated on Lily.

So much to unpack here. Firstly, all of this should be backed up by examples from the text, as they are subjective readings that have significant bearing on character analysis.

Snape, Harry, and Voldemort don't act like foils of each other. For one thing, a character doesn't act like a foil, a character either is or isn't one. That being said, I don't know OP's background and there could be a language barrier because English isn't everyone's first language, I'm just being pedantic. Even with that in mind, the statement remains incorrect. A foil is a literary device - a character who contrasts with another character, often with the protagonist. It is not a choice a character makes or an action they take.

In Philosopher's Stone Snape is set up as a foil to Harry in order to misdirect the reader from suspecting the real villain, Quirrel/Voldemort. Snape is presented as secretive, sneaky, and nefarious, contrasting Harry's role as a protagonist who is outspoken, honest, and brave. As the series progresses, Snape, along with Voldemort, are eventually shown to have more parallels than contrasts with Harry. Snape and Voldemort were born into muggle poverty, and although Harry was raised in a middle class home by the Dursleys, they thrust poverty and neglect onto him in a way that parallels his childhood of neglect and want with that of Snape and Voldemort. Snape's father was abusive, as was Harry's guardian, Vernon Dursley. Harry, Voldemort, and Snape all had traumatic experiences growing up in muggle environments. If anything, Snape and Voldemort might be foils to Harry in that they both harbored resentment for their muggle fathers in ways that signified the separation between the wizarding and muggle world, while Harry's experiences with the Dursleys didn't color his image of muggles in a comparable way.

The contrast between Harry, Snape, and Voldemort is in the way each of them deals with their trauma. As Dumbledore says:

"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities."

-Chamber of Secrets, Ch. 18

This becomes one of the overarching themes of the HP series, Harry, Snape, and Voldemort are all examples of how their choices took them to such different places in life from their comparable childhoods.

At school Voldemort was a handsome boy with talent, intelligence, and the recommendations of his teachers, but he chose to pursue power instead of success:

“He reached the seventh year of his schooling with, as you might have expected, top grades in every examination he had taken. All around him, his classmates were deciding which jobs they were to pursue once they had left Hogwarts. Nearly everybody expected spectacular things from Tom Riddle, prefect, Head Boy, winner of the Special Award for Services to the School. I know that several teachers, Professor Slughorn amongst them, suggested that he join the Ministry of Magic, offered to set up appointments, put him in touch with useful contacts. He refused all offers. The next thing the staff knew, Voldemort was working at Borgin and Burkes.”

Half-Blood Prince, Ch. 20

Snape chose to become a Death Eater for reasons we can only assume. We know he was in Slytherin during an era when Voldemort was in power and many of his allies had children in Slytherin house. At least two of Snape's dorm-mates, Mulciber and Avery, are canonically acknowledged to have become Death Eaters (both are present at the Ministry when Harry and his friends fight the Death Eaters in the Department of Mysteries in OoTP Ch. 35). It's unclear whether Snape chose to become a Death Eater out of admiration for them or out of peer pressure, or perhaps a lack of other options, while at school:

'… thought we were supposed to be friends?’ Snape was saying. ‘Best friends?’ ‘We are, Sev, but I don’t like some of the people you’re hanging around with! I’m sorry, but I detest Avery and Mulciber! Mulciber! What do you see in him, Sev? He’s creepy! D’you know what he tried to do to Mary Macdonald the other day?’ Lily had reached a pillar and leaned against it, looking up into the thin, sallow face. ‘That was nothing,’ said Snape. ‘It was a laugh, that’s all -‘ ‘It was Dark Magic, and if you think that’s funny -‘ ‘What about the stuff Potter and his mates get up to?’ demanded Snape. His colour rose again as he said it, unable, it seemed, to hold in his resentment.

-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33

It's unclear what Snape thinks of Avery and Mulciber, as his reply to Lily is downplaying but doesn't defend their actions. We see Snape's indecisiveness later in the argument he has with Lily after he calls her a Mudblood:

'It’s too late. I’ve made excuses for you for years. None of my friends can understand why I even talk to you. You and your precious little Death Eater friends - you see, you don’t even deny it! You don’t even deny that’s what you’re all aiming to be! You can’t wait to join You-Know-Who, can you?’ He opened his mouth, but closed it without speaking. ‘I can’t pretend any more. You’ve chosen your way, I’ve chosen mine.’ ‘No - listen, I didn’t mean -‘ ‘- to call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?'

-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33

Although Snape does ultimately choose to become a Death Eater, we see in his reply to Lily about both Avery and Mulciber and later her assumption that they all want to become Death Eaters that Snape doesn't argue for or against her accusations, but instead is evasive and unsure of himself. He opens his mouth to speak when she accuses him of wanting to become a Death Eater, but then closes it again without saying anything - he can neither argue against her point, nor state clearly, let alone with any kind of conviction, that this is indeed his ambition. It can be argued that it's the passivity of his choice that lands him with a Dark Mark on his arm, and it's the active choice he makes to risk his life in order to defect from Voldemort's ranks and turn spy that defines his character and without which Harry could not have defeated Voldemort.

Harry, as the protagonist, is also significantly defined by the theme of choice:

'But, sir,’ said Harry, making valiant efforts not to sound argumentative, ‘it all comes to the same thing, doesn’t it? I’ve got to try and kill him, or -‘ ‘Got to?’ said Dumbledore. ‘Of course you’ve got to! But not because of the prophecy! Because you, yourself, will never rest until you’ve tried! We both know it! Imagine, please, just for a moment, that you had never heard that prophecy! How would you feel about Voldemort now? Think!’ Harry watched Dumbledore striding up and down in front of him, and thought. He thought of his mother, his father and Sirius. He thought of Cedric Diggory. He thought of all the terrible deeds he knew Lord Voldemort had done. A flame seemed to leap inside his chest, searing his throat. ‘I’d want him finished,’ said Harry quietly. ‘And I’d want to do it.’ ‘Of course you would!’ cried Dumbledore. ‘You see, the prophecy does not mean you have to do anything! But the prophecy caused Lord Voldemort to mark you as his equal … in other words, you are free to choose your way, quite free to turn your back on the prophecy! But Voldemort continues to set store by the prophecy. He will continue to hunt you … which makes it certain, really, that -' ‘That one of us is going to end up killing the other,’ said Harry. ‘Yes.'

-Half-Blood Prince, Ch. 33

There's a clear point made by the author through Dumbledore as her proxy here, that choice is what matters, not fate. It's Harry's choices that make him the person he is and lead him to eventually defeat Voldemort. While Snape, Voldemort, and Harry all can be contrasted through the lens of their choices, this does not make them foils, as it is the the theme of choice and how it is exemplified by each character that makes them unique, but their experiences and many of their character traits (boldness, bravery, a personal sense of conviction) that make them parallels of one another. Each of them occupies their own place on the spectrum between the light and dark that the series establishes, Voldemort at the dark end, Harry at the light, and Snape in the grey area between them.

OP goes on to say:

His character is all about male entitlement, he was obsessed with her at Hogwarts and then showed to have no boundaries as he went into her house to cradle her dead body in front of her traumatized kid.

There's a lot to unpack here, and it's particularly challenging because you can't provide textual evidence for something that didn't happen in the text. After the above scene from Ch. 33 of DH in which Lily ends her friendship with Snape, we never see them interact again:

'No - listen, I didn’t mean -‘ ‘- to call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?’ He struggled on the verge of speech, but with a contemptuous look she turned and climbed back through the portrait hole … The corridor dissolved, and the scene took a little longer to reform: Harry seemed to fly through shifting shapes and colours until his surroundings solidified again and he stood on a hilltop, forlorn and cold in the darkness, the wind whistling through the branches of a few leafless trees. The adult Snape was panting, turning on the spot, his wand gripped tightly in his hand, waiting for something or for someone …'

-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33

The scene in the corridor in front of Gryffindor Tower between a fifth year Snape and Lily leads directly into the scene where Snape begs Dumbledore to protect the Potters (which I wrote an analysis of a few months ago but is too long a subject to derail this post for). We see no more interactions between Snape and Lily, and therefore there is no canonical support for the idea that Snape behaved obsessively or failed to respect her boundaries.

There's also no mention of Snape going to Godric's Hollow at all after her death. Snape holding Lily's dead body is only shown in the film version of Deathly Hallows, and as mentioned, the films are not canon. That moment doesn't exist in the text and can't be considered in an analysis of Snape's character. The scene on the hilltop leads directly into the scene of Snape crying in Dumbledore's office:

The hilltop faded, and Harry stood in Dumbledore’s office, and something was making a terrible sound, like a wounded animal. Snape was slumped forwards in a chair and Dumbledore was standing over him, looking grim. After a moment or two, Snape raised his face, and he looked like a man who had lived a hundred years of misery since leaving the wild hilltop. ‘I thought … you were going … to keep her … safe …’ ‘She and James put their faith in the wrong person,’ said Dumbledore. ��Rather like you, Severus. Weren’t you hoping that Lord Voldemort would spare her?’ Snape’s breathing was shallow.

-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33

This is the only depiction of Snape immediately following the Potters' deaths. The scene of him cradling Lily's dead body was Steve Kloves' invention and has no basis in canon. If anything, Snape's actions in canon can be interpreted to show that he respected the boundaries Lily set, and that even when her life was at risk he chose to go to Dumbledore - who he thought might kill him on sight - rather than talk to her directly after she ended their friendship. In addition, in all the information the text gives about the night Voldemort fell in Godric's Hollow and Hagrid collected Harry to take him to Privet Drive, there's no mention of Snape whatsoever.

There isn't much in the text to support the interpretation that Snape exemplified male entitlement either. So far we've seen him being as strict, if not milder, than other teachers at the school, his favoritism is also comparable to that of other teachers - implying it's more of a norm than an example of entitlement - and there are no canonical examples to support the argument that he was obsessed with Lily or violated her boundaries. Snape struggles to argue with Lily when she accuses and berates him, and the usual markers of patriarchal entitlement - silencing women, gaslighting, dismissing women's opinions, talking over them - are all nowhere to be found in any of their interactions. The only time we see him lash out at Lily is when he calls her Mudblood (OoTP Ch. 28) which, while inexcusable, he does under traumatic duress, and is not indicative of his usual interactions with her, as exemplified by the fact that she ends their friendship over it. As cited before:

'No - listen, I didn’t mean -‘ ‘- to call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?’

There's a clear implication that Snape has never called her this before. An argument can also be made that it speaks volumes of Lily's own biases, or perhaps her own affection for Snape (who, not long before this, was still her best friend), that she excused this behavior from him when it was directed at others, and only took issue with it when it was directed at herself. That, combined with Lily's own acknowledgment that they were "best friends" shows that Snape's relationship with her was a balanced, consensual one even when it became strained, up until their friendship ended.

Continuing with OP's points:

He only saw Lily as a trophy to be possessed, which you can see from the way he hated Harry, because Harry reminded him Lily wasn't his and that Lily had sex with another man.

There's no support for this in the text anywhere and is pure conjecture. I can appreciate it being OP's headcanon, but it's certainly not a result of studying the text and relying on it to form opinions, but rather seems to be OP projecting pre-conceived notions onto Snape as a character and trying to find justification for it. I've written a whole post extrapolating Snape's first class with Harry, but the tl;dr is that Snape, who grew up in muggle poverty and knew Aunt Petunia enough to guess that Harry didn't fare well in her care when he showed up at school bearing signs of neglect, likely expected Harry to have the same hunger for learning that he himself did at Harry's age. Instead, Harry couldn't answer a single one of his questions and showed no curiosity or enthusiasm towards being a wizard as far as Snape could tell.

Nevertheless, even though Snape did seem to dislike Harry, hate is an awful strong word given that it is revealed at the end of Deathly Hallows that Snape has risked his own life to protect him. This isn't particularly surprising when you consider that this goal was established as early as Philosopher's Stone, when Snape protected him, which Harry initially interpreted as Snape trying to kill him:

Harry couldn’t take it in. This couldn’t be true, it couldn’t. ‘But Snape tried to kill me!’ ‘No, no, no. I tried to kill you. Your friend Miss Granger accidentally knocked me over as she rushed to set fire to Snape at that Quidditch match. She broke my eye contact with you. Another few seconds and I’d have got you off that broom. I’d have managed it before then if Snape hadn’t been muttering a counter-curse, trying to save you.’ ‘Snape was trying to save me?’ ‘Of course,’ said Quirrell coolly. -Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 17

Again, the story is told through the lens of Harry's bias, but that doesn't mean his opinions of Snape reflect Snape's character. As another example, there's an implication in OoTP that Snape, having seen some of the Dursleys' abuse of Harry through his memories during Occlumency lessons, passed this information on in an effort to protect Harry, and that this is the reason why several Order members (Arthur Weasley and Moody in particular) show up at King's Cross at the end of the schoolyear and threaten the Dursleys to stop mistreating him. There seems to be no other explanation in the text for why these adults are suddenly aware of the abuse Harry experiences, except that Snape, who was abused as a child himself, and who is an Order member himself, is the only adult in the series who we see witness Harry's mistreatement firsthand. At no point in the narrative do we see Harry complain about the Dursleys to the adults he trusts or ask them for help, merely to spend his holidays away from them without explanation.

While Snape did indeed dislike Harry and often compared him to his father, his dislike for James had much more significant roots in bullying and trauma than in his concern for Lily's relationship with him. It's established in canon that James Potter and Sirius Black dislike Snape from the outset (as in the scene on the Hogwarts Express in DH Ch. 33). In their fifth year, Sirius - annoyed that Snape is so curious about where Lupin goes each month - tricks Snape into following the tunnel under the Whomping Willow to the Shrieking Shack, as Lupin tells Harry:

'Professor Snape was at school with us. ... Sirius here played a trick on him which nearly killed him, a trick which involved me -‘ Black made a derisive noise. ‘It served him right,’ he sneered. ‘Sneaking around, trying to find out what we were up to … hoping he could get us expelled …' 'Severus was very interested in where I went every month,’ Lupin told Harry, Ron and Hermione. ‘We were in the same year, you know, and we - er - didn’t like each other very much. He especially disliked James. Jealous, I think, of James’s talent on the Quidditch pitch … anyway, Snape had seen me crossing the grounds with Madam Pomfrey one evening as she led me towards the Whomping Willow to transform. Sirius thought it would be - er - amusing, to tell Snape all he had to do was prod the knot on the tree-trunk with a long stick, and he’d be able to get in after me. Well, of course, Snape tried it - if he’d got as far as this house, he’d have met a fully grown werewolf - but your father, who’d heard what Sirius had done, went after Snape and pulled him back, at great risk to his life … Snape glimpsed me, though, at the end of the tunnel. He was forbidden to tell anybody by Dumbledore, but from that time on he knew what I was …'

-Prisoner of Azkaban, Ch. 18

From this we can deduce that Sirius intended for Snape to die, or at least get severely injured, and that even as a grown adult Sirius doesn't regret trying to mete out this punishment to him as retaliation for curiosity. We can also deduce that Lupin was unaware of Sirius' intention and did not consent to be used as a weapon. For his part, Snape never did reveal that Lupin was a werewolf while at school, or even during that school year, until after Lupin ran amok on Hogwarts grounds, endangering others' lives, including Harry's.

There are other meta posts that go into Lupin's insecurities and vulnerabilities, but in short, he was grateful just to be allowed into the school as a student, let alone to have friends, and was in no position to challenge James and Sirius. Even as a prefect he didn't curb their behavior, as we see when he allows James to bully Snape later that year after their O.W.L.s:

'Leave him alone,’ Lily repeated. She was looking at James with every sign of great dislike. ‘What’s he done to you?’ ‘Well,’ said James, appearing to deliberate the point, ‘it’s more the fact that he exists, if you know what I mean …’ Many of the surrounding students laughed, Sirius and Wormtail included, but Lupin, still apparently intent on his book, didn’t, and nor did Lily. ‘You think you’re funny,’ she said coldly. ‘But you’re just an arrogant, bullying toerag, Potter. Leave him alone.’ ‘I will if you go out with me, Evans,’ said James quickly. ‘Go on … go out with me and I’ll never lay a wand on old Snivelly again.'

-Order of the Phoenix, Ch. 28

James acknowledges that he has no real reason to bully Snape and uses violence as a bargaining chip to coerce Lily into going out with him (James' behavior reflects much more entitlement than Snape's, in my opinion). He also chokes Snape with a bar of soap and then assaults him by dangling him upside down and removing his trousers (threatening to remove his underwear but we don't see it happen).

Lily herself refers to James as arrogant, and it's this trait, along with the trauma from James' bullying of him, that Snape perceives in Harry. He doesn't resent Harry for looking like his father because it reminds him that Lily had sex with another man, he resents him for it because of all the trauma James inflicted on him. The conflict-laden relationship between Snape and the Marauders is a significant driver of the story through several of the books and OP seems subjective to the point of being problematic in ignoring it completely and instead focusing Snape's dislike of Harry onto an invented idea of sexual jealousy that doesn't exist in the text.

It's never stated whether Snape had romantic feelings for Lily, or vice versa, only that they were friends. The closest we see to a hint of this is when “The intensity of his [Snape's] gaze made her [Lily] blush," or when “The moment she [Lily] had insulted James Potter, his [Snape's] whole body had relaxed, and as they walked away there was a new spring in Snape’s step …”

Lily's blush could be interpreted as implying she was attracted to him, or conversely that she didn't and felt awkward thinking he might be attracted to her. Similarly, Snape's relief at her insulting James can be interpreted as indicative of his attraction to her, or of him simply being worried about a friend hanging out with people he perceived as dangerous and was relieved to learn she wasn't putting herself in the way of danger by becoming friends with them. Although JK Rowling has said that her intention was for Snape's affections towards Lily to be romantic, and that she may have returned his affection had he not chosen the path he did, this is - like the note about Snape's father whipping him - extratextual and more of an interesting fact than a bit of canon to be extrapolated from the text.

Finally, OP says:

His interest in the Death Eaters was only secondary to his obsession with Lily and I think Lily rejecting him pushed him toward joining the Death Eaters, because, once again, his male ego was bruised and he needed to replace it with something else.

We've already seen that Snape's interest in joining the Death Eaters was a big part of Lily's reason for ending their friendship. Therefore, logically, Lily's decision didn't push him towards becoming a Death Eater, but rather isolated him from having any support system outside of the DEs. She didn't reject him, because rejection is the refusal or dismissal of another person's advances or proposal. They were friends, meaning they had a mutually consensual platonic relationship. Lily therefore didn't reject Snape, she ended their friendship and, as already stated, nothing in canon implies he didn't respect her boundaries.

As we have also seen in canon, Snape was bullied at school and had, at best, a neglectful and dysfunctional home environment in his childhood. In addition, he shared a dorm with students actively interested in becoming Death Eaters, and his one social lifeline away from them was cut off when he called Lily a Mudblood. What OP interprets as Snape's male ego being bruised is actually a much more complex set of social and emotional factors being described throughout the series to eventually reveal the profile of a character - young Snape - who was a vulnerable youth primed for radicalization by a violent faction of zealots. Although the enforcement and upholding of patriarchal norms is often a huge element of these kinds of social movements, that didn't seem to be the driving force for Snape based on everything we learn about his character. Instead, what we see is a boy who comes from abuse, lives in abuse at school, who loses all the support systems that might give him an alternative to the fascist cult he's being radicalized into which - if it's like most hate groups - would have been more than welcome to both take him in and help him cut his ties to anyone else in his life he might escape from them to.

It also goes against the argument that Snape was sexually obsessed with Lily that he continued to risk his life in order to protect her son an defeat her murderer for almost two decades after her death. He knew it would neither bring her back from the dead nor bring about forgiveness, and it goes without saying that sex was no longer an option. Framing Snape's motivation as obsession dismisses the realities of the complex and meaningful relationship we form as people, and the lasting, transformative influence we can have on each other, which is what Snape and Lily's story illustrates.

Finally, OP concludes with:

He remained mysterious up till the end and his back-and-forth with treason was very compelling to read about. So I hate him (as a "person") but he is such a good character narrative-wise and he is very interesting to study

OP openly admits to hating Snape, ie. having a bias against him, while stating he is "interesting to study" - except no part of their answer has shown that they've actually done so. Their arguments are unsupported in several ways, one being that they don't offer any evidence, and the other being that none can be found in the source text. What's ironic is that OP seems to resent Snape's subjective bias against Harry (and misinterpret his reasons for it in baseless ways) while also showing the exact same kind of bias against Snape themselves. You don't have to like a character by any means, but claiming that the kind of unfounded, superficial, and unsupported opinions that OP stated in their response have a basis in any kind of study of his character is ludicrous and an insult to the intelligence of anyone reading it.

#long post #I'd say sorry to OP for ripping into their post like this but they think people disagreeing with them politely is mean and hateful so #but yeah sorry not sorry when your argument is so unfounded that it can be shredded with an entire cited essay then maybe #reconsider the claim that your opinions have any basis in study #and look I don't think OP is stupid by any means I think they knew exactly what they were doing and that's why I decided to argue them #even if they won't see it #I usually don't tend to argue with haters and prefer to spend my allotted hellsite time delving into meta but this one got to me

22 notes · View notes

exeggcute · 7 months

Note

just a heads up - the whipping girl is great and does a really good job at describing transfem experiences imo and ring true to my life but based on conversations with transmasc friends its not as good of a reflection of transmasc experiences n can even read as offensive? idk how u identify or if that matters. I do think its worth reading for a good transfem perspective tho :3

interesting... I suppose I'll have to read on and see lol. I assume you're transfem based on the phrasing here and like, obviously communicating with me in good faith, so I mean this with no malice towards you or your transmasc friends—but I'm curious how much the "offensive" part comes from an honest/earnest reading of her work and how much stems from a more general kneejerk reaction from certain stripes of transmasc people who bristle at any descriptions of power dynamics that might implicate them in transmisogny... which, tbqh, the growing prominence of those kneejerk reactions is part of why I finally picked up whipping girl in the first place!

so I'm definitely interested in the transfem perspective, especially going back to the root of the term "transmisogny" amidst a climate where it's being repurposed for increasingly removed ends, but even as a transmasc(?)* person I've already been nodding along with stuff she's described in the foreword/blog posts that I've read so far. the only thing I would strongly disagree with is her assertion that masculine gender presentation is valued more highly than feminine gender presentation in lesbian communities, because in my experience that's not always or even often the case, but I also assume a lot of that has to do with cultural shifts over time considering that she's a few years older than my mom. lol. I actually wonder if the newfound dominance (or at least what I perceive as a dominance) of feminine perspectives in lesbian communities comes from the fact that, like, both gayness and general gender nonconformity are more culturally acceptable than they were even 15 or 25 years ago, but the former has gained more ground than the latter, and so being more "normatively" female (and therefore more mainstream) has become the new metric for assigning value in gay spaces versus an old school approach that simply valued masculinity as-is. times change etc etc. and in the act of typing all that out it also occurred to me how much the current plight of masc lesbians might be collateral damage from modern flavors of transmisognystic radfems who target trans lesbians in a way that also leaves cis butches in the lurch. much to consider...

* just to lay my cards on the table, I don't strooongly align myself with "transmasc" as a label but it does describe the general... direction in which I have moved, lol. in any case I'm certainly not transfem but I do believe in their beliefs.

26 notes · View notes

velvetvexations · 3 months

Note

Hey velvet, glad to see you’re back. I’m sorry you got powerjacketed by your own sisters and allies— you’re an easy target for exclusionists and crypto-radfems/transradfems because of your discourse alignments. I may not agree with all of your positions, and at times do believe you could be more receptive to other transfems’ points, but you dont deserve to be harassed out of your own safe space.

Please don’t feel the need to put yourself out there for your transmasc siblings. You got off pretty consequence-free this time, but i imagine much more severe hearsay could easily spread about you if you dont prioritize your safety more. being a transfem with an opinion on this site is hard and i wish you the best ❤️

If it helps any, I literally had tears in my eyes recently because I had a really nice conversation with a self-identified TMA for the first time. I'd talked before about how it would be easy for good and rational people to adopt a system that disadvantaged them but it would be more inherently selfish to do so when it advantaged you, but in retrospect maybe that WAS wrong of me to say. Maybe I WAS being a bit transmisogynyistic, because I was still wrapped up in frustration with other transfems at least partly as a group, even if I tried insisting I didn't think it was most of them.

But I was working with the data I had at the time, which is that I was able to come to borderline wholesome agree-to-disagree conclusions with TMEs while TMAs seemed to exclusively be hateful no matter how hard I tried to approach as a civilized being (and have continued to do so, despite declaring I'd give it up awhile ago), or if I did start out confrontational was specifically because they had takes completely unrelated to gender that smashed my berserk button, at which point that eclipsed anything else.

But then I talked to a TMA who made a post I thought was unfair, and they were like "yeah sorry I was just venting if I was talking about this in a way that was actually trying to spread awareness I'd have worded it better because I agree with you that it's a situation where the problem is people trying too hard to be respectful and the best way of actually dealing with that if one was to attempt it isn't getting angry with them".

And like! That very brief interaction wasn't even about TMA/TME, but they just had it listed as an identifier, and that made me completely reconsider the way I'd been viewing transfems, even if only a portion of transfems involved in an extremely specific discourse. Because I'd seen such a range of self-identified TMEs, from asshole pickmes to people who were just genuinely trying to be good allies, but here at last was a TMA I just disagreed with over TMA/TME language.

So I literally cried over that.

I mean, I didn't investigate her blog. Maybe if I looked into it I would indeed find that she believed in really awful things, TMA/TME-related or otherwise, but the actual content of that interaction was emphasizing that kindness is important when one is feeling that "TMEs" are making well-intentioned missteps so it still gave me a measure of faith.

The other thing is that something I had been worried about was my deep lore that made me a bit obsessively paranoid about dragging back up, but I talked about that a little while ago (cw for CSA) and since then I've felt safer about Velvet Nation being understanding and caring since I've already brought up the context of everything that happened.

And, also, as much as I do love people and try to live the Superman quote in my pinned post to the very best of my ability, I also have a bottomless need for attention, so.

#transandro phobia

10 notes · View notes

kaurwreck · 4 months

Note

hi i love reading your posts about bsd!!! they're very insightful + very clearly written by someone who's spent a while familiarizing themself with what they're talking about, and they're often refreshingly unique. particularly always taken aback (surprised? in a good way) by the trust you have in bsd in a work. even when i disagree with them, your analyses and theories are always (1) interesting (2) evidently written by someone approaching bsd and their conversations in good faith, both of which matter a lot to me.

might be completely off-base, but do you think having a background in law might impact writing bluntly/authoritatively, especially if your writing is perceived differently out of fandom spaces? i don't have enough experience to be confident, but that tone next to the emphasis on clarity in your writing feels like it fits, even if only in a chicken-and-egg way.

I stand by my problematic wife!!!!!!

I really, really do have so much faith in and love for bsd, and I trust Kafka Asagiri implicitly. This is, in part, because months and months ago, as I felt myself becoming consumed by the source material, I recognized I needed to temper myself and my expectations of the work.

My intensity and obsessiveness are as familiar to me as the beleaguered tendons in my wrists. I know twinging aches precede sharp, heated pain, so I know when to wrap the inflammation before it flares any further. Similarly, I know that if I don't ground myself before hours of hyperfixated research become tens of hours, I risk becoming disillusioned, and I risk pouring myself completely into something that won't replenish that time, energy, and emotional investment. So, I wrap my wrist when I can feel the inklings of tendinitis, and I reorient around authorial intent when the hyperfixation begins to spore.

So, I sought out interviews with Kafka Asagiri, expecting that he'd spoken to the limitations of his authorial framework.

(This sounds silly, but it works for me; for example, I adore Vanitas no Carte, but I only engage with the material referenced in VnC (ex: Song of Roland) shallowly except insofar as I have an independent interest. This is because when I similarly felt I might become obsessed, I sought out interviews, during which Jun Mochizuki stated clearly that the references she makes don't penetrate the substance of her characters or the story. So, I'll skim them, but most of the energy I pour into VnC (of which there's a lot), I pour into VnC itself rather than it's reference materials. This is because I'm rewarded by insights into the narrative I hadn't noticed before; different facets of interpretation I hadn't previously considered; greater understanding of the characters; etc. It's reciprocal; otherwise, it drains me dry because I cannot emphasize enough, I do not approach research like any human person should.)

Anyway, so, I searched for and identified statements Kafka Asagiri made about the referenced material. And, I was pleasantly surprised that he is passionate about the underlying literature and, from the outset, wrote the story hoping his audience would gain an interest in the literary works from which he took inspiration. And that sufficed, that constituted assurance that while I couldn't expect that he would intend all of the connections my obsessive, insatiable, pattern hungry brain would make, there was depth I could explore while still engaging with bsd.

What's wild is that I was expecting, like, easter eggs and light or ambiguous foreshadowing. Instead, once I started researching the period, authors, works, etc., the story began to open and come together where it hadn't been before. I clearly was already enjoying it, but there were what I perceived to be fairly severe structural flaws and neither narrative focus nor diverse enough arcs. Except the more I read the source material and the more I engaged with bsd as a multimedia work in which the various adaptations were facets of a whole rather than the same story reinterpreted + the various spinoffs as fragments of canon; the more I noticed a dialogue between bsd and its source materials. Which, taken together, recontextualized what I previously perceived to be narrative flaws such that while novel in structure, bsd became a satisfying, deeply intentional narrative.

This isn't to say I am noticing only and everything Asagiri intended to write, but his own sincere engagement with the works on top of which bsd is written is so tightly woven into the story and characters that bsd is a genuinely innovative medium of literary critique and historical reflection for an expansive array of literature that spans several eras.

So, I really, really do have so much faith in and love for bsd, and I trust Kafka Asagiri implicitly. Not because I think it's without flaws or that it hits each of its marks; because, quite frankly, even evaluated in the context of its unique structure, it's a rough tumbled gem. I certainly don't trust the story to fall into into a more common or familiar structure either.

Instead, I trust it to be sincere, compassionate, thoughtful, ambitiously playful, delightfully absurd, and I trust it to have more heart than sense. But mostly, I trust that while the story and Kafka Asagiri are untethered from convention, they are grounded in the hope and love and desperate yearning for humanity that saturates each of the namesake authors' works and legacies.

So, yeah, I'm never worried; but I'm often delighted.

(also, thank you so much for the kind words!!! y'all are ruining me with how sweet you've been this evening 🥺 you're also very, very on point regarding the impact of my law background on my writing, specifically its bluntness and emphasis on clarity. the authoritativeness actually preceded my legal training and even my ability to write. i'll spare you the baby lore, but, like, yeah, i think we should just cut our losses on that one.)

#bsd #bungou stray dogs #tipsy dima #i am glowing yall have hyped me up so much ty 🥺

9 notes · View notes

inmarbleimmobility · 9 months

Text

1.1.4 - "Works to Match Words"

well look who finally got caught up enough in their real job to do their les mis letters posts! (and figured out how to use the title feature!) oh boy there's so much here y'all.

the title immediately stands out to me - it reminds me of a bible verse, though I can't immediately pinpoint which one. a quick google tells me probably james 2:17 (faith without works is dead) but i think 1 john 3:18 fits better - "[...] let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth". this whole chapter is an exploration of what people *say* (or what their titles/positions say about them) vs what they *do*.

Pun Count is now 2 ("My highness cannot reach that shelf", maybe my fave pun in the whole book)!

Myriel refers to the Saint Augustine quote ("place your expectations in him to whom there is no succession") as being "something odd", just like Hugo later says he has his "own strange way of judging things" - driving home that point that for a priest to follow christ's actual words and intentions isn't the rule but the exception.

not sure how the anecdote about his cousin fits my words/works thesis but let me get to the end of this post and I bet I'll find it!

"using the tomb to feed their vanity" seems to imply there's something else these men should be using the tomb for - most likely a contemplation on heaven?

"A pennyworth of paradise" - lots here!! someone else brought up Myriel choosing to convince people to good acts through love rather than fear; we're seeing the fear approach work here, but only insofar as it gets Geborand to donate a single penny - a token contribution, a "work" that is more word than deed. he can say he was charitable, therefore he thinks he'll get into heaven. Myriel's saying it doesn't work that way - that a pennyworth of charity only gets you a pennyworth of paradise, perhaps also that the greater your works on earth, the greater your reward in heaven? this is a view I personally don't vibe all that much with as I feel like in practice it only encourages performative "works" instead of its intent (to reward fully those who were truly good). it *is* a very biblical take, though; see the beatitudes.

the Marquis de Champtercier - others have mentioned him as a kind of precursor to Gillenormand, which, yeah! the "words" here are the marquis claiming he's prioritizing his own poor while the actual work is to deny "Myriel's poor" his donation. Myriel (and I) disagree with the "my poor/your poor" distinction - the suffering of any person is the responsibility of all of us to alleviate, hence "give them to me". interestingly this was the first time i read this line as "give *them* to me" instead of "give them to *me*" - the latter is, again, Myriel saying he doesn't discriminate between "his" poor and the "Marquis' poor"; the former feels like an even cheekier followup to "you must give me something" - if it won't be money, it'll be "his" poor.

"God gives light to men, and the law sells it." Myriel is speaking literally here re: the door and window tax (which I know nothing about; what's the logic there??), but in a larger sense, he also isn't. Light is one of the things I'm specifically looking for on this read, and this feels like the setup for the points Hugo will make later with his other usages of light. God gives light - hope, love, education, belonging, whatever it is - to men, and the law - literally, but also just society and government - sells it (at a monetary cost but also a less tangible one - your soul? your humanity?) goddamn, I can't believe I never thought more about all the things Hugo is subtly setting up in these chapters and passing off as Sick Bishop Burns TM.

"My brethren, be compassionate; see how much suffering there is around you" - it says he's preaching this at "the cathedral", but I don't know much about the demographic of Digne at this time. are his parishioners mostly rich? mostly laborers? a mix?

I appreciate the inclusion of Myriel's knowledge of Southern dialects more now that I know a little about the context of Occitan/lenga d'oc/Provencal at this time! i want to spend some time researching the history and linguistics of Occitan here soon, it's fascinating to me.

lots of people have expressed that Myriel's doctrine of repressing the body so as not to sin as rubbing them the wrong way, and same. unfortunately it very much jibes with the Catholic view of sin. nothing'll give you Permanent Weird Feelings About Your Body And Specifically Sex like Catholicism! (this last to be read like a tagline on a commercial with, like, the Mr. Clean guy doing a thumbs up above it, only he's wearing a miter.) from a modern viewpoint I'd expect Myriel to think a bit differently on this point the way he does on a lot of other Church doctrine things, but I suppose if he really "got it from the Gospels" there's plenty of textual evidence to support that. ew, Catholicism.

also not the first person to point out "but be upright" as paralleling "un juste", the title of this book, but wow it's good.

gonna be vulnerable here and confess I don't really get what he's saying about the "offended hypocrisy" that's "quick to protest and run for cover". pot/kettle I guess? maybe it's just worded in a way I can't wrap my mind around.

again with the Big Three - women, children, and laborers (here "servants". Hugo via Myriel directly identifies the corresponding oppressors - husbands, fathers, and masters - but in this case I'm not sure how much I agree with those. masters certainly, but husbands and fathers? certainly they *can* be oppressive and create those conditions Hugo so strongly opposes, but not always - and in many cases those husbands/fathers are also laborers, so. I much prefer his followup of the strong, the rich, and the wise. once again Hugo says eat the rich.

"the guilty one is not he who commits the sin, but the one who causes the darkness." alright everyone, pack it up, we're done here, we've found the Main Idea! lmao can you imagine if that's where Hugo stopped? hilarious.

the counterfeiter. the "word" here is claiming to uphold justice, when the "work" is actually just upholding the law. I especially like the wording of saying the prosecutor had "brought truth to light" here - going to have to go grab my French text and see if this is a Hugo wording or a FMA wording, but either way it goes back to that theme of light - in this case, how the truth of the case isn't necessarily the same as the Light, the good.

the condemned man. there's so much here. "[Myriel] called [the condemned man] by his name" - this brings to mind musical!Valjean's line "my name is Jean Valjean!" when Javert persists in addressing him as 24601, as well as his later surprise when the bishop treats him like a person. sometimes all it takes is treating a person like a person. i'm sure this won't be the last time I say that. Hugo also refers to death as "an abyss" here; that recalls "I am reaching, but I fall/and the night is closing in/as I stare into the void/into the whirlpool of my sin". I don't think this is the first time Hugo refers to the unknown as an abyss, either! in this case, it isn't just the unknown of death that the condemned man fears, but likely also the judgment after, which he knows won't go well for him (he's specifically said to be "not ignorant enough to be indifferent"), much like the abyss of Valjean's sin. Myriel sheds light on this abyss ("showed him the light") and teaches the condemned man not to fear death or the afterlife. fascinating also how we're specifically told Myriel stays with the man onto the cart and all the way onto the scaffold, literally accompanying this man to his fate, helping him not be alone to the very last moment.

the upper classes see Myriel's reaction to the guillotine as "affectation" - because if they were to show the same outward reaction, it *would* be affectation for them.

haha hey did you guys know there's a character limit on tumblr posts? because i do now!! so uhh part 2 in a second i guess.

#les mis #les mis letters #lm 1.1.4 #i didn't even know i had this many thoughts jesus christ!

13 notes · View notes

causesciencethatswhy · 8 months

Note

https://www.tumblr.com/causesciencethatswhy/739756690719801344/the-only-expectation-was-that-he-should-have?source=share

Um i disagree on the point that members don't know how deep this shipping or solo shit goes cause taehyung is pretty deep in fandom cause he posts arts from accounts, has showed jm the moon tatto thing, jk used tiktok and every sns in this fandom is dominated by tk shippers be it any. I can bet all my money that all the members have seen worst of their shipping stuff than this. Like i know for a fact that even jm knows about it too. They knows they just don't react cause it might make a big deal so they just let it be.

The comapny also don't care about shippers much cause these delulu tkkrs are the ones that are also giving them some millions of money so why would they when they're making money? They gave tkklives her account back. You have people in that company just to keep the sns safe for boys and make sure people who defame them get's punished but you have all these accounts with big following defaming boys in the name of shipping.

This will sound rude now but mark my words tkkrs are beyond repair now and in future it will be jk, tae and their respective partners that are gonna get the end of their hate. Their partners are gonna get all the unnecessary hate from these shippers and neither the members nor anyone else would be able to do anything about it mark my words. They should have stopped them when it was time but now it's too late and at the end it's taekook that's gonna pay for it.

You're creating a causation= correlation link where there isn't one necessarily. Tae can easily come across pretty jimin fanart or ai art, without being in the trenches of shipping or army spaces (especially with all the plethora of art reposter accounts there are) Jk having tiktok in no way guarantees that he's coming across egregious shippers when most accounts he engages with are either meme accounts or dancers. Just because they have a presence on the internet that we can't exactly track, doesn’t mean than we can take the assumption that all the boys are aware of how deeply messed up the shipping spaces run.

With respect to hybe taking action, I agree that they need to start taking these shippers antis more seriously, especially on the non Korean sides, because most of the claims those accounts make could very well amount to defamation but their lax approach tells me that they either don't see them as a threat or are unable to take much action against perpetrators outside of SK, which we know has been an issue before.

As for tae and jungkook shutting down shippers more, they already have anon?? "Get out of your imagination, it's not good in there ", are Taehyung's own words, but was that good enough for the shippers, no? They found a niche alternative translation to satisfy their delusions or just straight up pretend it didn’t happen. People often accuse tae of ramping up tkkrs esp in chap 2, but its just been moments of him sharing about his interactions with jk, how is it his responsibility if tkkrs have run with it to be terrible to jm/jennie? Saying that he's "feeding these shippers" by simply talking about jk sounds strangely reminiscent of what tkkrs used to say about jm a few years back, but whatever.

As for jk, he's shut down tkkrs many times last year itself, what with his weirded out look into the camera when asked whether he's living with tae and many more examples which I'm not that interested in listing out. But does any of that, stop tkkrs? No.

I agree that tkkrs are beyond repair and it might create serious problems for any partners tae or jk might introduce, but you cannot in good faith put the onus of responsibility on the both of them for the way their shippers act. Its too victim blamey for me. I will hold tae a little responsible for reposting that account without checking, just solely because he has a bigger platform than most, but I'm not going to accuse him of being some secret terrible person for the actual content on those blogs.

#jikook

13 notes · View notes

kimbappykidding · 1 year

Text

Part One Here

Baekhyun had known your members for years and through you got to hear more about them and he decided Nayeon would be the best person for his scheme. Jihyo, Jeongyeon and Sana would likely tell you right away. Mina, Tyuzu and Momo might not know how to discreetly ask you if they didn't know the answer. Chayoung and Dahyun were wild cards and so that left Nayeon as the safest option but how to approach her? Baekhyun figured some award show after-party would be his best bet. There would be tons of people and he could surely get Nayeon alone...easier said than done when she had so many members. Whenever she went to the bar or the toilet someone went with her and Baekhyun thought he might not have a chance to talk to her...when Tzuyu who was guarding the table with Nayeon walked away leaving her alone. Baekhyun made a quick excuse to Lay about the bathroom and appeared beside her. "Hi!" he said sitting down next to her and Nayeon jumped "hi". "So we might not have much time so I'll just come out with it. Please don't tell Y/n but Suho is really enjoying being back with her and we've all been wondering if it will develop into more". Nayeon nodded "we've been thinking the exact same!". Baekhyun nodded "have you asked Y/n? What did she say?". Nayeon paused, unsure if you just tell Baekhyun and he smiled at her "I'm only asking because Suho wants it to be more but he's scared to ask Y/n in case she doesn't want to be and it ruins their relationship". He hoped telling Nayeon this would be a show of good faith and it worked. Nayeon looked down "we have asked Y/n but ages ago and she said they didn't work out dating last time so why would it work out this time?". Baekhyun was shocked and upset on behalf of Suho but Nayeon continued "however the girls pointed out that was ages ago when they were different people. Plus they never had this amazing chemistry and passion, so we told her it might be different now". "What did she say?" Baekhyun asked and Nayeon sighed "not much but she didn't disagree with our points...but like I said that was a few months ago so there's a chance she's changed her mind". "Do you think you could ask her?" Baekhyun asked "if you tell me that she has changed her mind then I can encourage Suho to ask her out! I just need to know Y/n won't break his heart". "Y/n would never be mean" Nayeon argued and Baekhyun nodded "I know but he's really fallen for her so if he worked up the courage to ask her and she said no it'd be hard for him. If she says no I won't tell him but we'll stop suggesting it to him and setting him up to fail". Nayeon nodded "okay, I'll speak to Y/n and text you?". "Yes, here's my number!" Baekhyun said handing her a slip of paper he'd already prepared. Nayeon nodded "okay I'll let you know as soon as I know" and with a wave she walked away.

Baekhyun didn't hear back for a whole week and the suspense was killing him. He'd drafted a message asking Nayeon if she'd asked you yet like 10 times before he stopped not wanting to be pushy. Nayeon was well aware Baekhyun was waiting for a reply but honestly there hadn't been any good time! You'd all been really busy with schedules and Nayeon hadn't got to be alone with you in ages. She knew if she just blurted it out to you, you’d immediately know something was up so she had to bide her time.Then one evening you were staying in and your roommate Jihyo was heading out. So Nayeon appeared at your door with a big smile. "What's going on?" you asked, clearly suspicious and Nayeon did her best to play it cool. "Nothing just we've hardly spoken all week and I missed you, fancy a catch-up?". "Of course!" you said welcoming her in and Nayeon flopped onto your bed with you. "Okay so what's new? How's your dating doing?". Nayeon quickly got roped into telling you the date she'd been on a few days ago and half an hour later she realised she'd gotten sidetracked. "Now enough about me, how are you? How's Suho?" Nayeon asked. You smiled at the mention of his name and nodded "he's good! He's back home this week because it's his brother's birthday". Nayeon nodded "cute, he's a good brother". You nodded "yeah he's so nice" and she smiled "and still hot?". You blushed nodding and Nayeon giggled "it's so nice that his niceness doesn't cancel that out". "If anything it makes it stronger" you explained "I see him being so kind and sweet and that makes me attracted to him and then he takes his shirt off and I want him even more". Nayeon laughed "that totally makes sense, nice guys are so hot" and you nodded. "So things are good between you?" Nayeon asked and you nodded "really good". Nayeon took a breath before going for the million-pound question "good enough for you to consider going official?". You paused and were quiet for a few seconds "I'm not sure". "Are you still worried about if you'd make it as a couple?" Nayeon asked. You nodded "yeah... it's difficult because I know we've changed but I'm happy now so why change it?". Nayeon paused "well I guess there's no reason to...except the security side of things". "Security side?" you asked and Nayeon nodded "yeah just if you're not exclusive Suho's allowed to sleep with other girls right?". You paused "I guess...". "Would you be okay with that?". The thought honestly hadn't occurred to you but now it did you knew the answer "no". Nayeon frowned "yeah I’d be the same...but I also agree with you, you should only date Suho if you want to be his girlfriend not just because you don't want someone else to be". You frowned "see that sounds nice, being Suho's girlfriend". Nayeon smiled "it does?" and you nodded "I'm just worried about all the expectation it brings with it! We already broke up once so there's added pressure for things to succeed this time and that's a lot to think about. Whereas at the moment there's none of that". "Who would put this pressure on you?" Nayeon asked "because you know none of us would think badly of you if you broke up. People break up all the time and breaking up is actually an incredibly mature thing to do. It's you showing you know when to call it a day and saving each other any hurt or pain. There's no shame in it". You nodded "I guess the pressure would come from me...and I don't want to hurt Suho, I'd hate myself if I hurt him". Nayeon took your hand "don't worry we all know you don't want to hurt him and Suho knows that". You nodded feeling teary and Nayeon squeezed your hand "plus I think you make Suho really happy so there's no need to worry about that. In a relationship or not he's smitten with you so you definitely make him happy". You blushed "thanks Nayeon" and she smiled "no problem" hugging you "wanna watch a movie?" and you nodded. Nayeon felt like she was low-key betraying you but she texted Baekhyun telling him you wanted to date Suho but were scared of the pressure increasing and of hurting Suho. Baekhyun thought you were so sweet and found it so telling how your main concern was hurting Suho. He thought that more than anything was why the two of you should be together. If you cared about someone that much you should give it a go but now he had to convince Suho of that. He told Nayeon he would encourage Suho delicately and she asked him to let her know if he needed her to do anything more. Mission infiltrate your group was a resounding success. Baekhyun was a lot less subtle than Nayeon when he appraoched Suho. "So have you thought any more about asking Y/n out?" Baekhyun asked him one afternoon. Everyone paused confused where the topic had come from and Suho blushed "no...why?". "I just think you should" Baekhyun said with a smile "that's all". Suho shook his head "I have no idea if Y/n wants that". "I think she would" Baekhyun said "if you just explain to her that second time's the charm and reassure her there's no pressure I'm sure she'd be on board". Suho didn't speak anymore on the topic but Baekhyun's words did stick with him and he thought about them every time he saw you. He decided he'd just have to go for it and was going to ask you after today's award show. You looked beautiful and Suho told you so as soon as he could at the afterparty. You blushed "you look good yourself". Suho smiled and went to reply when someone knocked into Suho. It was Red Velvet's Irene and she rushed to apologise and insisted on buying Suho a drink. You'd noticed Irene paying more attention to Suho recently and wondered if you weren't the only one who'd noted Suho's hotness. As you saw the two of the talking an idea occurred to you. Irene seemed into Suho and Suho's admiration of Irene was well known. Maybe they'd like to hook up too and you decided to let them because Nayeon's words had hit home but in an unexpected way. You realised it was wrong to gatekeep Suho and were searching for a way to tell him it was okay if he wanted to hook up with other girls. You couldn't have zero labels and also tell him what to do. You figured this was the best way to avoid hurting Suho, you weren't dating him so couldn't hurt him that way but were also setting him free by letting him know he didn't owe you anything. It was a win-win! So when he returned from the bar you smiled "you can go dance with Irene if you want" you said and Suho smiled at you "no it's fine". "Seriously" you smiled back at him "I know you've always had a thing for her so go. You don't owe me anything we're not together". Suho paused his smile vanishing "I know but I'm here with you...". "You're too nice" you laughed trying to play it cool "we're not a couple so go do whatever you want to do with Irene, that's the plus of not being official right? No restraints" you said shooting Suho a bright smile which you didn't truly feel. Suho meanwhile felt so shaken. It was totally within your right to not want to date him but to hear you say it was another thing. Suho felt really upset and he couldn't bring himself to smile. "Well if that's what you want" he said and you nodded "for you to be happy? Yeah" and so Suho walked away without another word.

Meanwhile Baekhyun and Nayeon were watching the two of you for any sign Suho had asked you to be official. They saw how tense the two of you were but mistook that for "telling someone you want to date them" tension not "telling the person you like to go hook up with a beautiful idol". "Oh they look serious!" Baekhyun said excitedly and Nayeon sat forward "he must be asking her! I hope he can convince her". "He can" Baekhyun said "plus Y/n wants to be with him! So I bet after he tells her there's no pressure that will be it. She'll collapse into his arms". Nayeon grinned excitedly and then paused seeing you smile "oh she's happy! He must've said it!". Baekhun paused because Suho still seemed really tense but you were indeed really smiley. Then Suho nodded and Baekhyun figured Nayeon was right...until he got up and walked right to Irene. "What is going on?" Nayeon asked. You watched Suho walk away and let out a shaky breath. You felt like you were going to burst into tears any second and wondered why. Shouldn't you feel good after doing the right thing? Suho approached Irene and you saw the girl smile brightly when she saw him. They looked so good together and Irene was the it girl of SM. It surely wouldn't be long before Suho switched from her to you but at least if he ended it with you instead of you hurting him, you wouldn't be able to hurt him. That was surely better but it didn't make you feel any better. "Hey are you okay?" Nayeon asked sitting down next to you and you nodded "yeah of course, are you?". She nodded not taking her eyes off you "what happened with Suho". You paused blinking "I...told him to go for it with Irene". Nayeon frowned "wait but why? You like him so why would you encourage him to get with another girl". You tried to explain it was for his own good but your words got muddled and before you knew it you were crying. Nayeon knew you wouldn't want Suho to see so she rushed you from the room to somewhere more private. Baekhyun saw you burst into tears and knew the conversation couldn't have gone well. Especially because Suho was definitely flirting with Irene and very successfully. Baekhyun was worried Suho was going to ruin whatever he had with you tonight so he quickly stepped in. "Hey Irene, Yeri was looking for you". "She was?" Irene asked leader mode kicking in "is she okay?". "I don't know but she said something about needing you and she seemed a little stressed". Irene frowned "I'll go see if I can find her thanks Baekhyun" and she rushed away. Suho knew Baekhyun was lying and turned to him "what was that for?". "What are you doing?" Baekhyun replied "why would you do this to Y/n?". Suho looked down "Y/n suggested it". "What!" Baekhyun cried and Suho sighed "she told me we're just casual and she likes that. She doesn't want a thing to change...except for me to hook up with other girls. I figured it must be because she's seeing other people and has only just realised I've not been. I feel like such an idiot" Suho said and Baekhyun went to tell him he must've got something wrong when Irene returned. "Yeri said she never asked me and none of the other girls did" looking at Baekhyun. Baekhyun paused "is she sure? Was it not her?". "Baekhyun what's going on?" Irene asked and Baekhyun turned to Suho "Hyung I really need to speak with you". Suho shook his head "stop messing around Baekhyun and leave us alone" and he put his arm around Irene and led her away. Suho and Irene danced for a while and flirted back and forth. They'd always been friendly but this was definitely something more and Irene had never looked at him the way she was tonight. Suho supposed he must be the luckiest guy in the world to have Irene look at him like that but he didn't feel happy on the inside no matter how smiley he was on the outside. All he could think of was you and how you didn't want him. They stopped dancing to grab a drink and Suho couldn't help but look around for you but you were nowhere to be seen. He wondered where you'd gone when Irene spoke "looking for someone?". "Of course not, who could look anywhere else when you're right in front of them?". Irene laughed "sure you weren't looking for Y/n?". Suho shook his head "no not at all, why would I?" replying far too quickly. "Are you and Y/n not a thing?" Irene asked "I'd heard you were back together". "We hook up but we're not together" Suho said "trust me that won't be an issue at all". "So she's okay with this?" Irene asked and Suho nodded "super okay". "And are you?" Irene asked and Suho froze. "What? Of course I'm okay with this! You're really pretty and I've always had a thing for you". Irene paused "are you sure? I saw you with Y/n earlier and you seem a little off sorts, did you argue or something?". Suho paused "I...not exactly". "Are you sure?" Irene asked "Suho we don't have to do anything if you're unsure. I don't like interfering with couples". "But we're not a couple and we never will be!" Suho said snapping and then he sighed saying it again slower "we're never going to be a couple again...I got my one shot with her and I blew it". Meanwhile outside Nayeon had finally calmed you down and understood the situation. "So you figured the only way you could still be with him and not hurt him was to let him date other people?" Nayeon asked and you nodded. "I figured I couldn't have him without sharing him so thought if I encouraged him to see other people then it wouldn't be so bad". "Y/n!" Nayeon said hugging you "I never said you were a bad person! I was just encouraging you to be open to dating Suho because he wants to ask you out!". "He does?" you asked and Nayeon paused "probably shouldn't have told you that". Suho felt like such a mess. Irene had been really nice to him and promised they could still be friends. She also told him to go and talk to you but Suho couldn't face any more rejection. So he was just heading home so he could dive head-first into bed when Chen and Kai approached him. "Hey is Y/n okay?" Chen asked and Suho paused "Y/n, I think so why?". "We saw her crying and wanted to make sure she was alright". "Crying? When?" Suho asked. They frowned "erm about an hour ago" Kai said and Chen nodded "it was after you two talked. Nayeon came over to her and she started crying". Suho felt so confused but he knew he had to make sure you were okay. "Did you see where she went?" he asked but they both shook their heads. Suho was looking around for you when he heard someone call his name. It was Baekhyun. "Can we talk now?" he asked and Suho shook his head "no where's Y/n? I need to talk to her". "I know where she is, we can talk on the way" Baekhyun said and he led Suho outside. "Nayeon what do you mean Suho wants to date me?" you asked and the girl sighed "okay don't hate me but Baekhyun told me Suho wanted to ask you to be his girlfriend but was worried you'd say no. Baekhyun didn't want Suho to get hurt so he asked me to see if you were open to dating Suho". "So that's what all those questions were the other day!" you said and Nayeon nodded "I'm so sorry but I just didn't want Suho to get hurt and Y/n I really think you'd be good together. You don't need to be this afraid". You sighed and went to argue when Suho stepped into the area where you were sat. Baekhyun had explained how Nayeon had asked you if you wanted to date and how they'd gotten in this mess. Suho was horrified and felt so bad. He couldn't believe he'd made you cry and no matter how much Baekhyun tried to comfort him he felt so guilty. Then Suho saw you, with your puffy red eyes and he froze. Seeing you so upset and knowing he was the cause was way worse actually seeing the evidence of it and he couldn't believe he'd been so stupid. You looked up and saw him and he realised he should probably move. "Suho?" you asked and he paused before coming towards you "Y/n I'm so sorry I made you cry! I only went after Irene because I thought you didn't want me and were trying to make me less clingy". "No I was trying to be nice and not leave you tied to me". "But I want to be tied to you" Suho said "in any way possible" and you blushed. "Okay so we're going to go" Baekhyun said gesturing to Nayeon and they rushed away leaving the two of you alone. Silence settled and Suho looked at you "can I sit down?" and you nodded. "So Baekhyun's told me some things Nayeon's said but I want to hear it from you... I'd like to date you Y/n but I understand you have some worries about that". You sighed "I just don't want to hurt you...what if it doesn't work and we've gone through all this for nothing?". "Well you could argue that with any relationship" Suho argued and you nodded "yeah but there's more pressure with us because we already broke up once before". Suho paused "well I don't think so, people get back together all the time! Chen and his wife broke up 3 times in their first year of dating and now look at them". "They did?" you asked and Suho nodded "people make mistakes Y/n but that's never a reason not to try, if you think you might be happy...". You paused "I just don't want to hurt you" and Suho took your hand "Y/n that is so sweet but you don't have to worry about that. I'm a big strong boy and even if we did break up I'd of course be upset but it'd be okay again eventually. So please don't worry about me. Just think of what you want because that's all I care about". You blushed "are you sure? You don't think I should be worried?". "I meant everything I said Y/n" and you nodded. "The I'd want to be your girlfriend" and Suho smiled "really?" and you nodded. Suho grinned "Y/n I will happily be your boyfriend" and he hugged you tightly. "You've made me so happy" Suho said and you smiled "I hope I always will". Suho pulled away and rested his hand on your chin "don't even worry about it, you do it naturally" and he kissed you. When you finally pulled away Suho sighed and bundled you against his chest "I'll never stop being grateful for the guys forcing me to show off my abs" Suho said and you laughed. "It wasn't just the abs that brought me back". Suho smiled "you sure?" and you melted at the way he was looking at you. "Okay I'll find some way to thank the guys too" making Suho smiled "I will also got to find some way to thank the guys but I'm hoping our methods will be very different" Suho said huskily and you swallowed "I hope so too". "Want to go try them out?" Suho asked "I've got a girlfriend to take care of". You nodded and both rushed to get back to Suho's. The next morning, you came downstairs together holding hands and the guys all noticed but didn't say anything. Baekhyun looked like he was dying to but D.O. had clearly threatened him or something because the boy was on his best behaviour. You felt bad for him so looked to Suho who smiled. "Just so you guys know my girlfriend might be over a lot more" and everyone froze. "Girlfriend?" Chanyeol asked and Suho nodded taking your hand "we're back together". The guys cheered and rushed to offer you their congratulations and Baekhyun claimed all the credit. "It was me who got them together you know?" he called loudly and you turned to him. "Yes that reminds me, you and Nayeon were scheming behind our backs weren't you". "Yeah...having those secret talks" Suho said putting a hand on his arm and Baekhyun froze "I...we only did it out of love and now look! The two of you are back together so you're welcome". You smiled "oh we'll find a way to thank you right Suho?". Suho nodded "definitely". Baekhyun paused looking between you two "I don't know if to be scared or turned on" making Suho lunge for him. Baekhyun screamed and ran around the house as Suho chased him. You watched amused until Lay gently touched your arm. "It's good to have you back Y/n". You smiled "good to be back".

30 notes · View notes