I wonder if the reason Alhaitham is so wildly mischaracterized is because of the words used to describe him. In the eternally baffling and frustrating game of telephone, it's easy to lose sight of a character's (or a whole story's, really) point and meaning, because the way we perceive them can be twisted by specific wording that can easily evolve into more harsher versions than they were meant to be.
Example: Alhaitham is blunt. He doesn't mince his words, he doesn't avoid pointing out a problem (be it of a person or a situation), and he doesn't sugarcoat it.
That already can sow discord around him, because to a lot of people, that's rude, or even cruel. It's taught to not do these things, to always run around a problem or tentatively hint at it to not overstep never established boundaries. It's also because it can feel like an attack on a personal level; it can feel like a gut punch to have pointed out all the ways we "lack" or where we could have done "better".
So it's easy to discard what these blunt statements or opinions are, and label it all as "bad" and "mean" or even "cruel". But the thing is, using these steadily more negative words to describe something (or someone), it paints a particular picture that is hard to look over or not see as The Truth, because they seem so deliberate, it shouldn't be an over-exaggeration.
We could go in a deeper discussion on if it's because of "neurotypical vs neurodivergent" misunderstandings (even if imo no one knows how to properly communicate anyway, be it by naturally struggling or just never being able to know social cues, or because the social cues are such a convoluted mess that even a "socially adept" person actually cannot do it themselves at this point), or that it's a rampant misuse of words that all have specific meanings but it's all lumped as one and the same. Maybe it's truly just a bad game of telephone where one person jokingly made a hyperbole once and someone who just came into the conversation without any context or knowledge of the source material takes it as fact and runs with it. Or maybe it's still just demonization of autism and asocial tendencies (be it deliberate or subconscious differs from person to person and I won't make any definite statements on that, cause that's not for me to decide without proof, a conversation, or frankly being my business to begin with...unless it's very obvious, then we need to talk, cause no. just no).
I mean, my personal frustration comes because Alhaitham's way of speaking is very close to mine, and to the way we speak in our household, and how my friend talks, so it being called mean or cruel feels like I jumped into a different dimension, cause it doesn't make sense to me. Someone just saying something in a neutral or even clinical way is not mean. Someone pointing out a thing without covering it in layers of "but you're *positive statement* and *positive statement*, so don't take this wrong!" is not cruel (especially when someone is asking for explanations or help; if anything, there needs to be a conversation about setting the boundaries with friends and close people for such situations - if you just want to rant and be comforted without actually discussing it, or if you need a softer approach, or if you actually want someone point out all the facts you can't or refuse to see by yourself; those are important, and no one can know what you need without you saying it (and strangers absolutely won't know or even are obligated to care, so that's another thing to keep in mind)).
This annoyance also comes from the fact, that the way Alhaitham talks is clear to me, so it being called all these negative ways is...weird..? I understand what he says from the get go, and I understand the almost constant layer of sarcasm and deliberate annoyance-inducing way of wording stuff, so it makes me feel at home (it makes it feel like he's me for a moment with all that snark). It makes sense if someone can't pick up on it, or doesn't really understand it; but we also need to take into consideration that Alhaitham is known by the characters he interacts with more than by us, however much we can have direct connection to character stories or read dialogues about him. Even as players, his desire to be Just a Guy with a firm boundary between work-social-private life, we aren't privy to see beyond what we're allowed to peek at. So even if we perceive a character's wording as bad, I think to then push our own feelings about it on the other characters (and usually also mischaracterize them alongside it) is a disservice.
All in all, please, also save Alhaitham from old toxic yaoi tropes, he just wants to read and drink coffee at home with his roommate, and give books to all the kids he knows for their own good.
14 notes
·
View notes
I gotta say for the first time ever I ship something that isn't canon, which is Ned and Sam, over canon Ned and Bill (and Rob). I think they should be canon given what they went through together, their chemistry, the emotional growth they both had, the bond they developed on screen, as opposed to with Bill where there wasn't as much of that that we actually see nor have they established anything that has developed beyond season 2's friendship. It's my own personal opinion of course but I would love to somehow establish a deeper relationship between Sam and Ned going forward, maybe a few years down the line post finale they find themselves getting closer, maybe Sam joins the polycule, even in a queer platonic way!
(this is also me being kinda sad that after all this Sam is still left alone after everything he's been through)
17 notes
·
View notes
Jim's expression and clenched fists while izzy is dying and Jim being the one to dig the hole for izzys body? I'm gonna be sick.
I wish they had more time to be the friends I wanted them to be, but I think Jim genuinely appreciated and cared for him, and I wish they got the chance to tell him that :(
david jenkins i'm gonna be in your fucking walls
37 notes
·
View notes