#grishanalyticritical

[lilu787788]

I could never side with Alina, Mal, Nikolai, Zoya, or the others, because their so-called mission was built on naive idealism and staggering ignorance of power. The destruction of the Fold, which they paraded as some kind of moral triumph, was in reality a fatal strategic failure. The Fold was not just a curse. It was a wall that kept predators at bay. For all its danger, it created a necessary boundary that stopped Fjerda and Shu Han from tearing Ravka apart. Erasing it while knowing enemies waited just beyond was not heroism. It was recklessness. It was the act of people playing at leadership, people who had never had to make real decisions with real consequences.

In eliminating the Fold, they stripped Ravka of more than a barrier. They removed a symbol of power, a geopolitical fact that demanded caution from aggressors. The moment the Fold vanished, Ravka stood naked before its enemies. Aleksander’s disappearance only made this worse. With him gone, the Grisha lost the one person who had fought for them with more than empty speeches and fragile alliances. No new defense was put in place. No army strong enough to hold the borders. No plan to deal with foreign aggression. No system to protect Grisha from being hunted in the streets. Alina and the others replaced harsh reality with fantasy. And fantasies don’t survive war.

Aleksander’s decision at the port was not cruelty. It was strategy. It was power used with restraint, directed at those who posed a real and immediate threat: Zlatan and the Drüskelle. They were not innocents. They were murderers gathering to destroy Grisha lives and destabilize the region. Aleksander acted fast and with precision. He didn’t revel in bloodshed, but he did what was required. He made sure the message was clear: Ravka is not yours to carve up. That is not evil. That is leadership. That is what real rulers do when their people are in danger.

Meanwhile, Nikolai stood delivering polished words that meant nothing. Alina and Mal congratulated themselves for their purity, while leaving a shattered nation defenseless. It was not only shortsighted — it was insulting. Their performative virtue was empty in the face of nations that had long wanted to see Ravka burn. Their ignorance of realpolitik wasn’t just foolish. It was dangerous. And in a world that mirrors our own — where aggressors wait for weakness — their choices feel not only unrealistic, but offensive.

Fjerda would waste no time. Shu Han would make their move. Civil unrest would ignite as the false promise of peace fell apart. Grisha would be scapegoated and butchered. Aleksander’s absence would be a gaping hole no one else could fill. The monarchy would collapse, exposed as ornamental and hollow. And the so-called heroes would become the architects of their nation’s downfall, remembered not as saviors, but as the ones who opened the gates and let the wolves in.

Aleksander was never the villain. He was the only one who saw the entire board. He knew that peace is not given, it’s enforced. Hope alone is not a strategy. Fear is what keeps the enemy from crossing your border, from hunting your people, from tearing your country apart. He understood that to lead in a brutal world, you sometimes must make brutal choices — not because you want to, but because no one else will. In removing him and the Fold, Alina and her allies didn’t end Ravka’s suffering. They ensured it would grow.

[yolixpan]

All above.

I’m still sitting here wondering what exactly Aleksander was doing wrong. I’m talking about his plan overall, nothing about what Genya and Zoyas’s beef with him are.

His plan seems solid, take down the lazy , worthless royal family, take over , end the wars and stop the persecution of the Grisha. I don’t see what’s wrong with that. He’s fighting a war and also planning a rebellion.

What exactly is Alina fighting against him for? Does she love the monarchy? Does she not actually care about the wars? She runs off without truly knowing what he’s doing. Baghra has no evidence.

I’m just confused because normally it’s the hero who wants to take down the corrupt monarchy but in S&B it’s the so called “villain “.

[siriuslyobsessedwithfiction]

On the topic of the destruction of Fold causing more harm than good. Firstly, there were blights, which were not only a threat to Ravka, but the whole world because it was not exactly contained. At least the Fold stayed the same for centuries in one place and the creatures couldn't leave it. Secondly, why was destroying the Fold such a necessity?

East Ravka needed access to the outside world somehow? Let's break it down. They couldn't produce everything on their own and trade nothing. They couldn't circle around the Fold through Fjerda or Shu-Han because they were enemy countries but to be fair, the Darkling was King for like two days and managed to strike a deal with Fjerda to allow passage for food and supplies because Nikolai was bombing them and causing the people to starve. So the previous useless Kings were 100% the problem and negotiations could be done. But the point is, West Ravka was fine on its own because they had access to the sea. It was East Ravka that needed the West because it was essentially trapped from three sides: Fold, Fjerda, Shu-Han. But then again, the author forgot the Earth isn't flat so East Ravka would still have access to the sea from the fourth side. They could go to Novyi Zem and Kerch that way and trade with them just fine.

The only reason the Fold was a problem because east Ravka was divided from the west. And while trading with Novyi Zem and Kerch would be easy, they'd have to go around the whole world to reach west Ravka. Ipso facto, destruction of the Fold served only one purpose, which was "uniting" the country. That purely seems like just a selfish reason for Tsars to hold onto their power in both sides of the country when the west Ravka hadn't needed the east in centuries and realistically would've established itself as a separate country a long time ago. So why didn't that happen? Because the Fold wasn't even that much of a threat or a problem! Ordinary people could still hire skiffs and travel through the Fold just fine! Close relatives still lived on either side of it and visited each other regularly. West Ravka didn't declare itself a separate nation because the Tsar was perfectly capable of sending a part of the first and second army through the Fold to squash the rebellion. And let's be honest, it was most likely Grisha they were scared of, not the first army.

In conclusion, destroying the Fold was a waste during that time. They couldn't even get rid of it properly and had to drag Darkling in to clean up the mess in RoW. In SoB, once the Darkling obtained control over the Fold and could move it at will, it could absolutely be used as a nuclear threat to ward off the enemy countries from declaring a full-scale war on Ravka, which they were planning to do and basically already doing with creeping occupation and clashes at the borders. The Fold was the least of Ravka's problems. Outdated absolute monarchy, serfdom, collapsing economy and the divide between Grisha and otkazatsya were more pressing issues. The Fold could act as Ravka's shield in the meantime. Then they could research merzost and the heart of Sankt Feliks, maybe properly train Alina first...But no, no training, straight up triple amplifier! Initiate the civil war nobody asked for, we need to get a bastard prince and then his girlfriend on the throne, who needs democracy even though realistically this is the time period for it! Let's destroy the Second army!

[stromuprisahat]

Yeah, the Darkling might've planned to manipulate the Sun Summoner to gain their loyalty, but then he got distracted by what seemed to be more pressing matters, like those pesky wars and his country falling apart, and look how that worked out for him...

[is-today-tomorrow-in-nz]

Why Nikolai is more of a villain than Aleksander

This post is an inspiration from one of anon asks.

Time and time again antis have accused Aleksander of several hideous crimes without understanding the monarchy of 19th century Feudal Russia and what serfdom entails. Due to this lack of understanding(or willful ignorance), Aleksander is studied under a harsher light than Nikolai and other characters. I blame the author entirely for this, as she never gave Aleksander a voice until much later. In books 1-3, he is only projected to us through Alina who had nothing but disdain for him.

On the other hand, we see Nikolai, who was a prince and then a king, who did not do much for the country or Grisha. However, his actions are softened by LB and antis. He is considered a 'flawed' human who did his best. His manipulative actions are treated as an act of strategic brilliance while his mistakes are treated as an act of desperation/helplessness.

So, let me first start by explaining some of the vile accusations thrown at Aleksander and then contrast it with some of Nikolai's actions.

He sex-trafficked Genya.

In Book 1, the author herself says two key points 1) Grisha are no better than serfs and 2) After their training, Grisha are either posted in the borders or sent to serve in affluent households. So Genya was not a unique case. This, again, is the price Aleksander had to pay for the Grisha to live. Genya had to be sent as a child because an adult Genya could not get as close to the Queen as a child would and it worked for a while until the Queen turned on her. This were an understanding of serfdom is needed. A serf can be released only by the master not by anyone else. Aleksander cannot take her away and relocate her somewhere else. And if the antis had read the 'The Tailor' they would know that in spite of the challenges, Aleksander did give her a choice- to disappear forever or exact her revenge and it was Genya who chose to stay.

He committed genocide in Novokribirsk.

Even if we ignore Alina's unreliable POV, Zoya's POV tells us that only a part of the city, near the docks was destroyed. So what Aleksander did was just a warning and not a 'genocide'. Antis keep forgetting that Grisha's enemies were not just Fjerda and Shu Han but Ravka itself. Had the coup had succeeded, he not just wanted Fjerda and Shu Han to back off but the First Army soldiers as well. Book 2 shows how his paranoia were not unwarranted. Through Fedyor's story we learn how they were attacked in their sleep and how First Army conducted sham trials and slaughtered them. This alone shows how Ravka's sentiments about Grisha was not much different from Fjerda or Shu Han. So in the event of the coup, Aleksander had no choice but to issue a warning all of his enemies.

He is a predator/abuser.

This is the one that makes me laugh the most. Girl, he is an immortal. He has no choice. All his age-appropriate past lovers are long dead and buried. What is he supposed to do? Remain celibate? They often bring up the kiss near Baghra's hut as an example of his predatory nature. But what manipulation happened? That dummy fell for Alina and high-tailed from there.

Let me draw a comparison to show what actual manipulation and predatory behaviour looks like. (1) Nikolai who is about 7-8 years older than Alina, forcibly kissing her, against her will, in front of hundreds of people just to better his chances for the throne. (2) Mal who punishes Alina for flinching at his advances by getting it on with Zoya. (3) Baghra, who preys on Alina's fears/insecurities and turns her son's one true immortal companion, against him. These are actual manipulations, not the one Aleksander did.

A predator/abuser needs to have constant access to his victims. In LB, own words, Aleksander rarely stayed at the Little Palace. Compared to him, Nikolai, Mal and Baghra had more access to Alina and they did actually succeed isolating her.

The Stag amplifier

Then the stag incident is treated as a sign of his manipulation and perversion. This where we need to apply our critical thinking and ask the important question who benefits from this act? It certainly was not Aleksander.

Let's rewind the clock a bit, Alina who was the Sun Summoner and a key political figure ran away from the Little Palace. Aleksander did not know if it was an enemy attack or something more sinister. He lies to King, who would have his head for this mishap and, searches for her only to learn that she run away on her own violation. So the girl, he hoped to be his ally became a threat. He was forced to reveal his hand sooner and speed up the coup. People need to understand that Aleksander is not an ordinary, lovesick boy, he is a war general and Alina has proved herself to be unworthy of his trust. So he put a leash on her. This not a question of morality but a question of ethics, much like the trolley problem.

He turned on his own Grisha.

They were deserters for god's sake! and was fighting opposite him. They forfeited his protection the moment they joined hands with the enemy. So he was treating them as a normal enemy.

He stole Grisha children.

He did what Charles Xavier did in X-Men. Grisha powers were tied to emotions and are instinctive. Without proper training they are bound to hurt normal people. Not to mention, if the Grisha were born outside they were either killed or sold to pleasure houses. And considering Ravka's anti-Grisha sentiments, he did what he had to do to keep them safe from actual predators.

Now let's talk about some of Nikolai's actions and let's not forget that he was the King/Prince of Ravka.

Sent his father on a luxury retirement instead of punishing him for his crimes.

Used Genya's trauma to make himself the king instead of offering her justice.

Did not care or investigate the genocide of the Second Army soldiers even if the said soldiers were serving the crown. He punished none of the First Army soldiers and was happily brown-nosing them.

Was happy to start a Civil war even after knowing the kind of king his father was. For a 'peace-loving' person (we have seen him in KoS and RoW ass-kissing useless feudal lords instead of using his authority), he did not attempt to negotiate with Aleksander.

Starved his people so Aleksander would have no choice but to use his Grisha to cross the Fold to get supplies. Again for the antis crowing about Novokribirsk, what do you call this?

Stole Grisha inventions like corecloth etc in the name of unification and supplied it to First Army. Read point 2 once more to understand the cruel nature of this act. He felt Grisha were hoarding better supplies but did not question why the First Army were having subpar things because if he did then the blame would rest on his father and his corrupt noble supporters. So he chooses to steal using the unification propaganda. How noble!

Sent Grisha who were not of age to war fronts and missions. Why not send the First Army? Are there no highly skilled people in the First Army for such things?

Manipulated and used Alina to establish himself. Atleast Aleksander 'manipulated' her for the betterment of Grisha, Nikolai did it for himself.

Destroyed everything Aleksander did for Grisha in the name of unification. Or should we call it erasure? He erased centuries of progress and left them without protection.

He claimed Aleksander used his Grisha selfishly for 'his' wars and then shamelessly sends his minions to recruit them from other countries.

If Nikolai was indeed a just and kind king as the antis claim him to be, why didn't he announce Grisha as a protected class? Why didn't he offer them equal rights as a Ravkan citizen? Through his own spies he knows what is happening to them in Fjerda, Shu-Han and Kerch and yet knowingly he lets Zoya abolish the rule of finding and securing the Grisha children (which mind you, saved Zoya from child marriage).

Aleksander was not just a person, he carried the history of the Grisha that was rapidly being erased. He built a place to pass down that knowledge, their culture and practices. If Grisha were not tested and found, who would save them if they died from wasting sickness, who would offer them protection from slavers and Fjerdans? Once again in the name of 'liberation' Nikolai had truly pushed them into hiding. Without these laws what happens when anti-grisha sentiments raise again after a few centuries? He removed every true protection and erased a targeted group's shared history in the name of liberation.

In the end, Nikolai did not protect his country nor the Grisha. He is in no way the hero of this story nor is his echo chambers whom he calls friends. I could go on and on. Truth is, it is not my intention to minimize things like SA or genocide. These are heavy topics and should be treated as such. Readers or antis who throw around such words should know the weight of such words. I hope this sheds some light on the hypocrisy that resides in this fandom.

Thanks for coming to my TED Talk!

[stromuprisahat]

#still not over LB making the canonical endgame love interest bad in bed

A shadow, a bone, and the stench of puritanism

One of the most disturbing things about the Grishaverse books is the underlying regressive, puritanical message they are conveying. Don't get fooled by superficial effects like dragon-shifting girlbosses and fancy "empowering" quotes like "It gets dark when I say it does" and "I'm not ruined, I am ruination"—it's just a candy wrapper for the purity ideals festering underneath. Alina will lose her say in whether it gets dark or not, and Genya will not ruin anything after all, because female agency is evil.

The first thing to strike the eye is the book's fascination with old, vitriolic, hateful, abusive women. Ana Kuya instills repressive values upon the children (mainly girls), lecturing them about "foolish mistakes of peasant girls," making them ashamed of their desires, and gets called a mother figure and remembered with unexplainable nostalgia. Baghra chastises Alina about her attraction to Aleksander at every turn, repeating the sentiment about "foolish girls" (gosh, are these two long-lost twins separated at birth?), and is painted as a wise mentor and a poor martyr of a mother, horrified by what her son has become (I wonder who raised him). It's not weird that people with such beliefs exist; it's weird that the narrative is trying to present them as something righteous.

If we are to believe the narrative, Baghra supposedly knew that the Darkling was "manipulating" Alina and was looking for amplifiers to take control over her powers for months, yet she stays silent up until the moment Alina and Aleksander are about to have sex. She averted a real catastrophe here! Obviously, if Alina had sex with "the wrong guy", she would have tainted herself for the rest of her life! That's the point of no return, eternal corruption of your immortal soul. The sheer moral panic over a girl having hots for a conventionally attractive guy would be hilarious if it wasn't treated as virtue.

Alina blaming Aleksander for "making her want him" in the end proves that she stayed in her deeply restrictive, backward mindset where women can't have sexual agency and can only be passive objects of seduction, deception, and temptation. A good girl doesn't have sexual desires; she's naturally chaste and pure until some big bad man appears and "corrupts" her, forcing her to want all those sinful, filthy, immoral things like sexual satisfaction or empowerment.

We see the same pattern with Zoya's retcon: in the trilogy, she's a desperate attention seeker, obsessing with proving herself to the Darkling. Other grisha don't seem to take her pursuits too seriously and think she is delusional. And suddenly, she was the Darkling's victim all along! He "groomed" her (although by her own admission she rarely saw him and always tried to get him to notice her), she was all pure and innocent, and he mercilessly seduced her with his sharp jawline against her will! Can't have our final girlboss lust over "an evil man" like some unprincipled harlot, can we? There is no way she might have wanted him on her own; she would never! She's a wronged Holy Mary, and that's all his fault!

Alina's relationship with Mal is a perfect example of a Victorian morality fable. Mal is a poster boy for the Madonna-whore complex, a guard dog of Alina's chastity: he's deeply uncomfortable with the fact that Alina might have been interested in another man, even before they started dating; he seems to be more worried that Alina might do something naughty with the Darkling than with the possibility of him hurting her; he gets aggressive every time there is a man breathing in the general direction of Alina. Yet we are told that he's just caring and protective.

In that excruciatingly dull, uninspiring sex scene between Mal and Alina, she says, "It was all we needed; it was all that we would ever have". I can't imagine that statement of resignation being a reaction of a young girl having her first sexual experience with the person she loves. Once again, we can see the same prudish values: a proper woman shouldn't be interested in sex; it's a chore for her; she just has to take whatever her husband gives her, lie back, and think of England. No matter if the rhythm is "awkward," the sex is as exciting as an unseasoned boiled chicken breast, and your partner thinks that the clit is a town in Fjerda, you don't want to be like one of those wanton whores who seek pleasure from their sexual encounters!

Her whole attitude towards Mal is downright disturbing. Look for yourself:

"I didn't care that we'd fought, that he'd kissed Zoya, that he'd walked away from me, that everything felt so impossible. The only thing that mattered was that he'd changed his mind. He'd come back, and I wasn't alone...If Mal was still with me, if he could love me, then there was hope".

The moral of the story: If the cheater, abuser, and drunkard still loves you and still deigns to come back to you, there is hope, and all is well! Be grateful for what you get; don't be a greedy slut! And that is what the narrative is trying to sell as a healthy, wholesome relationship. The books publicly denounce the collar only to hand the heroine a figurative chastity belt.

[vorbarrsultana]

one of things that drive me insane about the grisha trilogy is the fact that nikolai consistently is a non-factor in the political calculations of both, the darkling and his father. even genya, whose job is to spy on the tsar's inner circle, is like "it's just nikolai, they call him puppy, he surprised everyone by joining the army and then left to study in kerch or something, who cares".

meanwhile nikolai in question:

was a major of the first army. a senior officer one rank away from colonel, and two ranks away from major-general!

was person no. 2 in his regiment, the one in charge of 2000+ men daily. and, considering how much colonel raevsky and his soldiers seem to love him, managed them well.

was a decorated war hero of the struggling nation perpetually at war with its neighbours.

what i mean is that there absolutely should have been the party of grand duke nikolai aleksandrovich at the court (re: the succession), opposing the party of tsarevich vasily, the official heir. the people who want him to be ravka's next tsar, bastardy allegations be damned for the good of the country.

it could have been such an easy way to explain why nikolai was exiled sent to study abroad — his military record would have made him too popular compared to his brother. and it could have explained why nikolai is so sure of himself in siege & storm: he already has his own political party, and alina throwing her support behind him simply completes the puzzle.

also, when tatiana called nikolai "puppy" in ruin &rising, i was like. m'am, hate to break the news to you, but your cute puppy hasn't been that for the last five or so years. by now he is actually a wolfhound with very long and very sharp teeth.

(very much not the point of that post, but when i find time to work on my pre-canon!darkolai fic series, i usually imagine the ravkan political landscape before alina as "the army party" (nikolai, the darkling, senior officers of both armies + probably some diplomats, who also see what's going on with shu-han and fjerda) vs "the court party". by the shadow & bone events, the first splits into nikolai's moderates & aleksander's radicals, and the latter became irrelevant after vasily's death.)

[crims0nstardust]

[namorian]

also another reason why the shadow and bone series is a disaster zone: the timeline is impossibly scrunched. like yes, a civil war/coup/etc does not have to be a multi-year conflict but also-- this is a country the size of like, at minimum 1/3 of a whole continent. given that it's based on russia if we assume they're roughly the same size.... like..... dude.... the actual real life russian revolution went from 1917 to 1922.... these things take time. not even getting into how we're stretching the suspension of disbelief already having all these fucking 17yos running around with the skillset and reputations of an early-late twenty something (i'm looking at you especially with this one kaz my love) but just....... do you know how long logistics can take? and across somewhere like 1800s russia? ESPECIALLY wartorn 1800s russia.

also the idea that alina would ever be actually in charge is fucking hilarious. she had like.... 6 weeks of grisha training and bc she was a fucking CaRtOgRaPhEr and not actually like..... a fUcKiNg SoLdIeR -- she has no general knowledge of military strat, combat, anything. I don't think she even learned how to use a rifle man, MAYBE a pistol but i doubt it. she'd absolutely be stuck in position similar to katniss, being carted around for propaganda with no real autonomy she didn't fight for. which she does not seem inclined to do in the books.

like i'm sorry you just cannot have so much of your plot revolve around a fucking civil war and then have it take what???? 18 months??? and have your absolutely incompetent mc win. not when one side is lead by a 500yo military expert and the other is lead by a bastard prince who's political sway is never really acknowledged/used, someone who actively works against her own interests (alina), and dipshits like fUcKiNg MaL. Against a dude who's been all over this country, fought in ALL KINDS of battles and KNOWS ALL THE TOP OFFICIALS ON YOUR SIDE PERSONALLY AND WHAT THEY'RE LIKELY TO DO?????? BONKERS.

[byinbroshog]

Hi, I'm still thinking about serfdom in Ravka and the legal status of the Grisha! I made this graphic last night for a visual reference:

This was assuming that serfs, as peasants tied to the land they're born on and therefore legally considered a portion of Ravkan landowners' property, would make up the lowest rung of society. In the Russian Empire, serfs had next to no personal freedoms (even their marriages had to be approved by the Church). However, as I continued to read about the evolution of serfdom in the Russian Empire (...as one does), I discovered that there were actually two kinds of serfs: those tied to the land who could not be sold without it,* and those who were individually considered property and therefore could be sold on their own, called kholops.

This brings us to the Grisha. We don't know much about their legal rights:

Prior to TGT, they're considered "property of the King", and families were required to give them up (KoS Ch. 25)

They can be given as "gifts", as the Darkling gifts Genya to the Queen (S&B Ch. 7)

They're given to other nobles to work in their households if they aren't selected for military service (EDIT: S&B Ch. 8)

Obviously, as servants, they cannot legally refuse any order they are given, which means they can be raped by their masters and have no legal recourse** (R&R Ch. 7)

Since Grisha as people are the property of their "owner", the King, this means their legal status actually more closely resembles slaves than serfs...which means that the Ravkan "social pyramid" might actually look like this:

No wonder Alina was in complete denial about being a Grisha and turned up her nose at every "Serf-like" behavior of the Second Army. She went from being free to being, very literally, human property of the King of Ravka!

[louhilainen]

I would have liked the ending of the trilogy better, if Alina had something else going on with her life than Mal.

It seems like she has no passions or interests other than Mal. At the very beginning of the SaB she’s described as average at cartography, having no special interest or skills, or even strong friendships other than Mal (if it can be called that, as Alina has pick-me up attitude toward him). All Alina has is wry humor and her love for Mal. In the Little Palace, for the first time in her life, she has something of her own. Her power as the Sun Summoner. She finally has something she can excel at. 

In S&S and R&R Alina is busy surviving, trying to negotiate her new life in politics and as the leader of the Second Army, trying to stop the Darkling etc. etc. So I can see it really isn’t time for self discovery.  But couldn’t Bardugo in the first place have made her have dreams or interest outside Mal? Anything would have been fine. Like weaving, drawing, cooking, making cheese, anything! 

The ending with the orphanage and Mal is portrayed as sweet, domestic bliss, with a hint of sorrow and loss, but ultimately hopeful. But to me, Alina’s life just seems… sad. It seems to suit someone over 30+, not someone who’s about 20-years old. If Alina had shown some kind of interest in caring for children before I could get behind that. The only things of her own are the paintings and other art projects she does. The ending would have been more tolerable if losing her powers had given her a change to pursue her own dreams and goals.

It just seems Alina had something for the first time in her life, a piece of herself that made her complete, and then she lost it. Then she went back to Mal because Bardugo cannot allow her to have anything meaningful in her life except him.

I just think that this is a weird message to have, especially in an YA-book.

[lilu787788]

A great question was asked on our server: “Would antis love Alina so much and hate Aleksander if the two were genderbent?” I responded briefly there, but a dear friend @is-today-tomorrow-in-nz suggested I might do a Tumblr post about it, so I'm expanding on my thought here as well. It made me reflect on the huge hypocrisy we often see from Aleksander’s antis. They are quick to condemn him while making excuses for everything Alina does, even when her choices are just as destructive or reckless. She burns maps, which directly leads to the deaths of everyone on the skiff. She destroyed the Fold in a way that will likely leave Ravka exposed to enemy invasion, practically opening the borders for the enemy armies. What follows could easily be a massacre of Grisha and civilians alike. But somehow, these consequences are glossed over or reframed as heroism.

Now imagine if Aleksander had been written as a woman. A powerful Grisha who lived through centuries of war, loss, and terror. Someone who did everything in her power to protect her people from genocide, even when it meant crossing dangerous lines. Many of the same people who now hate him would admire her. They would say she was tragic. Forced to make impossible decisions. Carrying the weight of the world alone. They would say that creating the Fold was terrible, yes, but understandable. She would be called a girlboss, a warrior queen, a survivor. People would write long posts about how she was demonized for using power in a man’s world. They would weep over her loneliness, her trauma, her desire for control shaped by fear and love. Her story would be seen as emotional and layered.

Now reverse it. Imagine a male version of Alina. A chosen boy, gifted with light. He learns he’s special, believes he’s meant to save the world. But the first thing he does is try to kill the woman who’s been defending their people for generations. He calls her a monster. He lets his friend shoot her. He watches others hunt her and does nothing to stop them. He betrays her feelings. And when she’s at her weakest, worn down by merzost, when she is broken and defenseless, he stabs her in cold blood. He doesn’t even flinch. He mocks her when she calls him her saint. He gives her self-glorifying words and a blade to the chest. Would we still call him a hero? Would people write about how brave he was for ending her life?

I really don’t think so.

Aleksander is morally grey. No one denies that. But his antis always demand that he be flat and one-note. They treat him like he is evil for the sake of evil, ignoring everything that shaped him. At the same time, Alina is constantly given a free pass. She can betray, she can lie, she can hurt, and it is still labeled as strength or growth. Aleksander’s love is twisted into manipulation. Alina’s cruelty is dressed up as empowerment. His loneliness is seen as something he deserves. Hers is framed as tragic. He is hated for being morally complex. She is celebrated for being ruthless when it fits the narrative.

This is a clear double standard.

It’s not about saying that Alina shouldn’t be criticized. It’s about the fact that Aleksander is almost never given the same space in the narrative. He’s not allowed fear, heartbreak, or even love without it being weaponized against him. But if the roles were reversed, those same traits would be seen as powerful. This shows how selective antis still are when it comes to who deserves empathy and depth in storytelling. And all too often, it comes down to gender.

[imheredisappointingmyparents]

Translating Grishaverse names to their English version because I want non-Slavic people to cringe too.

Alina Starkov - Alina, grandson of Stark

Malyan Oretsev - Small, grandson of Orets

Genya Safin - (Eu)Gene, grandson of Saf

Nikolai Lantsov - Nicolac, grandson of Golden-chain-necklace

Alexander Morozova - Alexander, granddaughter of Cold

David Kostyk - David, grandson of Bone

Nadia Zhabin - Nadia, grandson of Frog

Vasiliy Lantsov - Vasilius, grandson of Golden-chain-necklace (Vasilius means High priest in Greek)

Tatiana Lantsov - Tatiana, grandson of Golden-chain-necklace

Ilya Morozova - Elijah, granddaughter of Cold

Baghra - Colour

I hope you didn't enjoy this too

[siriuslyobsessedwithfiction]

"Siege and Storm is boring, nothing happened there.", "I only remember Nikolai showing up". LIES. That's propaganda, actually. That's Grishaverse fans not wanting to reread the trilogy and especially that book because they've crafted a fanfic in their heads they're trying to pass as canon with encouragement from the author, actually.

Because rereading Siege and Storm would raise quite a few unsavory questions. For example:

Why is Mal drinking, gambling and fighting Grisha 24/7 instead of performing his duty as Alina's captain of the guard? (And don't give me "he was a stressed boy" bullshit, it was war, everyone was stressed. And everyone was coddling Mal. He was going hunting with nobles, living in luxury and insulting the prince).

Why did Mal fail his duty as Alina's protector and fell asleep on his watch, drunk, and didn't notice someone going in and out Alina's chamber?

Why did Alina run away in her pajamas aimlessly in the city, and when the crowd of worshippers started tearing her apart alive, she let them. Why did she attempt suicide? (Hint: she and Mal had a big fight earlier because Mal was being a drunk shithead. Alina still blamed herself).

Why did Mal slut-shame Alina one second and virgin-shame her the next? All while bragging about being with many women and kissing Zoya.

Why did the Darkling not manipulate Alina even though he visited her a lot through the tether? Why did he settle for petty little smirks and winks and silently kept her company through the long nights? Why did he admit he was lonely and stayed with her because she was lonely too? Where was loverboy Mal?

Why were the Bataar twins (especially Tolya) acting so weird towards Alina? Why were they brainwashed worshipers and viewed her only as a saint? Why is Tolya on his knees, shivering when Alina just pats his shoulder?

Oh, Nikolai is just an ambitious, conniving cunt who wants the throne, not a selfless fairytale prince? And he's only an improvement from his father and brother because the bar is so low it's in the seventh circle of hell? (Still the best character in that book).

Why is everyone so okay with murdering the Darkling's Grisha as if they aren't the same Grisha who they lived and fought alongside for years? Why is no one protesting that while the Lantsov prince is eager to engage in a civil war because he has big guns from his pirate privateer adventures , it's the oppressed minority (Grisha) who are dying the most?

Why isn't Alina more concerned that everyone turned on Grisha the second the times of trouble started, as if everyone was merely expecting an excuse? An absence of strong leader, so they could start sham trials and execute Grisha left and right.

[stromuprisahat]

Six of Crows- Chapter 30 (Leigh Bardugo)

So... Jesper does or does NOT speak Fjerdan?!

How can he know, what are the guards saying, if he doesn't understand their national anthem? I thought perhaps he cannot make out the words, but they're written above as he hears them, so that's likely not the issue. For some reason, he knows exactly one (1) sentence:

Wait, did you hear something?

[itstwoamandimcursingyourname]

thinking about how aleksander called Alina an apt pupil...and thinking about how Alina spent all of shadow and bone feeling stupid and kept belittling herself for being a slow learner when it came to all the grisha theory and controlling the light and how she carried that complex of thinking very little of her own intellectual capacity throughout the rest of the trilogy even though she made sm progress(up until the last battle)...and despite that or because of that perhaps, aleksander called her an apt pupil...