#i am....a fan of small group discussion rather than everyones opinions all at once

[lucisevofficial]

right, quick #realtalk before I go to bed, but I’m legit considering taking a bit of a tumblr social media hiatus if FE16 stuff gets announced, less I have to see and think about That Bullshit™

[calacuspr]

This England team has shown us all what the power of sport really means

There have been a few times in recent years where the entire nation has appeared united and optimistic – and almost all of them have been connected to sport.

The World Cup in Italy in 1990, the EURO 96 in England and the London 2012 Olympic Games all come to mind as moments that will endure as epochs that transcend everything else going on in the world.

England has been particularly divided in recent years as the Leave and Remain factions argue; the challenges facing the nation during the COVID-19 pandemic; and the economic struggles that so many have encountered pretty much since the financial collapse a decade ago.

At Calacus, we work with organisations who see the value of sport to positively transform society and the England team has shown that throughout the build-up to EURO 2020 and beyond, they have brought the nation together in a way little else can.

Granted, it helped that England did so well, reaching the final of the tournament. It is hardly a new phenomenon that the squad is so multi-cultural, with players with family heritage from around the world.

While the aftermath of the defeat to Italy has shown the unpalatable side of society, the way in which the England manager and players have conducted themselves has been a masterclass in authentic communications.

STAY TRUE TO YOUR VALUES

Taking the knee has been part of football tradition in England for more than a year now, highlighting inequality and promoting diversity.

The England team have been criticised by many, with the Conservative MP for Ashfield, Lee Anderson, announcing that he would not watch “his beloved England team” while the players took the knee; Home Secretary Priti Patel suggesting that it was nothing more than “gesture politics.” and Prime Minister Boris Johnson refusing to criticise those who booed the team.

Given the racism that the likes of Marcus Rashford, Bukayo Saka, Raheem Sterling and others have suffered, particularly from online trolls, it’s remarkable that politicians sought to condemn them and accuse the team of Marxist tendencies and BLM affiliation rather than a compassionate plea for solidarity and equality over division.

England defender Tyrone Mings said: “Everyone’s entitled to their opinions. The home secretary is one of many, many people who oppose us taking the knee or refuse to defend it . . . we [have tried] to educate and inform the minority who refuse to acknowledge why we take the knee and want to boo it.”

Notably, the boos faded as the EURO 2020 tournament progressed and the team got to the later stages and it speaks volumes that many of those politicians who criticised the team then tried to associate themselves with them through staged photography that fooled no one.

CELEBRATE INCLUSION

This England team are no strangers to speaking up for those who don’t have a voice.

Marcus Rashford has campaigned for an end to child hunger and has twice forced the government to make u-turns over free school meals.

Raheem Sterling, one of the stars of the tournament for England and who has been vilified himself by media and fans alike, has fought hard to call out bigotry in the fight against racism.

EURO 2020 started during Pride month and saw players wear rainbow laces and captains use rainbow armbands, despite some mixed messaging from UEFA.

When England played Germany in the round of 16, captain Harry Kane joined his counterpart Manuel Neuer in wearing a rainbow armband with England's official Twitter account saying: “@HKane will join @DFB_Team 's Manuel Neuer in wearing a rainbow captain’s armband for tomorrow’s game at @wembleystadium to mark the end of Pride month, as the #ThreeLions stand in allyship with LGBTQ+ communities around the world.”

Kane himself explained: “From our point of view, it is a show of solidarity with the German national team from all of us at the England national team to be united in trying to kick out all inequalities there are. We’re on a huge platform on a big stage so it is obviously a great opportunity to do so.”

Jordan Henderson has shown himself to be a captain on and off the field, supporting local charities during lockdown as well as leading his Liverpool team to success over recent years.

He is thought to be one of the main drivers behind the team planning to donate its EURO 2020 prize money to good causes.

Their donation – which could be in the millions – will be made to NHS charities now that the football tournament has concluded.

The team made a statement last May which said: “Following positive discussions with the FA, the England senior men's squad are pleased to confirm that a significant donation from their international match fees will be made to NHS Charities Together via the #PlayersTogether initiative.

“This contribution will be taken from a fund already set aside to support a variety of worthy causes using all match fees collated since September 2018.”

While England supporters still let themselves down by booing national anthems at times during the tournament, it shows the progress that this England team has prompted that Joe White, an England fan who co-chairs Gay Gooners, Arsenal’s LGBT+ supporters group, attended the England v Germany match at Wembley Stadium “in full makeup.”

They wore red lipstick, shimmery eyeshadow and mascara along with a rainbow flag and England flag painted on their face to complete the look.

They tweeted: “This is a really small and personal point but today was my first game at Wembley in full makeup and overtly queer (as opposed to just camp). Absolutely no issues from fans and some lovely chats.

“Despite being absolutely petrified pre game, really proud of our fans”

Henderson responded: “Hi Joe great to hear you enjoyed the game as you should. No one should be afraid to go and support their club or country because football is for everyone no matter what. Thanks for your support, enjoy the rest of the Euros.”

How refreshing that the LGBTQ+ community can now support the national team with no fear of abuse or intimidation and that the Three Lions Pride can display positive banners – understandably celebrating Henderson’s goal against Ukraine.

ENCOURAGE TEAMWORK

England manager Gareth Southgate arguably had one of the most talented England squads in recent memory.

The team’s headquarters at St George’s Park became a centre of fun with photocalls featuring the likes of Bukayo Saka jumping into a pool on a flying unicorn inflatable and Ed Sheeran playing a special concert for the team not to mention a preview showing of Top Gun Maverick and call with its star Tom Cruise.

While early on, there was uproar among fans over players who had been left out of the starting XI or even the squad, with flair giving way to pragmatism, Southgate showed how much the team ethic mattered to him.

After the 4-0 victory over Ukraine, Southgate paid tribute to the members of his squad who had not featured much during the tournament.

He said: “I am thinking about the players who I had to leave out of the 23 because they have been such a massive part of what we’re doing. It is so difficult to keep a group of this size feeling valued and yet those guys have been phenomenal about how they have sacrificed themselves for the group.

"I feel the responsibility keenly. But it is these challenges that make us."

Not once during the tournament did any stories leak of disgruntled players, while the players reflected the afore-mentioned values by resisting well-trodden paths of nationalism that previous encounters with the likes of Germany may have engendered.

In fact, this England team have shown dignity in the face of criticism and the very definition of what it means to be a team – there are no egos, no vested interests.

Where once supporting England meant violence and xenophobia, this England team has inspired a new identity with a commitment to diversity, inclusion and a more tolerant society, which is a credit to them all.

SHOW REAL LEADERSHIP

It was quite telling when, during the celebrations following England’s win over Denmark, former international Gary Neville said: “The standard of the leaders in the past couple of years in this country has been poor but look at that man there... he’s everything a leader should be: respectful, humble, tells the truth, genuine. He’s fantastic, Gareth Southgate.”

Southgate has been humble, engaging, honest and resolute that he knew what he wanted to do and would not waver, even when senior politicians criticised some of the decisions made by him and his management team.

Ahead of the tournament, in an essay on patriotism, titled Dear England, Southgate linked football and national identity and underlined why the game means so much more than just sporting excellence.

“I have a responsibility to the wider community to use my voice, and so do the players. It’s their duty to continue to interact with the public on matters such as equality, inclusivity and racial injustice, while using the power of their voices to help put debates on the table, raise awareness and educate.

“On this island, we have a desire to protect our values and traditions – as we should – but that shouldn’t come at the expense of introspection and progress.”

Southgate has been calm and assured throughout his tenure, ensuring that he and the team are consistent in their focus, messaging and conduct. There have been no scandals, no drama and every press conference or media opportunity has been assured and engaging.

FACE ADVERSITY HEAD-ON

Losing on penalties is part of football, but it’s also something that England have encountered at a number of major tournaments.

The backlash after England’s defeat was brutal, with the three players who missed penalties, Jadon Sancho, Marcus Rashford and Bukayo Saka all targets of racist abuse.

Some MPs also used the defeat as an opportunity to tell players to keep out of politics, such as Andrew Rosindell, who tweeted: “We are all proud of our England team, who have had the support of the whole country over recent weeks, but please focus of football, not politics. If you win for England, you win for everyone!”

Home Secretary Priti Patel expressed her outrage at the racism, prompting Mings to again address her double standards.

He said: “You don’t get to stoke the fire at the beginning of the tournament by labelling our anti-racism message as ‘Gesture Politics’ & then pretend to be disgusted when the very thing we’re campaigning against, happens.”

Soon after the game, the mural in tribute to Rashford was vandalised, prompting hundreds of positive messages and fans voicing their support for the Manchester United forward.

Rashford tweeted: ““I’ve grown into a sport where I expected to read things written about myself. Whether it be the colour of my skin, where I grew up, or, most recently, how I decide to spend my time off the pitch.

“I dreamt of days like this. The messages I’ve received today have been positively overwhelming and seeing the response in Withington had me on the verge of tears. The communities that always wrapped their arms around me continue to hold me up.

“I’m Marcus Rashford, 23-year-old black man from Withington and Wythenshawe, South Manchester. If I have nothing else I have that. For all the kind messages thank you. I’ll be back stronger. We’ll be back stronger.”

CONCLUSION

The England team have shown without doubt the power of sport to unify – and while EURO 2020 is now over, we have the Olympic Games coming up where athletes will come together in the spirit of competition and camaraderie.

As Southgate put it: “The reality is that the result is just a small part of it. When England play, there’s much more at stake than that.

“It’s about how we conduct ourselves on and off the pitch, how we bring people together, how we inspire and unite, how we create memories that last beyond the 90 minutes. That last beyond the summer. That last forever.”

While the positivity has proved to be a brief moment in time, the England squad showed society how to empathise, respect and engage in a way that has been in short supply for so long.

[luna-rainbow]

Sam, Steve and Bucky meta (part 2)

This is a meta exploring their relationships through Sam's POV. Part 2 covers events in Civil War.

Steve and Sam spent the next two years trying to find Bucky.

When a Russian trained assassin wants to go underground, he's impossible to find. It didn't help that Steve wanted to keep the search a secret. Sam was resorting to inventive ways of getting leads from his contacts without making it clear who they were tracking down.

He's read the thin file Natasha gave them cover to cover a hundred times now. The file was impersonal, almost depersonalising. He knew the man's date of birth and capture, the dates of entering and exiting cryostasis, his measurements, his allergies, the languages he could speak, and his responses to the experimentations. He knew the dates of some of the assassinations, but he knew nothing of what was inside.

Steve was always grateful for any leads Sam came up with, but didn't like to talk about him. Maybe it pained him to recall the man in the past, when he's almost unrecognisable in the present.

Sam wondered what it was that made the Captain so determined. Sometimes he thought Steve would do this for anyone he fought alongside, and then sometimes he remembers Steve's quietly muttered, "Even when I had nothing, I had Bucky."

Sometimes, when bored, Sam would try to profile "James Buchanan Barnes". He should be supportive, loyal, trustworthy. Maybe also caring. Strong-minded, to have survived the initial experiments from Zola. Brave enough to fight beside the Captain as a small team. An excellent shot...Sam would stop himself there; it was so easy to default to external attributes.

Sam wasn't sure he wanted to join the Avengers. He was just a regular guy in a jetpack, and saving the world was for people with fancier powers than himself.

When Steve finally convinced him to meet the group, Tony Stark took an instant fascination to his wings and had an upgrade for him in a week. He was surprised, because out of all people he was most wary of this wayward billionaire who is media's favourite badboy. He heard countless rumours of the guy's ego, and Sam's main hesitation was that he did not want to take orders from superiors who didn't know where their head's at.

But the Avengers had a more egalitarian relationship. Things were discussed as a group and everyone's opinions considered. Tony's love for theatrics was balanced by Steve's groundedness, and both had an earnestness for doing good.

He decided to stay, and just as he was settling in, the Avengers family had their first divide over the Sokovia Accords. Tony, having just been confronted about his own culpability over what happened in Sokovia, wanted to sign. Steve, who had just personally - and at great personal risk - dismantled an infiltrated government organisation, was much more reluctant.

"If we sign this, we surrender our right to choose."

As a vet, Sam experienced first hand military directives that threatened his personal beliefs, and it was one of the reasons he left. He stood behind Steve.

Before things could proceed, the unthinkable occurred.

There was a terrorist bomb attack on the UN Convention. In an instant, the monicker "the Winter Soldier", his association with Hydra, and his real name and image was broadcast across the world. The ghost story had become a real threat in everyone's consciousness.

"If he's this far gone, I should be the one who brings him in." Sam heard Steve say on the phone, "Because I'm the one least likely to die trying."

Steve still believed there was a goodness in Bucky. He still hoped that, two years from their last encounter, the man might do what he did last time and choose not to kill him.

Even after the man had just blown up a building with over a hundred people inside.

Sam wanted to believe the image of Bucky he had created for himself - steadfast, strong-willed, perhaps a little like Steve in his stubbornness. He wanted to hear the man's story, because he would either lead them to any remaining forces of Hydra, or he had another justification. There must be a better explanation for why he would stay quiescent for two years then suddenly do something so dreadful. Secretly, Sam also believed that the legendary Winter Soldier who nearly killed him twice would not have been so amateurish.

The realisation of this thought made him shudder. This guy had been sitting on his mind for too long, and it was twisting his judgement.

He knew it was futile, but he asked Steve whether he was sure he wanted to continue this quest.

Steve's answer was at once unsurprising, exasperating and touching in his faith. "He'd do it for me."

It was hard not to be envious of this guy who had fought alongside the Captain more than 70 years ago, who had left a string of murders and atrocities in his wake, yet was still regarded as a companion.

"The people who shoot at you usually wind up shooting at me," Sam pointed out.

He thought Steve hesitated for a moment. Perhaps he understood, perhaps he chose not to. Bucky was like a curse on both their minds that would not rest until they find him, but Sam just hoped that if shit does hit the fan, Steve has enough sense to remember that there was someone else he could believe in that wasn't Bucky.

He breathed a sigh of relief when Bucky was finally apprehended. It was perhaps the best outcome for everyone - Steve would be happy he's still alive, everyone else would be relieved he's in their hands, and at least he would have the chance to plead his case.

Except things went downhill from there.

Bucky flipped back to Winter Soldier rage, and the psychiatrist who was there when it happened vanished into the panicking crowd. This time, it was Steve who pulled the unconscious Bucky out of a river.

Sam was at the end of his patience. The guy had just torn through half the Avengers. He was a menace and a ticking bomb, but Steve refused to take him back. In the end, they reached a compromise and kept him clamped down.

"Which Bucky am I talking to?" Steve demanded when the man woke.

Still dazed, Bucky muttered, "Your mum's name was Sarah." He then chuckled to himself, "You put newspapers in your shoes."

Steve let out a small sigh of relief, "You can't read that in a museum."

As the two men dissolved into doltish smiles, Sam couldn't believe it, "Just like that, we're supposed to be cool?"

Bucky was cordial and cooperative with everything Steve asked. Sam could see from Steve's manner that the Captain believed he had his best friend back, but Sam had learned about biases in psychology class. Sometimes you want to believe something so badly because you have craved it for so long and needed it to be true.

Sam told himself that he needed to stay rational, because on this matter alone, Steve seemed to lose his levelheadedness. Fortunately, any pity he had for the former assassin was quickly evaporating under his bristly attitude.

The Avengers clashed at the airport. The match was tight, and time was short. Zemo might already be at Siberia, which would mean 5 more super soldiers unleashed on the world.

When Steve told Bucky to head to the jet, Sam cut in and told them to both go. There was no way he was going to let a volatile murder machine go off to Siberia on his own and meet up with his winter soldier comrades. Who knew which way he would turn?

The likelihood of them all flying out was too low, and they just didn't have the time to fight it out. Bucky knew the way, and he needed to go with someone who can control him - and at that moment Steve was the only bet.

Did he regret it when they ended up in the Raft? Only a little. If there hadn't been the threat of the super soldiers, if they didn't have the Sokovia Accords overhanging them, he would have preferred to convince Steve to bring Bucky back, rather than put his entire team in jail over a violent enforcer who would eventually have to face the law.

When Steve came to find Sam, he was alone. In typical laconic form, Steve recounted the brawl in Siberia with a few sentences. As he finished, he said, almost emphatically, "What he did all those years, it wasn't him. He didn't have a choice."

Sam understood that, but he also understood Tony's grief. What victim could accept "he didn't have a choice" from a murderer? What about their choice when he went after them?

But what he heard next surprised him. Bucky had chosen to go back into cryo because he couldn't trust himself to control the Winter Soldier.

He was free, but he put himself back in chains because he didn't want anyone else to be hurt.

That was the first time Sam separated Bucky from the Winter Soldier.

[sou-ver-2-0]

hello, your secret fan here!! although I've just realized that I probably already outed myself by liking stuff, haha,, sending another anonymous ask once again just in case though (maybe I should just... dm you... next time... haha, just kidding..,,..,,, unless?? 😳😳) I must say, I wasn't actually expecting you to reply!! Your long response literally made me vibrate while reading it, I'm not exaggerating (idk why or how you prompt such a strong reaction out of me???? what's this sorcery)

anyway, I can't wait for your next meta!! I've never really thought that much about Kugie, so I don't have a very strong opinion about her, it's a very out of sight, out of mind situation for me rn. I'm very excited as to what you have to say about her. I have something I want to discuss (know your thoughts about) regarding that emotions vs logic post, which I still love a lot. I've seen that you've already talked about Nao before, but what about Keiji??

I remember staring at the Sou vs Kanna choice for a long while when I first got to it, unsure of what to do. After a while, I realized that the game never really specified what happened if two normal commoners tied I think?? It says what happens when a sacrifice or a keymaster tie, but it never mentions two commoners tieing.

After I realized that, I kept trying to vote for Keiji lol while thinking "you can't possibly kill them both if they tie, right?????? you can't just add a new rule out of nowhere, right??? this means they can both live, right?????? p l e a s e,,". Maybe my refusal to vote for Logic or Emotion was Denial lmao, but I still wonder what would have happened if they had let us choose Keiji.

He didn't have enough votes to be in danger, I wouldn't have voted for him otherwise. But it still makes me think what if. That small "aha!!" moment filled me with so much hope. In hindsight, it would have been awful if they had killed the two in that scenario lmao, but I was so blinded by the possibility of saving them both that I didn't really give it much thought. Anyway, long ramble over!! thanks for reading haha. I might be overlooking something, I really need to replay everything.

Oh wow, I loved reading your story of how you tried so hard to save both Sou and Kanna omg! I feel your pain haha. It hits you on such a gut level how unjust this moment is. You start clawing desperately for any way out.

I think it speaks well of Sara that she lifted that responsibility from Gin’s shoulders, although she can still betray his trust by choosing poorly. But hypothetically that’s one of the kindest things Sara can do, being a good big sister to Gin by lifting that burden from him. Still, it’s rotten work for Sara and us the Player to make that choice.

As much as I love your story, I believe you’ve answered your own question! It’s most likely that both Kanna and Sou would be killed if they were tied for first place. That’s why Sara couldn’t vote for Keiji. The Floormasters always lean on the side of cruelty rather than mercy when enforcing the rules. They’re adamant that “at least” two people will die in a Main Game. 

Hell, another possibility is that the Floormasters would kill everyone in the group if they couldn’t decide on a single victim by majority vote. That’s not a spoken rule, but we can’t completely discount the possibility, can we? Since the Floormasters like throwing around the rule “Play our games properly or die as a penalty” so much. At the very least, refusal to participate in the Main Game would result in death, as we saw in the First Main Game when everyone was afraid that Kanna would be late and be punished. 

What I’m getting at, is that while it makes perfect sense for the Player to try to “test” the rules of the Death Game, to see how much they can get away with, the stakes are much too high for Sara! So I completely sympathize with you trying to vote for Keiji in order to “trick” the Floormasters, but there is no way Sara could personally take that risk. This is another case showing how the Player and Sara are in fundamentally different worlds. 

Another thought:

Something significant about YTTD as a game is that it mostly has a linear narrative so far. Nankidai has a specific direction in mind for where he wants to take the story, regardless of the player’s choices. This is especially true in Chapter 1, where Sara’s votes don’t matter. Who did you vote for in the Practice Round? It doesn’t matter; Mishima always dies. Who did you vote for in the First Main Game? It doesn’t matter; Joe and Kai always die. 

The story doesn’t branch significantly until we get to Chapter 2, when our actions finally determine which characters live and die. But even so, as of Chapter 3-1A, the different story branches still parallel each other closely. Whether Alice or Reko survived, they both act as “tough, competent” team members, and they perform the same actions in fights. Whether Kanna or Sou survived, they’re both the “spunky waifs” in the group and they also act similarly in fights.

I’ll compare this kind of storytelling to Undertale, since that’s a popular game most people know about. In Undertale, the Player gets to choose from the get-go which characters live and which characters die. So the story has the potential to branch in different ways pretty quickly! This shows how Undertale’s protagonist is more of a blank slate for the Player to project onto, while YTTD’s protagonist has her own personality separate from the Player. We can influence Sara, but there are always going to be some choices she’ll refuse to make.

And that’s all I can think of to say on that! Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me, Anon. You don’t need to feel so awkward; I love talking about this stuff. :)

(I am a sorcerer though! You got me!!)

[theanimeview]

The Summer of Online Anime Cons - Review!

By: Peggy Sue Wood | @peggyseditorial​

OKAY. This review has been way overdue, but in my defense, I wanted to wait until Summer was officially over, and for me, that meant the Crunchyroll Expo needed to happen before making this post. So let's get into it:

This summer, in addition to the Big Three Anime Weekend (where people could attend Anime Expo Lite, Funimation Con 2020, and Aniplex Online Fest all at once), we also had Comic-Con, the Virtual Crunchyroll Expo, and several other small conferences happening online like the Toonami special. 

The events I "attended" happened to all be free (woohoo!), and to be perfectly honest: I LOVED it. I hope that they have more virtual conventions like these in the future.  It's not because I don't love in-person and live conventions. I mean, anyone that knows me personally knows that I love conventions, traveling, dressing up, and more. I am a massive nerd for literary/professional/writing conferences and actively seek them out to attend throughout the year (if not present at them). I love anime conventions just as much and see them as a way to geek out with people from all over the world who share the same interests I do (and often know the niche anime/manga/webcomic/etc. that so few of my regular friends know about or have any interest in seeing!). 

However, I think that Anime Expo has seriously fallen apart in recent years. It's something I've been more than vocal about in the past, like last year. Last year, as much as I did have fun, the convention space was overly crowded. AX is one of the largest anime conventions in the US, and overcrowding isn't unexpected given the size of it; however, since 2017, the convention has gone from simply full/crowded to claustrophobia-inducing. Enough so that someone like me, who had never felt claustrophobia before in their life, became overwhelmed and physically ill due to the number of people touching me on all sides as we attempted to shimmy down packed hallways. As a reference, I usually love enclosed and or crowded spaces--like, my mom and I frequented packed swap-meets as a child that I loved navigating. I also grew up with six older siblings, in a home next to Disneyland... so, like, crowds are not an issue for me, which is why I never expected to feel the level of anxiety I did in that horrible 2017 crowd, which repeated in AX 2019.

Add on to that panel experience: whereas before people could and would regularly slip in and out of panels with lines sometimes being outside the door for smaller rooms with more popular content, now the lines for most programs are often placed outside, in the heat, with attendees asked to line up sometimes hours in advance to have even a chance of attending. To my knowledge, Sakura-Con and several other conventions I've gone to in the last few years don't have that problem, and it's a fair guess as to why but let's leave that topic for another day.

By comparison, the virtual convention was a breeze! Yes, sometimes I had to sacrifice going to one panel over another, but who hasn't had to do that at conventions before? Ultimately, I could enjoy the panels from the comfort of my own home in PJs. I didn't need to worry about food, overheating in the sun, or finding the bathroom while at my house. I didn't get to meet new people (😥), but I did get to "attend" with friends of mine that can't go to conventions regularly for health reasons.

My major criticism of the virtual conventions can be summed up pretty easily. One issue I found was that the scheduling of three digital-conventions in one weekend was far too tight, but that was quickly mediated by the Funimation and Aniplex groups banding-together and merging the events so that Day 2 of FC2020 was a split with AOF2020. Another criticism I had is the lack of shopping--but I'm sure my wallet and bank account were relieved to find that I was much too entranced in panels to care about putting my cards through a ringer. I thought I would be upset by panel cancellations, but since virtual conventions are new and since panel cancellations happen at live conventions too, I can't say I'm all that upset by them. Not to mention how easy it was to handle such cancellations online when you have many more panels to attend freely.

What was probably most upsetting was, at times, the layout. Of all the conventions, I think AX and Comic-Con did the best job with panel layout. AX used Twitch live streams, YouTube, and a handful of unique call-in panels that were easy to navigate. More frustrating was the ever-changing schedule times at AX, but that happens (mainly when you are one of the first conferences navigating the online-field and thereby making all the first mistakes). Ultimately, it was EASY to get to the right "room" for the right panel. It helped too that their schedule was frequently updated, so it was rarely a question of "which room?" and "when does this thing start?" Comic-Con, which featured all their panels on pre-scheduled youtube posts, was similarly easy to navigate and enjoy. Frankly, I preferred the use of YouTube as Comic Con's primary platform for distribution more, but that's just because I enjoy being able to go back and rewatch things later.

Funimation and Aniplex suffered a bit by not updating their schedules consistently. For example, Funimation kept listing panels for Day 2 in the room merged with the Aniplex Online Fest live-stream, leaving me (and I'm sure a few others) to wonder what in the world happened to all those disappearing panels. Though, I'm sad to say that Crunchyroll Expo had it way worse. Their different "rooms" attempted to allow for many panels and multiple languages, and it suffered due to the way they handled this, among other complications. The way things were labeled for different languages meant you either had to search through the individual tabs to make sure you wouldn't miss anything, or sift through all of it at once. There was no in-between. You also wouldn't know which panel was whereafter it aired, meaning things got lost easily. Sometimes I wouldn't even know what panel was canceled, rescheduled, or entirely overlooked by me! This issue is difficult for me to find acceptable, as the Crunchyroll Expo happened months after other conventions and had arguably more time to review platform options and layouts for their digital conference. It almost felt like they were aiming for a "different just to be different" feel ultimately at the cost of user experience, which is crazy since Crunchyroll is one of the largest online anime streaming platforms in the US abroad. It would have been better for them to publish their pre-recorded panels similar to episodes of a show that people could scroll through than the disorganized mess that their expo "stages" tried to do.

With that said, let’s focus on content. 

Panels were the main focus of these conventions (obviously), and content-wise, they did NOT disappoint. AX hit HUGE on the industry panels from major licensing and publishing companies in the US and Japan. They also had the most in terms of interesting focuses. There was a healthy mix of fan panels, culture panels, industry panels, and such, meaning someone could find something of interest in nearly every hour. In fact, at the time, Casea (@madamekrow) and I were in a real panic about how to watch everything we wanted to watch. You could tell that a lot of thought had gone into making this thing work given how quickly they had to switch from live to digital, and I appreciate that. FC2020 and AOF2020, by comparison, were not as reliable in terms of those profession-based and fan-based panels, and given that they are mainly licensers of anime rather than convention planners, it makes sense. They were also up against a convention with a long history (BTW, AX celebrates 30 years in 2021). That's not to say they didn't come to the table without the cards. 

FC2020 brought it home with premiere screenings of animes to come. My favorite of their premiere list is By The Grace of The gods, set to come out in October of 2020. Meanwhile, AOF2020 lacked premieres, professional and fan-based panels but made up for it with entertainment of a different kind. They hosted all-night marathons of popular works they license, held a digital concert, and unintentionally perhaps, generally gave a place to "chill" between the stressful jumping from panel to panel. In conclusion of the Big Three Weekend, they gave the summer a phenomenal start!

Next up is Comic-Con. In my opinion, their panels were heavily movie-based as opposed to print-media comics, manga, or anime. Yes, of course, there were plenty of comic panels too, but they weren't the same as what we saw during AX, FC2020, or AOF2020. The feel was different--maybe because of content. Regardless, it was interesting. I enjoyed much of the industry-related panels, like "Manga Publishing Industry Roundtable" and "How to Thrive as an Indie Comics Creator Now!" (I mentioned before I'm a publishing nerd, right?) Perhaps most preferable to me is that the Comic-Con panels are still available on their YouTube channel, which means that unlike many other conventions, I can share the panels with friends interested in a particular series, subject, or person. I LOVE that. Share-ability is huge, and I think Comic-Con was smart to make their content available moving forward. It has certainly been great for my film-loving friends and our team members here at The Anime View (like Jenna @jkmorgan-media​).  

Lastly, Crunchyroll Expo. What can I say about this one? The panels were huge variables. I know that everyone on our team found them to be a mixed bag, myself included, as Crunchyroll opened up to fans hosting panels. This was great, in my opinion, but with that comes a bit of criticism. Some fan panels were polished, exciting, and engaging. I loved many of the mecha panels. I also loved some that were engaging discussions of a topic between people that were close friends. HOWEVER, with that came just as many who were new to public speaking, hadn't prepared much of anything and just recorded an awkward Zoom call, or worse (it's hard to describe how).

As for the smaller conferences like the mini-Toonami Con during Adult Swim’s digital conference, I don’t really have anythings specific to say so I’ll be leaving them out of this review. 

I don't want to shoot down any of the fans that hosted panels despite this negative review. It's HARD to present at conferences, and for some, it's even harder when they know they are being recorded. I remember my first conference where I stared at my paper the whole time and had to be asked to raise my voice twice for people to hear, while my friend aimed my phone at me to record the mortifying presentation for my mother. I don't blame the people that had a hard time doing this, and I fully support Crunchyroll for giving fans, particularly young ones, the platform and experience to do this. Some of those panels were very interesting, despite the presenter's awkwardness. Controversially, the handful that made no effort (and you could tell which), I don't extend that empathy.

For me, panels quality has nothing to do with camera work, lighting, or even sound in some cases (for the most part, as long as you can hear the words--awesome). I didn't need to see spot-on PowerPoint slides, anime clips to fit the conversation or hyperactivity. To me, it was all about what was being said or not said. One panel that comes to mind that I aimed to attend was about picking the right anime for you or a friend. I ended up ditching half-way through. It was, sorry to say, terrible. The hosts definitely had the energy and passion to discuss anime and interesting subjects beyond their approach to the idea of recommendations. 

For example, they spent a reasonable amount of time comparing how they grew up experiencing anime to how many people now entering the fandom have come to know it. They started by describing how they watching anime on a handful of VHS rentals from BlockBusters, while many people in my (Peggy's) "anime generation" grew up in the age of fansubs and illegal uploads; meanwhile, my (Peggy's again) niece grew up experiencing all of her anime through legal online licensing services like Netflix, Funimation, Crunchyroll, etc. After discussing that difference, they mentioned briefly (as in one time in a single sentence) that the popularity of a particular genre in anime when you entered may affect what you find most interesting before completely undercutting themselves to say that you can't recommend anything to anyone because people always think about what they like first. (I hate to break it to them, but I find it pretty easy to recommend things based on my friends' stated interests in past series. Maybe that's because I watch almost everything of every genre in anime, but also--it's not rocket science. If your friend likes thrilling action movies, you can probably name a few thrilling action animes to satisfy their interest.) It felt as though the panel's title was misleading when the answer to recommending anime is "you can't." (when, in fact, you can with little to no complications!)

Overall, for me, AX takes the crown in terms of content. They had a fantastic mix of everything you hope to see at a comic convention in addition to making it fun. Comic-Con takes the crown for best platform use and layout (AX takes a close second and Aniplex/Funimation sharing third)... Crunchyroll doesn't rank in this category. Aniplex/Funimation shares the title of Best Entertainment. Crunchyroll takes the crown for fan inclusion into the presentation spotlight. They're all winners, but if I really had to rank them, it'd be this:

Anime Expo - Title: Content is King  👑

Comic-Con - Best Platform/Layout

Aniplex/Funimation (Sharing is caring) - Best Entertainment

Crunchyroll - Best Fan Inclusion

With that, I conclude my long drafted review. Thank you for your patience, and I'll see you all next week in another post!

[resplendentgoldenwings]

About Steven Crain

I’ve always been something of a contrarian even as a girl. If my old sister loved strawberries I loved blueberries. If she hated raisins I loved them. It was never personally I have simply always preferred to something different from what the others around me are doing.

The more different things we are doing as individuals in a group the greatest number of experiences are open to all of us. Imagine for a moment that you have a group of five people and five different paths in a forest. All the paths go to the same place, but each takes a different route. Now If all five group members take a seperate path and meet at the end of the day to share their experiences then it’s as if each member of the group has been in five different places all at once. This variety in taste and preference and response enriches us.

And so it is being this person that I am I find myself defending Steven Crain.

Over this last week I have been rewatching eipsodes of The Haunting of Hill House, limiting myself to one a day and taking it in much more slowly than the original ten hour Saturday binge. And in this second watch not only do I find myself not hating Steve I am actually find him a likeable and flawed character much like his siblings and pretty much every other human being in existence.

Spoilers follow.

It is very much Shirely’s response to Steve in the very first episodes that I think heavily influences fandom’s general opinion of the character and his actions. Shirely calls Steve selfish,accusing him of being a poor elder brother and insists that she is the one to take care of everything. Yet the actions of the rest of the family demonstrate something different.

The flashbacks of Nell, Luke and Theo show us a Steve that is caring and heavily involved in the lives of his younger siblings while Shirley actually features very little, except you know to make Luke leave his twin sister’s wedding so she believes he wasn’t there for her. Moving right along.

Steve is the very first person Nell calls when she reaches her breaking point, she calls Shirely when she can’t get ahold of him. When she finally speaks to her father her father directs her back to her eldest brother and then calls Steve immediately despite the late hour.

Now to be fair it was partially because she lived closest to Steve, but it’s telling that Hugh doesn’t pay Steve’s objections any attention or even know that Steve and Leigh are seperated; Nell can’t go to his house because he no longer lives there. Steve’s support and availability are taken for granted by the dad and the rest of the family.

When Steve finally does return to his apartment he finds Luke robbing him. He doesn’t react with anger, he gives Luke more money and let’s him keep some of the stolen items. He also doesn’t challenge Luke’s statement that the money isn’t for drugs. Instead he asks Luke if he’s cold, because he remembers that Luke told him feeling cold is a symptom of withdrawal, such a small detail of his brother’s life to recall two months after they discussed it.

When Luke has actually earned a day pass after completing a month of rehab he doesn’t visit Shirley or Theo or his own twin instead he choses to take Joey, an important friend to have dinner with Steve and his wife. Like Nell Luke knows that it is Steve he can reach out too  --not Shirely despite her insistence-- no matter how many times he messes up.

They do argue during this visit, but it is only as Steve rather adroitly points out that Luke should be wary of Joey, because she might burn him, which of course she does. To be fair he did it in a very irritating elder sibling way, but again it comes from a place of caring and Steve wanting Luke to succeed.

Even Hugh seems to lean heavily on the eldest Crain sibling, because it is Steve who is with Hugh at the lawyer’s office when they are children. Iit is Steve who has to hear his father say that he won’t fight to keep his kids with him and he won’t take any of the steps the lawyer is advising to keep the family together.

This seems less and less like the actions of a man who only looks out for himself and more and more like someone whose support, care and availabilty are so consistent that it is always taken for granted by his family. This is so much the case that they can rage at him about his book, calling him names, embarassing him in front of his fans and he still gives them the promised royalties and shows up when they need him.

Now about that book. I can’t even bring myself to condemn him for writing it. Now his siblings have every right to be angry at him because they don’t like being portrayed as mentally ill, but let’s pause here. Unaware of the supernatural events around him Steven Crain sees him mother succumb to mental illness and depression and kill herself. In this time of crisis his father provides absolutely no leadership for the family whatsoever and he watches Theo, Nell and Luke sink further into various mental illness as they age. 

Luke becomes addicted to drugs,Nell struggles with deppresion, PTSD and perhaps other symptoms to the point that no one is suprised by the idea that she went back the house and killed herself as well. And even though Theo functions she is completely, emotionally walled off from everyone she loves. 

Steve percieves a family in crisis, people that he loves in crisis and no one is doing anything about it. No one wants to name the illness, no one wants to get help. 

Now since his family has been so scarred by what happened at Hill House he writes a book about it and uses that money to get all of them a better fucking life. They may not have healed from the tragic events that took place there, but the story can pay for all of their dreams Shirely’s funeral home and her charity cases, Theo’s Ph.D and subsequently her practice, Luke trying over and over again to go for rehab and Nell’s therapy and pretty much anything else she wanted. 

The fact that Steve had  a vascetomy is perhaps one of the most telling things about his character. It tells us first and foremost that he sincerely believes what that the family is ill and in need of help, but more importantly it also show just how deeply affected by the events at Hill House he is.

Of all the children Steven Crain is the eldest he would have the strongest, clearest memories of not only his mother, but his entire family before that summer and so he can most clearly mourn for who they were, the promise of who could have become before that summer at Hill House. And I think he just could not bear the idea of having a child and watching them sucumb the way his mother did and the way his siblings seem to be.

And this is also yet another thing that no one else in his family seems to know about him.

The younger siblings feel a certain ownership of the family’s experience at Hill House. Steve is excluded from this in spite of the fact that he was there, he witnessed it and was as deeply affected by what happened as the rest. It silently tragic that his understanding of the events seperates him from his family as surely as Theo’s walls seperate her from everyone that she loves.

Steve isn’t perfect none of the Crain siblings are they all do crappy things to each other and make mistakes, this is the inevitability of life. But I think if you simply dismiss Steve as selfish or gaslighting his siblings you're missing out on a huge chunk of the characters and a huge chunk of the story.

[saltybiowarefantears]

A Clash of Pride and Loss

Here I am, about to write a character analysis of a divisive character using a rather extreme feeling analogy. Now, I’m not here to condemn nor condone anything, rather explain what I feel is a general misconception of behavior on part of said divisive character: Solas. This is not meant to change anyone’s mind about his general character - good, bad, or otherwise. I’m not here to tell someone is right or wrong in their personal preference of character traits. It’s not meant to stir up discourse or drama; this is merely allowing me to air some thoughts and feelings on the matter. Honestly, this probably won’t add anything to the general meta database on him. Would not be a bad gamble to guess someone else has already discussed this and in better detail.

So now after a much unnecessarily lengthy opening paragraph, if you still wish to proceed, on to the topic at hand: Solas and the Dalish.

Ah yes, the situation and attitude even Solas positive fans tend to agree is a rather unattractive trait for their favorite egg man. In the Dragon Age universe we’re shown this group of people who have lost nearly everything - lives, culture, history, a home. They’re continuously oppressed as a race and scattered to the wind. Then there’s the Dalish fighting tooth and nail to maintain the last scraps of their old world. Over two games we’re conditioned to (hopefully) emphasize with their plight.

So when Solas comes along and seems to sneer at the mere mention of the Dalish, well that’s bound raise some hackles, especially those playing as a Lavellan. Gut reaction to someone insulting something we as a player treasure, i.e. the Dalish, is to return the favor and insult back. How dare he be such a condescending jerk about them?  What gives him the right?

Well... he does. He gave himself the right. Let me explain the layers to this before anyone throws a fit over the use of “right” in his view and behavior towards an oppressed fictional people. Keep in mind as well that this analysis is coming from a context of knowing about Solas, his identity, and his past. This is a 20/20 hindsight discussion. In the beginning, innocent to any knowledge of him, yeah he can definitely come across as a condescending jerk when asking him about his opinions on the Dalish.

Anyway in order to fully understand why Solas reacts the way that he does, we have to take a look at his past. Even further than that, we need to put ourselves in Solas’ shoes. People tend to forget small things with him when confronting him in the game (unless it’s Trespasser). We need to remember these small things and empathize with his position to understand his behavior. To do that, we’re going to take a hypothetical journey and where this piece might get Problematic™.

A Real World Analog (Sort Of)

Ok, for this bit I ask for everyone to relax. Sit back, stretch even. Remember that at no point I am positing this to be offensive or sensationalize for the pay off of some knee-jerk emotional response. This is a hypothetical framework to analyse a fictional character, ok? There’s better analogs I am sure as this doesn’t quite fit, but it’s the one where my mind went when brainstorming this piece over the course of many days and many showers.

Let’s start this journey. Pretend we’re on an alternate Earth in an alternate timeline. It’s World War II. You are part of one of the groups of people hunted and oppressed by the Nazis. I know, I know... deep breaths. We are going there. You lived through the horrors and atrocities committed by them. You become a figurehead of a resistance to fight the Nazis. You try freeing your people. You do an unspeakable thing in the merest hopes that it will lead to a better future for your people. You are willing to bear that burden, gamble it all, if it means your people have a future. You go to sleep, leave, whatever and wake up in the present.

Here’s where the alternate timeline kicks in. Upon waking/returning you find the consequences of your actions. The people you were trying to save have lost everything - lives, culture, history, a home. During your slumber, your people have suffered a cultural genocide. The past and their history have warped. Instead, these new people perform a cultural rite of tattooing numbers on their arms; not to remember the past, but to revere the very people responsible for their oppression unbeknownst to them. 

So here you are, face-to-face, with the people you once tried to save; their actions a twisted, corrupted farce of their true culture. And you’re responsible.

Pride

Can you imagine the shock and horror of such a discovery? The blame and strife curdling inside you, swallowing it down lest anyone discover your secret. Wouldn’t you want to shake someone and scream “No! This is wrong! You can’t do this!” This is what Solas has to face.

To Solas, the Dalish represent all of his failures. He failed to protect his people. He failed to free them of the evanuris’ grasp. His gambit failed. They may have gained their freedom because of him, but at the cost of their identity and culture. As someone who values truth, wisdom, history, compassion, how would it feel to be the catalyst to a cultural genocide? And for not one soul willing to listen to him about it.

All of this negativity and reflection of his worst deed, he confronts it, not with his warmth no, but with his other side, his character flaw, his pride. He shields himself in his conviction of truth. How could they not listen to him? Easily. The answer is extremely easily.

The Dalish’s recalcitrance feels like a slap across the face. It wounds him, both his pride as a perceived font of wisdom and his burden of past deeds. He is rejected from the closest thing he can find to home and people. I honestly posit that this was the start of him believing the Dalish are not his people, only shadows of them. All of that self-sacrifice only for these people to be ungrateful for him trying to show them the truth and error of their ways. He denounces them as childish for it, further aggravating their beliefs towards each other. Miscommunication of intent leading to contention. Essentially, Solas’ bias towards the Dalish is because they are a bleeding, festering reminder of the consequence of his actions and their snappish response to him (I’ll get to this in a bit. I promise this isn’t just an attack on the Dalish.) 

Change, however, is also integral to Solas’ character. You meet him only after some unpleasant run ins with Dalish clans. You meet him, honestly, at his most guarded. He doesn’t know what to make of you, especially if your Inquisitor is Dalish. He’s quick to reply to questions of the Fade or magic, but hesitant of your possible malicious intent in asking personal questions. I believe the Dalish fall under this category as well for him, aka personal and tightly held opinions on things that might crack his performance mask. Unfortunate for Solas, he’s also a self-declared hot head. The Dalish, quite frankly, pissed him off. So when you ask him for his opinion on the matter, rather than cool and calculated reluctance, he fires off about them.

This is the core of his belief, i.e. Dalish have lost their history/culture/magic/etc., met with disbelief of him of all people, bare faced, knowing something important on anything Dalish. However you can appeal to part of his pride and ask what can be done.

To me, I believe this catches him slightly off-guard. You don’t ask sarcastically; there’s a lot of sincerity to the question. No longer are you immediately rejecting anything he says, but in fact questioning things (another favorite of his).

If you listen to him, he apologizes for his behavior. While the first part might come across arrogant, especially given the tone, but really, to me, it shows him confronting his own biases and distortions. It is not fair for him to punish the Dalish for not knowing what they don’t know. And thus starts your actions and openness with him in turn opening him. You can begin his turn of pride back into wisdom and seeking of knowledge. It is a bit tangential in the grand scheme of this analysis, but I feel like it’s an important detail to remember. Most people tend to remember his constant disapproval of anything you say about the Dalish while ignoring this bit of conversation.

Seeing Suffering vs Living It

For Solas, he cannot understand why the Dalish refuse to listen to his correct truth and knowledge of their history. If their entire purpose is to collect and never forget their past, why refuse arguably the most important pieces of information on the matter? Just as many tend to not put themselves in Solas’ shoes when examining his bias towards the Dalish, Solas himself does not walk in the shoes of the Dalish (I know there’s a joke in there somewhere given their lack of shoes.) He believes because he lived at the height of the elves, he can judge the poverty of culture in which they now dwell. 

What Solas does not have, however, is the experience of living through said poverty of culture. He wasn’t there to experience the plight they suffered. He lacks understanding of how possessive the Dalish are over their remnants of history and culture. In reality, the Dalish are truly only concerned with adding to their database of ancient elven history. Solas asks them to rewrite and take away. To them, that’s unthinkable.

The Dalish also mirror real-world cultures in terms of societal and self-imposed ostracizing. The world was cold and cruel to them, stopping at nothing to strip them of everything they are as a people. Thus, the Dalish turn on the world as a means of security and comfort. Anyone not Dalish is to be treated wearily. Right or wrong, there is no denying the Dalish are harsh when it comes to their view and treatment of non-Dalish, and almost more so when it comes to non-Dalish elves. It’s how they protect themselves. It’s how they protect their culture. 

So when Solas, no clan and marked as stranger, wanders up to a Dalish clan, of course they automatically guard themselves. When he then seems to snatch the last scraps of history from their hands because he says it pales in comparison to what actually was, you bet they’ll go on the defense. No one takes things from the Dalish. And more importantly, no one takes their history from them any longer. Never again shall they submit. To them, he’s telling a starving man not to eat scraps because it used to be a feast. Why should they believe him on it as well? The catch all reply of “the Fade” doesn’t suffice when applied to asking them to completely rethink their entire current culture.

Sigh of Relief, It’s the End

Now, I think I’m going to cut it shorter than I initially planned. There was some banter between Solas and Varric that reminded me of Solas’ last-of-my-kind-syndrome (I got very excited about this “new” dialogue because I have the memory of a goldfish.) I wanted to tie all of this into that plus his plans for the Veil. Because, let’s face it, everything is all connected when it comes to him. He’s a giant yarn ball of past wrapping around threads of the present. Pull at one string and you find a Celtic knot of past grief, anguish, regret at the core. That might be another post for another day though.

Getting back on track, this confrontation between Solas and the Dalish can be boiled down to a sentence from earlier: “Miscommunication of intent leading to contention.” Solas sees the horrors of his past in the Dalish. All he can see is a twisted, shadow version of the people he thought he saved. And the heart stopping ramifications that what he did indeed did not save them. He wants to fix his past mistakes. He doesn’t want there to be strife of innocents, especially not strife caused by him personally. The Dalish, on the other hand, see another person grasping greedily at their culture and history. Solas is another person with no right to their history trying to tell them what is “true” and “right”. 

In the end, is Solas right? Yes. Is he wrong? Yes. How about the Dalish? Yes to both. It’s not a matter of right or wrong or who started it. This is a matter of explaining how this bias came to be by examination of both parties. Some matters can be solved, in my firm belief, by taking a deep breath, and walking in the other person’s shoes for understanding. Or in this case, foot wraps.

[yoongisgoawaydoormat]

Is yoongi your fave in bts? I just today stumbled over a video of bts and watched and now 100 videos later i really think i kinda like them and especially Yoongi. He is such a sweetheart. so as a fellow 1d stan now into bts i wanted to know if louis was your fave and if yoongi is in bts? Cause i find it quite interesting to know^^'

ok so i have some esoteric ramblings that go far beyond the yes or no question you asked me here lmao... i guess im just feeling very “in this essay i will-” rn because of how much i truly adore both of them. also this basically turned into a personal diary entry but also simultaneously a cultural studies essay on how we make meaning in celebrities so like..... 🤷🏼‍♀️

@gettingaphdinmomo can u believe this anon let me merge 1d and bts? im indebted to them tbh

so yeah yoongi is my bias in bts and louis was always my fave in 1d! (well zayn too but z isn’t a member of 1d - tho i think he relates to some of the points im going to make here as well) and coincidentally i’ve actually been doing like... some self-psychoanalysis recently just reflecting on what my affection for louis and yoongi says about me, says about them, etc... just been thinkin’ ya know?

and i just feel like yoongi and louis are 2 sides of the same coin and it’s a coin that i distinctly Relate to and i’ll explain why. both yoongi and louis have very distinct caricature-type reputations on the surface. both vis-a-vis their role in their respective groups and in relation to the personalities that we see/they show us. 

and what i mean by that is that louis is known as loud, brash, exuberant (formerly camp and flamboyant as well, though im not even gonna try to get Into A Discussion of That rn); to most people that do not take the time to go far beyond the surface, that’s kind of louis’ whole deal, right? (again this isn’t a discussion of public opinion of louis and doesn’t account for how his various stories/stunts/‘relationships’ would impact people’s view of him)... yoongi is sort of in the same boat but on the opposite end of the spectrum if that makes sense? he’s the tsundere member. he’s seen as cold, distant, has dry humor, doesn’t like to show affection, etc. that’s what the caricature of min yoongi is.

but everyone who is a fan of either of them knows that neither of those caricatures are wholly accurate and that the caricatures belie an emotional depth and intelligence that both of them very clearly possess.

we can never know even a fraction of public figures’ personalities, but to the small extent that we do get glimpses, yoongi and louis are both individuals who clearly care very deeply about others. they are attentive to the emotions of those around them and they are supportive and nurturing in their own ways. but at the same time neither of them are overtly touchy-feely about it if that makes sense? their empathy is exhibited subtly but it runs deep. their demonstrations of caring and compassion are nuanced behind layers of something else. 

for louis, i think there’s always a bit of humor layered on top of his emotional displays (i.e. giving liam a hard time about being a ‘lad’). and i see myself in that. i use humor as a defense mechanism and couch everything serious in my life in a joke, for better or worse. again, im not saying that that’s what louis is or does in real life, i’ll never know nor would i presume to, but i am saying that i see something of myself reflected in Louis Tomlinson™ and among a million other reasons to love him i think that is one of the reasons i’ve always been drawn to him. he’s so compassionate and caring but you have to make sure you’re not distracted by his bright loudness to miss it. in addition to seeing myself reflected in louis, i also admire so much about him that i am not but aspire to be more like. i wish i could be more extroverted like him and i wish i could be a bright presence for the people around me like i know he is. so with louis i see myself and i see traits that inspire me to go outside my comfort zone and push my own boundaries.

for yoongi, the soft sweet infp that he is, i think his emotional displays are equally as subtle and layered behind a bit of stoicism and a bit of introversion and a bit of being very carefully selective about who he lets in. his displays of affection and caring are alway there but are not done to be viewed and given great attention (i.e. his hand holding). i don’t think yoongi much likes being the center of attention and would much rather have his members be that (lol @ jimin) but at the same time he has moments where his energy just bursts forth. these are moments where he’s clearly so comfortable with his surroundings and the people he’s with that he feels no need to be measured or restrained. again, this is all my interpretation of what i see and is thus filtered and distilled so many times that i’d never presume to state all of this as some factual evaluation of yoongi’s personality, but also again, i see myself in these observations and interpretations of yoongi. i find it very difficult to express my emotions (see the above point about couching everything in humor) but they are there and they are felt deeply and they show themselves in subtler ways. i find it difficult to display affection with even my closest friends and family but am also just a touch-starved bitch looking to hold someone’s hand like yoongi is always doing. i too sometimes begin to feel comfortable enough with those around me that my passion and excitement just bursts forth all at once, but only sometimes, otherwise im hyper conscious of myself and tend to self-police if i have not reached such a comfort level. i see a lot of that in Min Yoongi™. but like with louis i also see a lot in yoongi that i strive to be more like. i struggle with the weight of my own expectations for myself and i internalize A Lot, as yoongi seems to, but yoongi also demonstrates such a clarity of self when it comes to these things. i think he Knows himself quite well, which is something i’d like to be better at. i think his self awareness (something i think namjoon also has in spades) and his work ethic are admirable and inspire me greatly. he just seems so Lucid Perceptive and Insightful about his situation, and that encourages me to be more honest with myself about my own situation.

and like maybe this is all just a diatribe that could be applied by anyone to their fave celeb? there’s levels to abstraction to every celebrity and there’s always interpolation/projection our own traits, neuroses, insecurities, desires, etc. onto how we view our favorite celebs... but idk there seems to be something slightly different with celebs like yoongi and louis (and zayn and namjoon actually now that i think about it). 

like let’s contrast it with other 1d and bts members: jin and hobi have carefully constructed the way they want to be seen and they don’t let people see much beyond that (and they’re So Valid for that). i actually think niall is quite a lot like this as well. the caricature is the whole picture that we get if that makes sense (though of course not even a fraction of the whole person which we are not nor should we be privy to) but its still a human picture, its still rooted in a sense and a feeling of authenticity; it just has its boundaries and is clear about those boundaries. thus the consumer public gets a discrete, self-contained persona whose likeability isn’t necessarily dependent on the consumer’s ability to relate or see themselves in the persona but rather is simply likeable!

then you have liam and jungkook who i see as quite similar in some ways for some reason (which im sure is gonna get me yelled at lmao). i dont mean that i think they’re similar people just that i think both of them are quite earnest and what you see is what you get with them. i don’t think either of them have it in them to pull a jin/hobi/harry (see below) and construct/be viligent about the boundaries of their persona. i think tae and jimin are mostly like this as well. they’re all just kind of unapologetically themselves (liam particularly after 1d ended, tho i know that, ironically, many feel he’s a bit of a poser nowadays)? i see these types of figures as similar to the type above just with less stable boundaries/less concern for those boundaries.

then you have harry whose caricature is constructed to be larger than life, to be almost non-human in its Celeb-ification. Harry Styles™ is not meant to allow for reflection of yourself in it. the consumer is not supposed to find parts of themselves relating to Harry Styles™, that defeats the purposes of the larger than lifeness of Harry Styles™. (i know this sounds bad and don’t get me wrong i do hate harry lol but i also don’t think this is an inherently Bad way to be a celebrity. it’s the david bowie, lady gaga [pre-joanne] school of celebrity and its fine, i just think it should be recognized for what it is and i think its very different from how bts and the other members of 1d operate [though i recognize that some people would view zayn in this light]).

personally i think yoongi and louis (and zayn and namjoon, to account for everyone in this analysis here) don’t fit into the above categories. clearly i dont think any of these four are in the Harry Styles™-type camp (duh). but i also don’t think they fit into the authentic-but-carefully-boundaried jin/hobi/niall camp nor the what-you-see-is-what-you-get liam/maknae line camp. i think these 4 occupy a limbo space between the two ‘categories.’

anyways, the long and the short of it is that we all make our own meaning in celebrities. for me, i find myself drawn to yoongi and louis because i see traits of my own reflected back at the same time and in the same person that i see aspirational traits. im inspired and im comforted by this duality that yoongi and louis provide for me. i love all the members of 1d and bts (except harry lolz) but yoongi and louis (and zayn and namjoon, who i’d say is my 2nd bias in bts if that wasn’t already clear) hold special places in my heart because of how they occupy my sort of nebulous fourth category of celebhood.

anyways, i’m pretty sure no one is still reading this, which i do Not blame you for, but that’s my two cents! i love min yoongi and louis tomlinson, whats new!!!!!!!!!

[jewell-chan]

Top 16 Shuichi Saihara ships

Another Amino copy/paste and this probably be extremely controversial, but let’s give it a go posting it. This is my Top 16 Saihara ships, including crossover ships as an entry. And yes, this is my quick opinion and I know there will be controversial choices but I do explain my points and I am aware which choices are controversial and why. Major spoilers under the cut:

Art source: https://www.pixiv.net/member_illust.php?mode=medium&illust_id=62325101

Hiyo, and finally, I’ll be actually listening to my poll results. And here, I’ll be going back to discussing two things that set this fandom on fire: Shipping and opinions. Yes, I know, the horror.

If you hadn’t guessed from the title, this will be ranking the ship of Shuichi Saihara, the Super High School Level Detective. It’s 16 because Saihara is pretty much shipped with the entire cast and more.

We’ll have NDRV3 spoilers from here on out since Saihara is a major character in the game so plot and character details will be discussed. Also, I’m unsure but I’ll add the warning anyway: This list may contain the mentions of adult themes and a bit of foul language. Since the title is so straightforward, I don’t really need to explain much with this OP so let’s begin.

16.Saiharu

Let’s start with one of my least favorite ships in the series. Also known as Harusai and Saikawa, Saiharu is a really poor ship in my opinion. Pandora hearts spoilers but, for those who read it, do you remember when Sharon and Reim randomly got married at the end for no reason other than both of them being Break’s friends? That’s how this ship feels to me. Except worse.

First off, Saihara and Maki’s personalities are way too serious so despite the many interactions they have, specifically in Chapter 3, they never find any particular dynamic making their chemistry seem weak as well and almost non-existent. The only, and I do mean the only, good exchange between the two is in Chapter 3 when Maki gets mad at Saihara for the implication she’s overweight and claiming the only woman Saihara has ever touched was his mother.

So that alone makes me feel neutral, leaning towards dislike, on the ship. Their chemistry being bland as fuck. However, that’s not what seals the deal. What does that for me is in Chapter 5, Maki tells Saihara and the others that she will not go into the hanger and attack Ouma and the group decide to believe her. What does she do? Go into the hanger and attack Ouma. When the group finds out about this, they have no reaction, Saihara included. When Maki thinks she’s the killer, she tries to sacrifice everyone, Saihara included, just to make sure Ouma’s dead. She put her personal bias against Ouma over the lives of Yumeno, Kiibo and Saihara who she knew were innocent.

Normally, I’d think this would be interesting. Relationships with conflict are actually well done. However, they don’t do anything with this. They do show concern for Maki’s attempt to kill everybody but it’s glossed over too quickly to notice. After the trial, Maki talks to Saihara about Kaito and it’s supposed to be a heartfelt scene between the two but at best, it feels plastic. At worst, it feels manipulative. I can’t believe this conversation after she tried to get him and the others killed and it’s not actually brought up past this point.

My final reason is why I hate this ship is because it feels the only appeal it has is because Kaito is dead so why don’t his two best friends hook up? I hated it when Pandora hearts did it in canon(keep in mind that Pandora Hearts is my favorite series of all time) and I hate the idea of it here. Thankfully, Japan agrees with me and dislikes the ship strongly with very few fans so making them canon wouldn’t help sales very much.

15.Saiguuji

Thankfully, Saiharu is the only Saihara ship I dislike. Let’s get to this weird ship. It’s fairly popular on twitter for some odd reason and while it’s fanbase is small outside of that, it’s few fans are incredibly vocal. I am fairly neutral on this ship.

This one is really personal taste, however. I just find it weird. I understand why it’s shipped but the fanbase’s treatment of it makes it sound like a tragic and canon love story gone wrong.

Like, if you want my perception of this ship, try looking at Korekiyo’s love hotel. That is how I see this pairing. So looking at the fanbase compared to things like that, I just… Ehh?

However, the incredibly bizarre fanbase aside, I actually do enjoy the dynamic between these two in Korekiyo’s FTEs. This is where I find the major appeal of the ship and definitely my favorite part of it. Korekiyo talking about anthropology and folklore tales to Saihara who’s patiently listening is actually very nice. I can see where people are coming from when they ship this. Even Korekiyo says he finds Saihara worthy for his sister.

Another thing to bring up why I can’t really grow to like this ship is because of their main story. Not only does Saihara expose Korekiyo as the killer, Korekiyo being rather pissed off about it, but Saihara finds Korekiyo absolutely disgusting in terms of his motive, even to the point of being relieved he dies. What also doesn’t help is he says “I will never understand you…” if you check his door after his demise which is probably one of the harsher comments protagonists give out we’ve had so far. Understandably so. So yeah, it’s not exactly a healthy ship and I personally have no care for it but eh, I see the appeal.

14.Saimugi

Another ship I am neutral on but can see the appeal for. This is really the ideal ship for those who like psychologically abusive villain X protagonist ships. I have seen some fans for it who pretty much enjoy it for the reasons I would assume they would.

Mugi seems like everyone’s friend for most of the game, Saihara included, and the two also have some optional scenes together. There’s also that scene when exploring for lab where she talks to Saihara more about her life outside of cosplaying.

However, in the final chapter of the game, you find out their friendship was a lie and Mugi was just a role for her to play inside of the script. While they weren’t close or anything, you could still feel they were friends. So not only is it heartbreaking for Saihara, but the final trial nails in Saihara’s suffering all caused by her. Having her be Amami’s true murderer, exposing his whole life being a lie, showing his audition tape of who he once was and all gloating about it as Saihara falls to a despairing state. It’s quite hard to watch and definitely impactful.

There’s also her Salmon mode ending(I stopped calling it prison mode since the localization says it this way) where she appoints Saihara into working with her in the cosplay business only for her true self to leak out implying she’s going to do worse things to him than what he expects she will. So with things like that, I can see the appeal of this ship. Although, it isn’t to my taste exactly.

13.Sairumi

Not a very popular ship but I can see the appeal. Although, outside of the goth aesthetic which I like, I am pretty much neutral on this ship. I do admit that Kirumi’s love hotel is my favorite and I actually do like her interactions with Saihara throughout the game. They’re both surface level with each other and get along swimmingly.

However, what lowers this ship for me is Kirumi’s pure salty and petty hatred for him in the second trial. I mean, he does have a nice line towards him after the trial to imply she doesn’t hate him but she was so furious he got her found out as the killer that she’s the only culprit who voted for Saihara out of pure spite.

12.Saihamatsu

Ah yes, the most popular ship in the fandom is only number 12. I’ve made a post going into detail on how I feel about this ship but I guess I’ll briefly repeat myself here. I have neutral feelings towards this ship. There are things I like about it, things that irk me about it and things that make me not care for it.

I do admit that it’s very cute and tragic. While I have my issues with Chapter 1, I actually really like how Kaede’s trial is done and thought her slow manipulation to exposing Saihara was amazing.

I also like certain moments between them in Chapter 1 like when Kaede asks Saihara if he’s looking up her skirt and he apologises, but unlike other anime girls where she’d get all pissy at him, Kaede took it rather maturely and didn’t mind. Another moment is in the investigation where Kaede finds a porno magazine, Saihara wonders why it shocked her so much and she fails to persuade him not to look with her which results in the two incredibly embarrassed. “It’s just Moobies- I mean movies!” got a laugh out of me.

However, my issues with this ship is the same issue I have with the anime Clannad. It’s pretty much “Look at this thing, isn’t it adorable? Oh fuck, now it’s dead. Feel sad” and then you have to angst over how the OTP was destroyed for the rest of the game because the game told you to. They don’t exactly expand on their relationship outside of them being cute and that’s fine, I like simple ships like Momoharu, but this one feels so plastic and forced in a lot of areas. Like when they’re investigating Amami’s corpse, she claims her heart skipped a beat when Saihara touched his corpse. I know it’s because she thinks she’s the killer but blind players are just gonna turn their head questioning why Kaede finds Saihara looking at a dead body hot.

And then there’s Chapter 6 where their relationship takes over and overshadows Mugi’s character a lot which genuinely pisses me off since we don’t get to see much of her true self. Instead of Saihara holding a grudge against Mugi for making everyone suffer throughout the killing game, they have him hold a grudge JUST because she was Amami’s true killer making Kaede falsely executed. Yes, that’s an asshole move but I think writing a script for a killing game and manipulating everyone to death is far worse. It’s like if one guy murdered a man and the other set fire to a school and killed every student inside, and you get mad at the guy who murdered a man.

11.Crossover ships

I don’t usually care for crossover ships outside of talent plan interactions like Mikan X Tenko(I really love this crossover ship due to their talent plan interaction) but I think Saihara has some nice ships in this category.

Ones I enjoy include the obvious Saihara X Kirigiri and the strangely amusing Saihara X Komaeda. Unfortunately, I don’t care much for Saihara’s crackships myself so this is a quick one. Honorable mention goes to Sakura X Saihara because they’re canon(Voice actor joke.)

10.Sairuma

Now this is a strangely popular pairing. I didn’t understand it very much at first since Saihara shows a lot of distaste towards Iruma and her love hotel… Sure was something. However, once I did her FTEs, I could see why this was liked. I wouldn’t exactly consider myself a fan but it sounds nice. Her FTEs actually imply that Iruma may have developed feelings for Saihara in which he accepted said feelings, although not agreed.

Said implication carries onto the third trial in a back route, funny enough. I wasn’t expecting Saihara to be able to tolerate Iruma the way he manages in his FTEs almost to a level where she can pretty much be considered another member to the group of V3 characters fighting for the Saiharabowl alongside Kaito, Kaede, Angie, Ouma, Kiibo and Yumeno. And yes, Iruma is the only one where they actually explain why she gives you her underwear after her FTEs unlike everyone else. What a treat.

9.Amasai

I do like this ship aesthetically and it has some really well done fanart. I’m going to have to replay Amami’s FTEs in order to talk about this more but I’m saving that for my FTEs review post which should come eventually since I finally managed to get my vita copy of the NISA version of the game. That aside, I can safely say that we’re getting into the ships I officially like starting with Amasai. Not saying this is OTP or even BROTP tier but I do genuinely like this ship. The issue is I can’t exactly put my finger on why.

I could say it’s because their personalities work so well with each other, but that’d be too simple of an explanation. I’d say it’s because of Amami’s FTEs and his Salmon mode ending. For those who are unaware, Amami is the Super High School Level Adventurer and upon learning his talent in his FTEs, he tells Saihara about his adventures of travelling across the world. He also explains to Saihara his situation involving his sisters and how he views himself as a terrible brother to let them go missing.

In his salmon mode ending, Amami offers Saihara to travel the world with him and look for his missing sisters together in which Saihara accepts. It’s one of my favorite Salmon mode endings and I found this a very sweet exchange between the two. My only issue with this ship is Amami’s kind of a dick to Saihara in his FTEs whether it’s outright or subtle. I don’t know if that’s just me but he seems a lot nicer with Kaede and a lot douchier with Saihara. Maybe it’s because he’s discussing his missing sisters which is a tough topic to bring up.

8.Saigoku

This is somewhat of a rarepair but it does have it’s more obvious fans and I can see the appeal of this one. Consider it a BROTP of mine actually. Gonta kind of acts like a respectful little brother to Saihara despite obviously being the taller one of the two. Their interactions are very pleasant and Gonta’s FTEs do show this.

What seals the deal for me though is Chapter 4. Unlike the other culprits, Saihara is incredibly firm and gentle with Gonta. Not even Kaede was given that type of exposure. Saihara is aware that Gonta doesn’t even remember murdering Iruma and is taking it easy on him because of that and being as calm and reassuring as he can to him. It’s a way that helps Gonta understand what’s going on, even if he is in tears while establishing so.

I can easily see why Chapter 4 brings tears to so many people and this touch is one of the many reasons. Saihara doesn’t want to believe Gonta is the killer even to the point of suggesting a personality switched, but he can only focus on his goal as a detective to accept that every bit of evidence points to him and the pieces connect the scenario too well. Even after Chapter 4, they try to hammer in Saihara sacrificed Gonta and he definitely feels that way.

7.Saihoshi

This is another BROTP of mine. Throughout Chapter 2, Saihara seemed like the only one who wanted to actively help Ryoma. A strategy I noticed Saihara uses on Angie, Ouma and Ryoma is that he wants to reach out and changed people thinking that’s the right way to go about it. Ouma points out why that’s wrong but I’ll get to that eventually. Here, it actually is the right decision.

Ryoma and Saihara are both able to read the surroundings which results in the two of them able to see eye to eye with each other’s ideals and the two of them refusing to go along with each other’s ideals. Saihara wants to help Ryoma while Ryoma thinks it’s useless. Throughout Ryoma’s FTEs, Saihara keeps bugging Ryoma and asking him to talk about himself to Saihara in order to gain his complete friendship which Ryoma catches onto quite easily.

Ryoma’s final FTE and their last main-story encounter made this BROTP for me. I’ll go in more depth on why Ryoma’s FTEs are so great in his Free time event review but it basically shows that Saihara’s attempts to reach out to Ryoma actually do work and Ryoma becomes willing to give a chance. In the main story, before Ryoma and Saihara get separated ending in Ryoma’s unfortunate demise, Ryoma says that he’s willing to find a reason to live in order to fight alongside everybody and Saihara’s conversations with Ryoma throughout the chapter is a huge motivation to get Ryoma to do so.

6.Saimeno

Now unlike Saiharu, this is actually a GOOD survivor type ship. What a surprise.The reason I like this ship is because Yumeno and Saihara are actually fairly similar in some ways and share a lot of chemistry.

The two of them both like to suppress their emotions, although Yumeno to a higher extent, and became more attached to the people around them as the game goes on. The dojo scene with Tenko shows that the two are similar in this regard.

They also have their differences as shown in the later half of the game. Saihara is more serious and reserved while in the second half of the game once Yumeno has opened her emotions, she’s more optimistic and throws jokes around a lot more to keep everyone’s spirits up.

I also really like their interactions in Chapter 4 and Yumeno’s love hotel. They’re extremely cute like Yumeno asking Saihara that if he was lost in thought from her beauty and then getting flustered over complimenting herself. Also, Yumeno’s artbook comment is really adorable “*pet pet* Good boy!”

5.Sainaga

This is a bit of a controversial choice, but I actually really love this ship. The reason for this is Angie’s FTEs and her love hotel. I just love the dynamic of the weird quirky girl dominating over the serious and submissive boy here. Strange, I wouldn’t think I’d enjoy a dynamic like that but apparently I do.

Angie’s final FTE has Angie admit that she’s in love with Saihara due to his aggression, and while said aggression was not Saihara’s intention, it sure got Angie to take a liking to him. And I can’t explain why but I loved their interaction. Angie’s quirky and ambiguously bizarre attitude played off of Saihara’s straight man side perfectly. It’s also a part of the FTEs that give some characterisation to Saihara as well as the one he’s hanging out with.

4.Saiten

Ah yes, I can hear people screeching in the distance. I clarified before that Tenko isn’t confirmed a lesbian, just incredibly likely is. In fact, I headcanon her as a lesbian. However, that doesn’t mean it’s a crime against humanity to ship her with a guy. If you guys can ship Komahina despite Hajime likely being straight, I can ship Tenko with Saihara and Kaito. With that out of the way, yes, I ship Saihara with Tenko.

Of course, this ship is incredibly unlikely or got a long way to go. I guess you could say Saiten has still got a ways to go. So why do I like Saiten? Well, as many people have picked up, Saihara seems to be the boy Tenko tolerates the most. She was a bit rude when her dojo showed up(not when they entered) and didn’t let him participate in the celebrity experience, but those aside, she seems to like Saihara. Or at least, she likes Saihara and doesn’t realize such considering her degenerate males thing is only delusion.

These two generally have some nice interactions throughout both Tenko’s FTEs and the main story. The dojo scene and her first FTE in particular shows that she does care about Saihara and respects him to some level despite constantly berating him for being a boy. The part of her FTE where she flips Saihara so hard he passes out, but she feels guilty and brings him to his bed soon after is one of my favorite moments in the FTEs of any of the V3 characters, really.

3.Oumasai

I have a full ship thoughts post on this and while it’s a little outdated, it still holds up opinion-wise. I find their main story interactions quite lacking outside of half of Chapter 4 and Chapter 3 but I really love the dynamic between these two in Ouma’s FTEs, Salmon mode ending and other bonus content. And yes, I am aware of how popular this ship is which results in it having a lot of fans and haters. That means that my liking to this ship and not Saihamatsu is probably going to get me some flak.

First off, I absolutely adore the aesthetic between these two. Ouma’s black, white and purple blends very well with Saihara’s white, black and blue but not in a way where they contrast so much. Saihara’s a detective and Ouma’s a supreme leader which can be bended into a cop and a phantom thief too, so their talents go hand-in-hand. Funny enough, Ouma’s love hotel is quite similar to that scenario.

Getting into their interactions and personalities, Ouma has trust issues and uses his coping mechanism to both keep himself alive and to avoid attachment to anyone. The reason for his ideals is currently unknown. However, despite everything, Ouma wants a friend. Someone who can see his true self and gain his trust. Since Saihara was a detective, he was Ouma’s opportunity to do so. Ouma’s FTEs are his attempt to get closer to Saihara and have a friend who can understand him and figure him out.

The game also implies that in the process of this that Ouma developed feelings for Saihara which is where the love for this ship spawned, thank you single-chapter-4-line-that-caused-an-entire-community-to-go-nuts. I also adore Ouma’s salmon mode ending. Not even the Super High School Level Detective can ace everything perfectly. Ouma calls Saihara out on trying to change him to reveal his true self rather than finding his true self through the fake one which is a pretentious attempt and not a strategy if you want to gain someone’s trust. However, Saihara does take up on Ouma’s idea and agrees to see his true self underneath. Unfortunately, the main story didn’t go as well and while Saihara couldn’t understand Ouma by the end, he still viewed him as his friend. Unfortunately, it was too late for that and Ouma was violently killed off.

2.Saimota

This is the true BROTP right here. After Kaede’s death, Kaito felt the need to carry on her wish and role as leader and tried to train Saihara’s confidence up and understand him like Kaede did. As a result, Kaito ended up understanding Saihara more than Kaede did. He’s what kept Saihara in line the whole time after Kaede’s death. As a result, he, along with Ouma and Kiibo, was the one who ultimately brought Saihara to confront his fear of exposing the truth and prepared him for the consequences in doing so.

Their main story summary aside, these two are pretty much the definition of a bromance. They’re a Kamina/Simon duo(I don’t like calling Kaito a Kamina clone because he isn’t, but Saimota does have a Simon/Kamina feel to it) in which there’s an unconfident but intelligent member and an arrogant but dumb member. What I find interesting however is the way they handle the Simon and Kamina type of relationship in which they have Kaito grow jealous of Saihara for being able to talk with both his mind and his heart while he can only do the latter and focus on his beliefs.

However, after Chapter 4, Kaito gains a lot of character development in which he learns to put his bias aside, use his head a little more and apologise to Saihara for venting out his jealousy onto him. It’s good that V3 gave character development to all of it’s main characters unlike the other games(DR1 had Kirigiri develop, SDR2 had Hajime develop, but DR1 still left Naegi and Togami(until the series went on and he became more of a friend to the group) for development and Chiaki and Komaeda focused more on being endearing characters than having development which isn’t a bad thing) and both Kaito and Saihara are no exception.

Also, can I just point out how Saihara acts like he has a crush on Kaito in his FTEs, like can we just talk about that beauty?

1.Saiibo

I had already made a post on this, but yes, I fucking love Saiibo. I love it a lot. It’s so cute and pure and sweet and comfy and perfect and- I really like Saiibo.

Okay yes, I admit that my favorite thing about this ship is just how cute it is. It is absolutely freaking adorable and even when I try to have a serious discussion on it, I always let my inner fangirl slide which I am proving as I type. Kiibo tries his hardest to be seen as a human and Saihara tries to help out every now and again only to end up comforting him on his failed efforts which is shown in Chapter 5.

I love how this ship is mostly background noise in the main story so it’s easy to appreciate and there’s no strong interactions nor conflict between the two so it also makes it a nice friendship in the background. In Kiibo’s FTEs, Saihara tries to help Kiibo get a career of some sort to help him feel more human and learns more about his history in the process. I’ll go in further depth in my FTE review but Kiibo’s FTEs are amazing for more reasons than the Saiibo scenes. My favorite part in Kiibo’s FTEs is his singing which is so bad Saihara is frightened by it.

And let’s not forget Chapter 6. With Kiibo bringing Saihara back to his senses, the audience erasing Kiibo’s AI through the survey poll and Saihara quite literally breaking his chains to save him. It’s definitely my favorite part of Chapter 6 and a really well done climax. And then you have Kiibo sacrifice himself for the survivors. One of the saddest moments in the game for me. There’s also Kiibo’s love hotel which is also really cute. Kiibo tries to learn romance with Saihara which results in the two holding hands.. Which Saihara points out isn’t really holding hands and just shaking hands.

And those were my top 16 Saihara ships. This was a bit of a short list, especially for one that took so long, but I thought it wouldn’t be fair if I gave in depth paragraphs to Saiharu, Saihamatsu and Oumasai while Saiibo, Saiguuji and Sainaga got almost nothing. I hope you enjoyed this quicky at the very least.

[savvyliterate]

So I have “A Year in the Life” on the brain again, and because I am in Hermione mode, here’s another really long essay on the revival revolving around the little-discussed fourth main storyline.

READ PART 1: How Luke and Lorelai have a far healthier relationship in AYTIL than in the original series

And, yes, there were four main storylines in AYITL. I love how each of them addresses something different:

Lorelai's storyline has to deal with everything in her life changing, and she is finding that she is stuck in time. Her father has died. Her best friend has left the business they started together. Her longest-serving employee wants to leave. Her daughter is drifting. Her mother is throwing every mistake she ever made in her face. Everything is happening so fast, and she can't quite keep up, and it's terrifying her. By the end of the revival, Lorelai has learned how to move forward with her life.

Emily's storyline deals with the changes in her life after Richard's death, of how to start living alone - truly living alone - after 50 years of marriage. She has to deal with her relationship with Lorelai in a way she could avoid before, because she had Richard to fall back on in regarding her opinions about her daughter. Emily learns throughout the year to become independent and learn to live for herself.

Rory's storyline deals with drifting and the displacement a lot of Millennials have in the world. Life wasn't what was promised her in high school, and through a combination of her own choices and the changing industry, her chosen career has left her behind. Rory has to find her identity all over again, and you see her stumbling through life as she comes to terms with it. This is the one storyline that's left open when everything is said and done.

But there’s that fourth, because there were four people listed in the opening credits after all, and this storyline is so subtle and so entangled with Lorelai and Emily's that you don't realize it for what it is until the very end of the revival, and that's Luke's storyline. His storyline deals with the opposite of what everyone else does, and that's the fear of getting left behind.

It's such an interesting storyline, because it picks up a subtle thread that's woven throughout the original series and tugs on it. You don't even really realize it at first, because unlike the storylines for the the three girls, Luke's doesn't start until "Spring" when Emily informs him about the trust set up in his name.

There has been some criticism of the discussion he and Lorelai have over Michel in "Spring," and about how he snaps at her for not letting Michel push her around. It's the type of behavior he displayed during season 6 that made fans bristle, and it has the same root cause. Why do things have to change? Why can't you be happy with what you have?

LUKE: How have you peaked? The place has been booked solid since you opened.

LORELAI: But it's so small. Just ten rooms and no suites, no mini-fridge and no room to grow.

LUKE: You don't need to grow.

LORELAI: Tell him.

LUKE: Why does everything need to grow? If something's good, keep it the same.

LORELAI: Yeah, but I kinda get what he's saying

LUKE: No, you don't need more. [Snapping]

LORELAI: Okay.

This sort of behavior is actually pretty unusual for a guy who constantly encouraged Lorelai from the very beginning of the series to grow. Luke was one of her very first supporters regarding the Dragonfly and repeatedly told her she is capable of branching out from the Independence Inn and running her own business. He even put $30K of his own money behind that belief before they were a couple. And he has been super proud of her achievements, go insofar as to order back issues of the magazine the Dragonfly was featured in so he could get familiar with the publication. As we saw in "Winter" with Rory's "New Yorker" article, this is an aspect of his personality that hasn't changed over the past nine years.

So why is he balking now?

Part of it is the tendency for Michel to push Lorelai around, and the fact that everyone around Lorelai is forcing her to question her own decisions and this is the breaking point for Luke. He's seen what Emily's constant second-guessing of her choices have done to her, and Michel piling on top of that isn't helping. As he pointed out, Michel has been guilt tripping Lorelai over one thing or another for 20 years. His next sentence was to immediately apologize for snapping, but he's feeling pretty protective at this point. I don't think he meant it in a mean way. Previous times Luke has made similar statements, he's walked them back pretty quickly - such as his protests over the Durham Group wanting to purchase the Dragonfly back in season 5. Back then, his response was largely the same as this: an initial snap judgment, some time to process things, then revisits it from a more rational standpoint. Really, this has been a character trait going all the way back to the beginning of the series.

But here in "Spring," this conversation serves another purpose - especially given its placement in the episode. In Broadway, you tend to have a piece of music where the major players state their desires. In "Hamilton," Alexander Hamilton does this during "My Shot." He doesn't want to throw his away his shot to change the world. Most people's "I want" songs are toward the beginning of the show. However, Aaron Burr's desires are cloaked until well into the second act of the musical. That's when we finally find out that Burr wants to be in the room where it happens. He wants to be part of these history-making decisions rather than remaining on the sidelines.

In "A Year in the Life," this discussion about Michel in the second act of this revival is really Luke's "I want" statement. He wants everything to stay the same, because life for him is good. This is established in "Winter" and why this storyline didn't start there. He and Lorelai are stable and happy, which shows in their relentless bantering and bedtime rollicking. He's the super proud dad, the one rescuing everyone when Kirk's car breaks down, the one providing support for Lorelai at Richard's funeral and when she realizes she's going to therapy with her mother. He's devoted to both Rory and April, as seen by the menu placement of Rory's article and taking several hours (and three dictionaries) to decipher April's letters. This has always been him at his best, and it's about to change.  

"If something's good, keep it the same." And this is where we pick up his journey, because the next major scene that Luke has is the one where Emily calls his cell phone and specifically invites him to dinner to tell him about the trust Richard left him, and then we're off to the races.

One thing that the original series subtly points out is that everyone Luke has ever loved or cared for deeply has left him - be it through circumstances out of his control, their own need to grow, or his mistakes involving those people: His mom died when he was young. His dad died of cancer when he was in his 20s. Liz bailed on him, presumably when he was dealing with his sick dad. Rachel came back and left again and again. Anna left and didn't think he was worth telling about his own kid. Nicole bailed when she realized he wasn't all into their relationship. Lorelai left him because of their mistakes regarding April and Christopher. Jess chose his birth father and California over a stable life in Stars Hollow. Rory and April left home and made their own lives in the world.

You have someone who, at the age of roughly 50, is convinced that he will always be left behind, that he isn't worthy enough to stay for. Luke has severe abandonment issues. Yeah, Lorelai and Emily weren't the only ones who needed therapy. It can be argued that out of the four members of the main cast, Luke is the one who needs therapy the most but never gets it - even though part of him recognized that need all the way back in season 4 with the self-help book.

Now you have Richard reviving Luke's insecurities from beyond the grave thanks to the trust. No matter that it's established Luke has a decent amount of money on his own - enough to offer Lorelai a $15K loan out of pocket for termite repairs, to immediately write out a $30K check for the Dragonfly, to drop $100K on a building without any sort of financial issues. He was able to afford renovations to the diner and apartment twice without any sort of financial issue, and helped pay for renovations on the Crap Shack twice (season 6 and at some point between "Bon Voyage" and "Winter".) That really nice stove now in their kitchen isn't cheap by a long shot, and I doubt Lorelai was the one to pick it out or spend the money on it. He's floating the bill for April's education at MIT, and while I'm sure she had scholarships, it's not exactly cheap.

But despite all of that, Richard is claiming through that trust that Luke still isn't doing enough to provide for Lorelai. Don't get me wrong, I think by the time of Richard's death, there is a certain amount of trust and affection between Luke and the Gilmores. Richard included him on the actuary table to begin with, and Emily called Luke a member of the family. Emily is affectionate toward him at the funeral, and while there is some awkwardness, there isn't a ton. His first instinct at Friday Night Dinner is to hug Emily, which speaks to a lot about his character growth there - that the guy who could barely hug Rory in the early seasons of the original series has shed enough of his armor to more easily show physical affection. Yes, Emily tells the therapist that he doesn't often go to FND, but this is also Emily - who has an established pattern of telling people they're not doing enough when they've done all they can. Luke could have gone to every single FND for years and Emily would still claim that he barely shows. I don't think he went as often as Lorelai, but I would wager he went probably once a month - just enough to be familiar with the house since he was wandering about doing stress home repairs at the funeral, but not with Richard's inner sanctuary (as he mentioned to Emily he's only been in there one other time).

Now Luke gets dragged into this real estate scheme and really doesn't protest it. Part of it is knowing that Lorelai and Emily are having issues, and he doesn't want to make things worse. But, deep down, part of him thinks that Richard is right - he isn't doing enough for Lorelai. And that seems to be confirmed in his mind when Lorelai starts pulling away from him. She's lying about therapy, and while they aren't the huge lies she expressed back in season 5, it's still lying. And that just adds to his unvoiced fear that Lorelai will leave eventually him behind. His response? To clam up about the trust. Piling onto all of this is Lorelai’s new belief (no thanks to Emily) that Luke isn’t satisfied with his life, though he made it very clear in “Winter” that he was.

In "A Year In the Life," Lorelai never considered leaving him. It wasn't an option on the table from her perspective. That was all coming from him. Yes, she second-guesses how she treated him, and that her own selfishness led to him having a life he didn't want - hence the surrogacy subplot and their fight in the diner in "Summer" - but she never thought of leaving him. Even at the very beginning of "Fall," when she's babbling to his voicemail, her thoughts are of getting herself straightened out and coming back home. Contrast how Lorelai treats Luke at the beginning of "Fall" versus "Partings." She was going out of her way to avoid him in that episode until their ultimate confrontation that ended the engagement. When she's on the hiking trip in "Fall," she leaves rambling voicemail messages and defends him to the strangers she's hiking with. It's not the actions of someone planning to bail.

As I wrote a couple months ago, "The Wild trip was never about Lorelai figuring out if she was going to end the relationship. It’s Lorelai finding herself so she can deal with all the emotional crap thrown at her in the past year. She goes when she does because she realizes that she’s fighting with her daughter and that if things keep going the way they are, she could very well permanently damage her relationship with Luke."

But Luke doesn't see that, because there is no precedence in his life for this sort of thing. When he sees people growing emotionally, he knows they will walk away from him.

LUKE: You know, there's been some, uh ... Between us, it's been

JESS: Communication problems?

LUKE: Exactly.

JESS: Never experienced that myself. Maybe she wanted a vacation.

LUKE: Yeah, from me. From us.

JESS: No. No.

LUKE: Uh, she's been keeping things from me.

JESS: Guy things?

LUKE: No. Other things. Like, she's been she's been going to a therapist. Do not say, 'It's about time.'

JESS: I did not say it. I thought it, but that's the way my mind works.

LUKE: Ah, we've been arguing, like sniping. And, we never sniped, you know. We never picked at each other in public and put each other down and made other people look at us like, "Oops, what's going on?"

JESS: I don't like you using the word "oops."

LUKE: I don't like me using it either. I never used the word before. Now I'm a guy who snipes at his girl and uses the word "oops."

JESS: Well, when does she get back?

LUKE: Three weeks. It's the longest we've been apart since we got together.

JESS: You might be wrong.

LUKE: You think I'm wrong?

JESS: Hey, I'm just hearing headlines.

LUKE: Lorelai Gilmore decides to hike the Pacific Crest Trail to figure some things out. What's that sound like?

JESS: It sounds like she's leaving you.

LUKE: Yeah.

Way back in season 4, we are treated to two significant excerpts (and some smaller ones) from the self-help book that Luke purchases. The second excerpt is the one that everyone latches onto, because that's when Luke realizes his feelings for Lorelai.

But the first one is the one that comes into the play in the revival. It's the lesson that Luke never learned, and the single thing that causes him to screw up all his significant relationships:

MAN ON CASSETTE: It's going to take work. It's going to take introspection. You're gonna have to learn new things -- how to be your own best friend, how to treat your damaged psyche with a little kindness, how to say, "hey, pal, you're worth it. You mean something to someone, and you deserve love." That is the key. If you crave love, then you deserve love. Say that to yourself. If I crave love, I deserve love. [Luke sighs deeply.] Now, how did that feel coming out? I'll bet it was hard. I'll bet you felt ridiculous. Some of you may even have been incapable of saying it at all. Try again.

LUKE: I'm not incapable. I just haven't been hit in the head with the Oprah stick lately.

And that's the lesson Luke never learned. He honestly doesn't believe he is worth fighting for, and his own sense of self worth is utter crap. It's why he doesn't react to Lorelai's pleadings in "Partings" until it's far too late. It's why he lashes out at her in season 6 and becomes overly controlling. It's why he just goes along with the cruise, gets married, then never really tries to make the marriage work with Nicole. It's why he dealt with April so badly at first and couldn't figure out how to integrate his relationship with his daughter with his relationship with his fiancee and her daughter.

His talk with Jess is the first time that he openly admits that he is terrified of Lorelai leaving him again, and shows us how he really feels about himself - he's tired and lost and doing things he knows is out of character. He feels like he is the root of Lorelai's issues and that he's the one holding her back. But because of this, because he's finally acknowledging his own fears, he's able to address them. This culminates in the reiteration of his initial "I want" statement when Lorelai returns home in "Fall." This is the culmination of his entire story arc, because he's finally taking a stand for himself.

LUKE: I am not unhappy, okay? I am not unsatisfied. You think I'm unhappy and unsatisfied, and I can't convince you that I am not! I mean this right here is all I will ever need. I never thought that it would happen. That you and me that we would happen. But we did. Listen, I know I am not the easiest guy in the world to build a life with and to share a house with, but there is no one who will be more here for you than me. I will never leave. I will never think about leaving. I will do whatever it takes to fix what's wrong."

The speech in "Fall" is beautiful, necessary, but also in a way pointless. Lorelai has already decided they should get married. She never thought of leaving him, which is why she just kind of gives him this baffled look throughout all of it. He wasn't going to change her mind about anything, because it was made up all along.

But what the speech does is put the cap on Luke's storyline and what he learned through his talk with Jess. He finally acknowledges that he as a person is worth fighting for and so is their relationship, then actually does so - which is far different from his actions post-"Wedding Bell Blues" and post-"Partings." Yes, Luke also made a big damn speech at the end of "The Long Morrow," but it was also different. He doesn't put forth the effort to say he will fix whatever is wrong with them, just that he moved too slow. It's capped with him walking away again when Lorelai reveals she slept with Christopher. They never really talk about it in the aftermath, as he just makes barbs at her when they run into each other in the next episode. Luke never went to the effort to really find out what was wrong and to see if there was a chance they could move past this. They eventually do, as they apologize to each other in "Hay Bale Maze," and Luke in "Summer" finds the idea of Lorelai cheating on him preposterous, so clearly everything regarding that was resolved off-screen after "Bon Voyage."

In "Fall," Luke finally fights for his relationship because he's finally fighting for himself. He's not going to be left behind again, and he will do whatever it takes to avoid making that same mistakes again and again. This is when he starts to recognize his own self worth, and for the first time in his life, he is truly all in.

And that's a beautiful storyline - to discover that you are a person worth fighting for. That change doesn't mean you have to be left behind.

[moviestorian]

what do you think Theon and George Warleggan have in common?

Hi!

First of all, I am so SO very sorry it took me ages toreply. I’ve had plenty of different things to do, and I thought this is such aninteresting question that deserves a fully developed reply. Finally, I’mreplying, and the final result is over 3000 words. :P

Disclaimer: my interpretation is basedon both show and book Theon, but almost entirely show version of George (he’sslightly different than his book counterpart, and also I’m reading The BlackMoon, so I wouldn’t even have a full context to discuss book George, so…)

I briefly outlined the topic at the endof this post, but it’s really short, and I will try to be moreprecise here. Ok, let’s start!

George& Theon vs. fandom

I will start with something which may not be a typicalparallel and is not directly connected with George/Theon’s personality (I mean,it could be refered to many other characters), but I still find it strikingenough to consider. I’m talking about the fandom’s most usual reaction to bothof these characters. Theon and George are (probably) equally disliked byPoldark/GoT fandoms. There are (rather small)groups of their fans of course,but there are definitely many more of those who - to put it mildly - dislikethem. Quite frankly, I think Theon’s fanbase is actually bigger than George’s,but this may be because GoT/Asoiaf fandom outnumbers the Poldark one.

Coming back to the fandoms’ reaction, George and Theonare commonly perceived as “evil”. George is rather frequently calleda “villain” (I kinda get why people think so but I’d argue with that, tome he’s more of an antagonist, just like Javert or Frollo), and while I don’tsee people using the same term to describe Theon that often, I’ve come acrosssuch opinions as well (also…I believe GRRM called him a villain…). Finally,they both receive a fair amount of hate, and well… this hatred can be very nasty(selective empathy, maybe?). I guess I shouldn’t be surprised anymore, but I’mstill quite astounded how awful things people can write… (I’m talking aboutposts in which you can find such gems as “Theon deserved to be tortured”,castration jokes etc., or “George should be flayed alive” and that Rossshould’ve put his face in fire.

Identityproblem

George Warleggan and Theon Greyjoy, as Inoticed, deal with the “I don’t belong anywhere” problem, even thoughtheir issues come from slightly different backgrounds (btw, they are both quiteshitty at solving their problems). George, as a wealthy and powerful banker whois grandson of a blacksmith, does belong to neither aristocracy nor commonfolk,and isn’t actually being accepted by either of these groups. When it comes toTheon, he is neither fully a Stark nor fully a Greyjoy. His arc is more of anidentity arc than anything else, I would say. As a hostage in Winterfell, he isreally close to the Stark family (as he admitted himself, Robb was more of a brotherto him than Rodrick and Marron) but he’s not one of them and he always remainsa Greyjoy in the Northerners’ eyes (and apart from Robb, he is rather indifferentto other Starks, definitely not one of them). However, he’s been in Winterfellfor so long that he doesn’t fit the Iron Islands, too - and hence, hissupposedly glorious return in A Clash of the Kings is one huge disappointment for him.

As a direct result of this problem, Georgeand Theon are doing their best to “prove themselves” - Warleggan is tryingreally hard to become a member of aristocracy, and Greyjoy wants to showeveryone that he is a true Ironborn. With pretty unfortunate results. Theirmain problem is, though, that they are not people they’re pretending to be, andI think they both know it deeply in their hearts, so it becomes some sort of acomplex for them. In early season 2, when Demelza asks him what’s thedifference between being a miner’s daughter and a blacksmith’s grandson Georgeangrily responds that “she will always beminer’s daughter, while he is a gentleman”. And it is not the only timewhen George reacts very (let’s say)sensitively when somebody brings up thematter of his origin. I think this is because he knows that no matter how many times he’ll deny it, he will always beblacksmith’s grandson. It’s pretty similar in Theon’s case, and although I disagreewith statements that the Starks were/are his true family, many GoT characterstend to think so. However, I can’t deny that he is strongly attached to theStarks and is influenced by what he experienced in Winterfell. Yet even beforethat, when he was just a child, he was not a “typical” Ironborn, he was a shy,sensitive child.

Acceptance & isolation issues

Something strongly related to the pointabove. I already mentioned the problem of not being accepted by theNortherners/Greyjoys (Theon) or commonfolk/aristocracy (George). No matter howmuch Theon and George will try, and let’s face it: both of them, yet especiallyGeorge, do stuff that not only don’t help them but actually makes the problemworse, they will always remain somewhere inbetween. Theon will always be “thatStark hostage” or, even worse, “Starks’ dog” in Ironmen’s eyes, and George willalways be “that upstart (poodle)” in aristocracy’s eyes. 

Because of this acceptance problem thereappears an isolation problem, too. I find it quite striking how lonely Georgeand Theon are. In Theon’s case it may not be that obvious because of the maskhe wears (smiling a lot, etc.), but in my opinion there’s no doubt he IS lonely. In George’s case it’sactually both pretty ironic and interesting about the TV characterization ofhim, because he seems more introverted than Theon, but at the same time he shows his loneliness quite often – butin a subtle way. Even in public places a viewer can frequently spot him beingalone. Because of this loneliness, Theon and George have this one person theystrongly rely on psychologically – I’m talking about Robb Stark and ElizabethChynoweth-Poldark. I already mentioned how Theon treats Robb as his youngerbrother, and I will also say that I think Robb is also the closest personequivalent to a true family member he ever had. When it comes to George, hecares about Elizabeth very much, to the point of obsessiveness (one couldwonder, who is George more obsessed with: Ross or Elizabeth?), and she isactually the only person (at least as far as I remember, correct me if I’m wrong)he speaks openly to about how lonelyhe feels (“Loneliness is not one-sided,Elizabeth. A man may feel it, too”).

Difficult family relationships/(poor) interpersonalskills

This partially comes as a result ofidentity/acceptance problems, and partially affects the mentioned issues aswell. I will start with saying that George is an orphan in the show (we don’tknow when exactly he lost his parents, though) and while technically both BalonGreyjoy and Alannys Harlaw are alive (well, Balon dies in AFFC, but Theon stillgot to see him in ACOK), Theon is so isolated from them since he was takenprisoner that he basically don’t have parents, too. I assume he was quite closeto his mother when he was a child, but his relationship with Balon wasextremely cold and this never changed. So, as consequence to them not reallyhaving fathers, George and Theon’s personalities are shaped by father figuresthat are not exactly very positive for them – Cary Warleggan and Ned Stark (ohmy, I never thought I will be comparing Ned to Cary, but here I am).

Let me start with Cary. Even in thebooks it was noted several times that Cary has too big of an influence onGeorge, but I promised to stick with the show and so I will. From season 2 Caryhas been less and less significant character in George’s arc, but I’d say it’sstrongly visible how many of George’s actions are somehowinfluenced/strengthened by Cary in s1 (happened once or twice in s2 as well,but George is already very independent by that time and usually decides to dowhat he wants). Cary is really, really cold and pretty amoral (he gives offthis vibe of not having much empathy, if any) and seems to have no problemswith doing harm at all, when even George seems to hesitate. One of such momentsare when Cary is absolutely not moved by Julia Poldark’s death and literally raises a toast (!) for “Ross Poldark’sdownfall” after his little daughter’s death and dissolving Carnmore CopperCompany (note that George slightly raises his glass but doesn’t drink, anddoesn’t look happy in the slightest). To be honest, he doesn’t seem very closeto his nephew in emotional terms, too – they are more like business partnersthan relatives, and allow me to emphasize: before marrying Elizabeth Cary isthe closest family member George has; the onlyfamily member he has. Taking this into account, what kind of person George issupposed to be? In some aspects he is similar to his uncle – distant and cold,and where does he get it from? Again, we don’t know how old was George when hisparents died so we’re moving a little bit into a headcanon zone (at the sametime, we don’t know what Nicholas Warleggan was like, and it’s probable that hewas similar to Cary to a certain extent, they were brothers after all).Assuming it happened when George was a child/teenager – then Cary definitely had a strong influence onhis personality and perception of other people/emotions in general. Then,assuming it happened when George was in his late teens/early twenties, thatinfluence would be way less significant, but it doesn’t mean there would be noinfluence at all. George still could have tried to somehow “stick” to the onlyfamily member he has and sought for his approval, at least in how to deal with business and make investments.

Before I will explain similiaritiesbetween Cary/George relationship and Ned/Theon relationship, let me emphasizethat Cary and Ned are not the same. Eddard is loving to his family and capableof showing his affection, while Cary is not. Where I see a parallel is how Nedis cold towards Theon, and Theon isliterally quite scared of him, which does influence him negatively. Let mequote the books to present how Greyjoy felt about Ned Stark (bolded by me foremphasis):

“As if ten years in Winterfellcould make a Stark. Lord Eddard had raised him amonghis own children, but Theon had neverbeen one of them. The whole castle, from Lady Stark to the lowliest kitchen scullion, knew he was hostage to his father’s good behavior,and treated him accordingly. Eventhe bastard Jon Snow had been accorded more honor than he had.

Lord Eddard had tried to play the father from time to time, but to Theon he had always remained the manwho’d brought blood and fire to Pyke and taken him from his home. As a boy, hehad lived in fear of Stark’s stern face and great dark sword. His wife was,if anything, even more distant and suspicious.” (GRRM, A Clash of Kings, Theon I)

Or here:

“This was never my home. I was a hostage here. Lord Stark had not treated him cruelly, but the long steel shadow of his greatsword had always been between them.He was kind to me, but never warm.He knew that one day he might need toput me to death.” (GRRM, A Dance with Dragons, The Prince of Winterfell)

These quotes alsohighlight Theon’s acceptance problem pretty well, but let’s go back to therelationship issue. Theon was taken prisoner when he was, if I remembercorrectly, 9 years old and stayed there until he was 19. So, his teenage yearswere shaped by: a) being isolated from his parents; b) having “parent figures”that are distant and make him literally insecure; c) feeling isolated by hissurroundings. This is not a healthy environment for a growing child. Theon had,undoubtedly, far worse than George Warleggan (who at least did not feel thathis life was on threat), but what I see they have in common here is that theyboth hardly had someone to truly rely on, and if you don’t have support in yourown family (or what is close to your family), why should you expect suchsupport from others (that’s why George seems a bit paranoid at times, as ifeveryone was against him personally)? Therefore, they develop very poorinterpersonal skills.

Because they don’t havevery positive and supporting family relationships, they can’t create veryhealthy relationships with women (at least I believe this may be the case). Bythe way, I can’t unsee some similarities between Ros/Theon(show only) andMargaret/George relationships, but I guess it’s a discussion for another post. WhatI think they have again in common is that Theon has huge problems withdeveloping relationships with women other than having sex with them (it startschanging in ADWD, when he helps Jeyne Poole), and usually objectifies them.George technically doesn’t do that (he treats Elizabeth with huge courtesy),but disrespecting Demelza, in a sense, makes him feel superior (especiallysince he is technically a lowborn, too. Demelza just highlights his insecurityabout his origin) – he constantly calls her “a kitchen maid” and tells theguards in Bodmin that she is a harlot to prevent her from trying to save Rossfrom hanging. Theon doesn’t treat lowborn women well, too, and his insecuritiesprevent him from creating a long-lasting and loving relationship. George kindamanages to make that with Elizabeth, but their marriage (and pre-marriageperiod) is far from perfection – he can be obsessive and (sometimes, but still)manipulative, but then is gentle and loving.

Compensatory narcissistic personality disorder

Alright, I am not the most competentperson to discuss this, and @incblackbird wrote an amazing book in which shedescribed Theon’s formation of his identity and defense mechanism he uses, so Iwill be rather brief here. So, what Theon and George share psychologically isthat they are both hella insecure, and they try to hide it behind the mask ofarrogance (in the series it’s brilliantly acted by Alfie Allen and JackFarthing, I honestly think they make one of the most nuanced performances inthe show they’re in). In case of Theon it’s his “constant smile” (it’smentioned many times in the books), and in George’s – his general posture,especially how he tends to hold his chin very high and proudly. I love thescene in 1x08 when he’s going to Trenwith very quickly, silently crying, andthen he just stops and put his usual mask on, to hide his emotion and makeimpression of having full control over himself. Another scene when you can seehim “posing” is in s2 (episode 3, I believe?) when he’s “training” in front ofthe mirror.

Theon and George also seem to havesuperiority complex, often being expressed by them downplaying or hurtingothers to make them feel better. However read ASOIAF or seen GoT/Poldark knowwhat I’m talking about. ;)

Capability of doing terrible things

A side effect of what described above.Both of these characters did some really horrible things (and that’s mostly whythe fandoms dislike them), in order to prove themselves (esp. Theon) or getwhat they want (George trying to get closer to aristocracy). Theon definitelyregrets what he did, and in the show I get the impression that sometimes Georgedoes too, although he would never admit it (I think his behavior shows that hisconscience is not quite clear, he’s not Cary after all). To illustrate whatthey did I will give some examples: Theon abused Kyra (left her crying aftersleeping with her), turned on Robb and killed the farm boys and burned theirbodies, while George tried to have Ross hanged and forced Morwenna to marryWhitworth against her will.

Tendency to like “pretty things”

Alright, that’s the last thing :). Theonand George have, in a manner of speaking, quite interesting fashion sense, Imean that they like to wear/be surrounded by pretty things. This is noticed byBalon Greyjoy (probably other Ironborn too), Ross Poldark and aunt Agatha, andat the same time serves as a mean to highlight their identity problems – thatTheon is not fully a Greyjoy and George is not fully an aristocrat. Once again,allow me to use quotation from ASOIAF to show what was Balon’s reaction toTheon wearing jewellery:

“His father slid his fingers under thenecklace and gave it a yank so hard it was like to take Theon’s head off, hadthe chain not snapped first. “My daughter has taken an axe for alover,“ Lord Balon said. “I will not have my sonbedeck himself like a whore.” He dropped the broken chain onto thebrazier, where it slid down among the coals. “It is as I feared. The green lands have made you soft, andthe Starks have madeyou theirs.”(GRRM, A Clash of Kings, Theon I)

And now let’s compareit to George’s case. It’s a bit more visible in the books, but I promised tostick with the show and I’m going to keep my promise. ;) In 2x03, when Rossstarts a fight with George, George is wearing a ruby on his stock tie, and I maybe wrong, but I haven’t noticed any other male character in Poldark wearingjewellery on their stock ties. Obviously it was not the reason why Ross startedthe fight, but later in the same episode Andrew Blamey and Francis ask him forthe cause of this conflict, and he responds that he didn’t like his stock tie,which means that he noticed that anddidn’t like it (possibly reminded him of George being a nouveau riche, who’sricher than all Poldarks together). Another scene is George’s conversation withaunt Agatha she tells him:

“I remember the first time Francis brought you here! Fligged out in yourfrills and fallallery! (…)Velvets andsilks you wore. ‘Twas plain your mother had no taste.(…) And you, staring about like abull-calf that had strayed from its stall.”

That was the final one. :) I hope you are satisfied with my answer,anon! I know it’s very long, but I hope it’s at least a bit interesting!Obviously what I wrote here is by no means everything that can be said on thistopic and I’m pretty sure there’s something I missed. ;)

[knightofbalance-13]

https://thefairywzard.tumblr.com/post/163494894168/rwde-circus-drama-with-kob-part-1-the-first-shade

Now I could go through this whole thing and explain in detail why this is wrong but this is an example of the Gish Gallup fallacy so let me run through this quick and show you why it’s so stupid:

People of the rwde tag! You might have noticed a post recently, written by yours truly, about the lack of body diversity in our all-time favourite show RWBY: The Life and Times of Jaune Arc.

Playing to RWDE tag bias.

Predictably, our esteemed rwde troll and official laughing stock of the entire tag, KoB, decided to reply to my post and I think we’ve all had enough experience dealing with him by now to know where this led. I read over KoB’s… words and after bleaching my eyes with silt, I sat down to think about what I should do in response, if anything at all.

Ad Homenin

The Responsible™ and Adult™ thing would be to simply ignore his incomprehensible drivel and move on, possibly block him and maybe set up some salt circles for good measure. After all, usually the best thing to do when dealing with trolls is to keep them at arm’s length and try to not provoke them too much. That is the smart and sensible thing to do. That is how you avoid conflict with assholes online.

Refering to me as a demon

Ah, another day another troll on my posts. You know kob, I knew that eventually you’d pull something like this. I knew that after I was done eating my strips of rotten boar meat while sipping a 1945 La Pinot Noir that I would log on to tumblr dot com and see your small, sad little avatar in my notifications tab. And I would sigh and roll my tired eyes in contempt of pretty much your entire internet presence as far as rwby is concerned, before moving on to reading your long-winded, contradictory and dumb dumb arguments, all lined up in this neat little pile of poo that the FNDM calls “kob’s post history”. And then I would sigh again, questioning the meaning of life while enjoying a bowl of branflake cereal with chocolate chips and cinnamon.

Pseudo intellectualism

Believe it or not kob, it took some time to decide whether or not I should reply to the inane, animalistic screeches that you call counterarguments, but ultimately I decided this was too good an opportunity to miss on dragging yo ass. Obviously a confrontation is exactly what a slimy troll like you wants and technically I am enabling you and your ~predispositions~ by writing this, though I think the feeling of self-satisfaction I’ll get by talking shit to your face will be more than worth it. I should think most of the rwde tag has an extended knowledge of you and your interactions with the FNDM and most of us probably agree that you’re a trolling asshole, a ding dong and potentially Literally Satan™.

Ad Homien on par with early Catholic Church.

I will admit that volume 4 did shave off some muscle from our beloved lotus boy of suppressed emotions, but they have by no means added those to Ms Valkyrie.

Outright defeating own point and contradiction (Jaune and Nora have similarly sized arms. Look for yourself.)

Now I’m not gonna get into the teachers yet, because I’m genuinely curious as to what you meant when you commented on yang’s beefiness. I should like to think that these images make it pretty clear, even to someone as stubborn and as opinionated as you kob. Yang has no muscle. Never did. That sound you just heard was everyone in the rwde tag simultaneously whispering the words “oh snap”.

More outright contradictions and Ad Homenin. (yang’s official art shows the same arm type as Nora and jaune as oppose to Ren or Weiss)

Next up is the FNDMs favourite faunus of the hour, Blake Belladona. You will, once again, note the absence of muscles in her extremities. Gee it’s almost as if these characters all have the same body types, what a surprise. But by all means, keep insisting that Weiss is the slender one.

Not understanding what Atheletic means (Looks at Olympic swimmers: Ain’t no muscles there.)

What you don’t seem to understand kob is that not everyone sees the world under your fucked up, weird, distorted lens. Honestly what to begin with here? The unrelated comparisons? The blatant way you contradict yourself with the opening sentence? “Oh look at me I’m the infamous kob and I spend my days hating on people for making valid, critical points on shows I watch. RWBY doesn’t have a body problem because I say so, these characters are totally muscly and RT doesn’t want muscly women in their shows anyway so that’s why there are none after all, this doesn’t matter and no one cares”. Really now kob, if you’re going to try and delegitimize the issues I cite, you could at least do a better job at it.

In any case, I don’t especially remember CRWBY making public statements explaining in lengthy details why body diversity is their personal kryptonite and that’s why there’s none of it in the show. But then again I’m not as dedicated a fan as you have proven yourself to be, so maybe I missed that enlightening interview with the crew. I also don’t understand what made you bring Kill La Kill into this -as I would charitably call it- discussion, when that show is a clear deconstruction of rampant objectification in anime. It’s satire kob. It’s making fun of the dumb sexist tropes people see in shows so very often.

To be perfectly fucking candid kob, your determination to undermine my arguments by claiming that representation is “not a serious concern at all” is actually rather cute. Like a bigoted puppy furiously chewing on a couch. Indeed this vehement passion of yours is so strong that I’m beginning to suspect you get an intense hateboner whenever the rwde tag updates and this is your only method of release. 

Not addressing the point. Also: unrelated comparisons. Monty Oum stated that Gurren Lagann was an inspiration on RWBY and watched Kill La Kill. So in fact, I am comparing anime that have influenced RWBY.

As well: Not saying WHY body diversity would be an improvement.

Third; Misrepresntinga show (Kill La Kill outright says you shouldn’t care about what other people think. Remmeber Satsuki’s speech in Episode 3? Yeah, apparently you forgot to watch the other 23 episodes of the show.)

Fourth: Misrepresenting my argument (they don’t want to do it because they haven’t already done it, not through an interview.)

Fifith: projection.

Gosh what an interesting peephole we have here of kob’s mental inner workings. I never would have associated plus-sized people with Santa Claus, but I suppose that’s what happens if the content you consume is constantly deprived of diversity. Don’t worry kob, it’s not your fault that most media is monochromatic in more ways than one (but feverishly defending those that are kind of is). If you want to know why it’s important to have representation of all sorts in shows and other media, then I suggest you google that and find out for yourself.

Inserting words into my mouth.

Oh yes, beware the SJWs. They creep in your homes and hide in your cupboards. They’ll wait until you’re not paying attention and then pounce on you with anger and fury and a slight hint of sexual arousal. And as they suck your warm, viscous blood, they’ll start babbling about wanting fair representation in the media for marginalized groups of people and how the way to achieve that is to hold popular shows to a higher standard of diversity. I haven’t even gotten to the bit where they talk about queerness in media, THAT’S when shit get’s blood-curdlingly scary.

More projection.

See, this final “damming” ending statement brings me some discomfort; because I have to, for once, agree with kob. Having more diversity of body types (or any types for that matter) be present in a successful show will encourage other shows to follow suit. It’s like this thing, oh what’s it called, oh yeah progress. So you’re right on that at least. Now if you think diversity will add “nothing to the show” I would suggest that you a) educate yourself on the benefits of diversity and representation in media because that’s clearly an area you are sorely lacking in and b) go fuck yourself.

More Aad Hominin and misrepresenting what I said (I was referring to the fact that you would shoehorn in fat characters for the sake of brownie points instead of, you know, having well written fat people) and projection (thinking I’m skinny.)

I honestly don’t know how to explain to you that not everyone is like you and not everyone can binge the TV channels and see someone exactly like them represented in a randomly-selected show.

Assumptions (i didn’t know there was fat, balding, autistic 19 year olds with no dads. yeah, I’m fat too so most of your argument in that part is invalid, blading people are treated as a joke and the number of intentional written Autistic characters can be counted with only hands. And the number of WELL WRITTEN Autistic characters can be count on my hand if I chopped off seven fingers.)

Someone who isn’t constantly treated as a joke, or insulted within the show, or is nothing but a stereotype, or is pushed aside so that other characters can take the stage. If you can’t fit that concept into that head of yours because the slimy, fanged eel of hate inside is taking too much space, then the only thing for me left to do is to sincerely, wholeheartedly tell you to go fuck yourself with as much virility as you can muster.

you mean like how fat people are portrayed as lazy, balding men are treated as aging ad desperate and ugly, how writers cannot diffiate between “Autism” and “brain damage”, how men are always seen in the wrong in arguments and seen as being dumb, animalistic, lazy and wimpy whereas the women are treated as can do no wrong, wise, perfect people? because I do: But that;s the artist’s descision and they deserve to do what they want with their works: there is nothing wrong with that.

And now you can see why I didn’t go through and go in depth as to why this person is wrong: It’s blatant and obvious. But don’t take my word for it: see the train wreck for yourself.

[cinephiled-com]

New Post has been published on Cinephiled

New Post has been published on http://www.cinephiled.com/113-joan-crawfords-mommie-dearest-gets-reprieve/

At 113, Joan Crawford's Mommie Dearest Gets a Reprieve

On this day in 1904, Lucille Fay LeSueur (later known as Joan Crawford) was born in San Antonio, Texas. Some sources list the year of her birth as 1904, 1905, or even 1908, but a quick search of the San Antonio census records reveals the truth. By any measure, Crawford was one of the greats in the history of Hollywood.

I recently watched the 1981 film Mommie Dearest for the first time in decades. While Faye Dunaway’s depiction of Crawford over the course of almost 40 years is dead on, it sometimes seems as if she’s using Carol Burnett’s parodies of Joan Crawford as her source material rather than the actress herself. The way Dunaway transforms herself through makeup, hair, costumes and her exquisite acting chops is one degree short of channeling, but her performance is so over-the-top that you have to wonder what the filmmakers were going for. What could have been a truly incisive look at the stresses and psychological issues of a well known figure is instead an exercise in High Camp even though I don’t think that was anyone’s intention at the time, least of all Faye Dunaway’s (who refuses to discuss this film today). I’m not sure director Frank Perry was the right man for the job, and yet he did direct two films that I thought were outstanding depictions of mental disorders: David and Lisa in 1962 and the classic Diary of a Mad Housewife in 1970.

I have long wished for a new look at Joan Crawford on the screen, one that would treat her life and issues more seriously, not as a big punchline. But I never dreamed it would actually happen — I was sure that Faye Dunaway’s larger-than-life depiction was the last time we’d ever see a talented actress donning Crawford’s red lipstick and shoulder pads. I was wrong!

Ryan Murphy’s eight-part series Feud, currently running on FX, details the production of the 1962 Robert Aldrich film, What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? Though we’ve only seen half of the episodes, I have to say that I am deeply moved by the performances of Jessica Lange as Joan Crawford and Susan Sarandon as Bette Davis.

Not everyone in my circle of classic movie-loving friends agrees, but I find Lange and Sarandon’s depictions deeply moving and nuanced. Yes, What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? has itself become a camp classic on par with Mommie Dearest, and this series focuses on the bitter rivalry between the two stars as they grappled with the agonies of being middle-aged in Hollywood (Davis was 54 and Crawford 58 during the making of that film, not old by today’s standards but in Hollywood they were considered ancient relics), but Feud also looks beyond the Hedda Hopper-ish “dirt” to the living and breathing women behind the icons, with all their wisdom, experience, insecurities, and vulnerabilities on full display. I think Sarandon and Lange, themselves 70 and 67, are remarkable in the roles.

Feud also looks at aspects of the questionable parenting of both women, but presents it in a much more compassionate way despite many cringe-producing moments. Davis’s daughter, B.D. Hyman, who would eventually write her own tell-all about her mother, actually had a small role in What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? although it was clear from the start that she did not inherit her mother’s acting ability. Played by the talented Kiernan Shipka (Sally Draper from Mad Men), we see Davis and B.D. struggling through difficult moments in their relationship as mother and daughter as well as fellow actors. In 1962, Crawford’s two older children were out of the picture but we see Crawford interacting with her teenaged twin daughters who would later refute the charges levied by their older sister.

When Christina Crawford’s tell-all book came out a year after her mother’s 1977 death, Old Hollywood divided into two camps: those who thought the book represented the slanderous ravings of a spoiled brat bent on revenge for being written out of her mother’s will; and those who said they had witnessed Crawford’s unstable behavior with her children and were convinced that the book’s shocking claims were true. At the top of the list of Joan’s defenders was her old friend Myrna Loy who had known Crawford since she first arrived in Hollywood in the 1920s and had appeared with daughter Christina in a stage production of Barefoot in the Park. Loy disliked Christina and said that she had behaved horribly during the run of their play. She said that while she never saw Joan hit her daughter, if anyone needed a good slap it was Christina. Yikes.

Helen Hayes, however, another great actress whom Joan had befriended in the 1930s, did not exactly elect Joan Mother of the Year in her autobiography:

Joan was not quite rational in her raising of children. You might say she was strict or stern. But cruel is probably the right word.

When my young son Jim came to stay with me, we would go out to lunch with Joan and her son Christopher. Joan would snap, “Christopher!” whenever he tried to speak. He would bow his little head, completely cowed, and then he’d say, “Mommie dearest, may I speak?” Joan’s children had to say [that] before she allowed them to utter another word. It would have been futile for me or anyone else to protest. Joan would only get angry and probably vent her rage on the kids.

I have read that people who are abused as children often become abusive parents. Maybe it was Joan’s tough childhood that made her exert her power like that over her own children. But understanding the reason did not make their suffering any easier to watch.

Pretty damning stuff, and yet were many who claimed that Christina Crawford exaggerated some of the childhood episodes for dramatic purposes. I admit that certain scenes from the film that so appalled me when I first saw it in the 1980s don’t seem that bad today. At Christmas time and on birthdays, Joan’s fans would send Christina mountains of presents. Crawford would let her keep one or two and have her give the rest to needy children. This is presented in the film as monstrous abuse but I have to say that it seems pretty reasonable to me today. Still, it’s clear that there were times when Crawford’s highly disciplined and controlling nature devolved into episodes of severe mental and physical abuse. The last thing I would ever do is accuse Christina Crawford of lying about her own childhood. I would think that the only thing worse than experiencing such abuse is telling people about it and not being believed. Only she knows what happened between her and her mother and it certainly seems like Joan had plenty of issues that made her a challenge to live with. On the other hand, I wish the makers of Mommie Dearest had avoided the temptation to create completely fictional scenes of terror like the one in which Joan almost kills Christina in front of a magazine reporter.

As far as Joan’s friends defending her, it’s true that you never really know what goes on behind other people’s closed doors. Still, Christina Crawford hasn’t helped her “case,” in my opinion, by encouraging the camp-fest that has developed around the book and movie of Mommie Dearest. She has appeared at screenings with drag queens playing her mother and at which the crowd interacts with the film à la Rocky Horror using props. The last time I saw the film in a theater, an AFI-sponsored screening for its 25th anniversary in 2006, I was uncomfortable at the uproarious laughter that greeted so many scenes. If the story is true, we are laughing at horrific child abuse. If it is an exaggerated tale of a troubled childhood, we are participating in a major defamation of character of a woman who is not here to defend herself and whose public image (the one thing everyone who knew Joan Crawford said she cared about more than anything) has been utterly trashed.

Not that I can truly blame the audience for laughing or claim that I took the high road and didn’t join in from time to time. How can you not laugh at lines that are so out there they have become indelible parts of our pop culture such as “Christina, bring me the ax!” or the iconic “NO WIRE HANGERS…EVER!!” My personal favorite is a scene that I think shows Joan in a positive light even though she’s clearly being a Class A bitch. After her fourth husband, Pepsi-Cola honcho Al Steele dies, the top brass at Pepsi try to kiss her off. Never one to meekly slither away, Joan Crawford lays into the Board and threatens to use her fame to turn her fans against Pepsi if they continue their campaign to get rid of her. After years of dealing with the sleazeballs of Hollywood, Joan was not about to let this group give her the heave-ho. “Don’t fuck with me, fellas!” she spews with an evil smile on her face. “This ain’t my first time at the rodeo.” I hope she really said that, it’s such a great line.

While the Crawford twins, Cathy and Cynthia, that we see in Feud always defended their mother against their sister’s charges, Joan’s adopted son, Christopher, definitely did not. Though he was never as interested in sharing his story with the world as Christina had done, his own childhood was every bit as troubled.  As a young boy, Christopher ran away from home several times. At 12, Joan placed him is a residential military academy but it didn’t curtail the trouble the boy constantly got into. Following Crawford’s death and the release of his sister’s book, he finally agreed to talk to a newspaper reporter in 1978 about his unhappy childhood.

“I want to tell this once, so people will get off my back and leave my family alone,” says the 6-foot-4 man whose hard life shows in his face. He needs dental work. There are small scars on his face and larger ones on his back from a mortar explosion in Vietnam.

Crawford recalled his mother’s “sleep safe,” the harnesslike device used to keep infants securely in their beds. Chris was strapped into bed until the age of 12. Once caught playing with matches, his mother made him hold his hand in the fireplace. “I had blisters all over my hand. That day I ran away for the first time. I was 7.”

Though Chris attended his mother’s funeral, his last encounter with J.C. was five years ago. His youngest child was born in Brooklyn, on welfare. “When Bonnie was born, she had a lot of trouble. She was just a tiny little mass of bones with some skin stretched over them. So I called J.C. and said, ‘I need your help. Your granddaughter needs blood and she needs it now. She might die.’ J.C. said, ‘She’s not my granddaughter. You were adopted.’ I lost my temper and slammed down the phone so hard I broke the receiver. That was it between J.C. and me.”

FEUD: Bette and Joan — “Mommie Dearest” — Installment 1, Episode 3 (Airs Sunday, March 19, 10:00 p.m. e/p) –Pictured: (l-r) Jackie Hoffman as Mamacita, Jessica Lange as Joan Crawford. CR: Suzanne Tenner/FX

That’s as bad as anything in Mommie Dearest. Christopher Crawford died of cancer on September 22, 2006. Cynthia Crawford died the following year. It’s quite possible that Christina and Christopher’s perspectives about their mother were as true and valid as their younger sisters’ claims of a strict but very loving mother. In any event, I’m grateful to Ryan Murphy and Jessica Lange for allowing the world to see a more multifaceted and complex version of Joan Crawford, albeit another fictionalized take that is open to different interpretations. Few people cared more about their career or their public image than Joan Crawford and I’m happy that this poignant examination of the screen legend doesn’t treat her incredible and often tragic life as one big joke. Happy Birthday, Joan!

[bywordofaphrodite]

Book Reviews 9&10: Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone by J.K Rowling & Twilight by Stephanie Meyer

This review’s theme is *drum roll* books I was banned from as a child! Audience age: age 9 and up for reading level… as for content, that will vary between parents !

So to shake things up for my final reviews, rather than reviewing books I grew up with, I am discussing two books that were banned in my household, my church and my school. Triple threat! Good for them. To be transparent, I have not read Harry Potter before at all. I even bought one of the books a couple of years ago and still haven’t made it round to reading yet. However, I have seen all the movies and I love them very much. More than that, I’ve always loved the lore surrounding the series; I think fans have made the legacy more interesting than the movies in adapting the lore to different fanfictions, which I’m sure some people will agree with and others will not. With many people I meet around my age, it is fairly common for me to be asked what my Hogwarts house is (Slytherin, in case you’re curious), and even people I wouldn’t expect to be all that interested will know their house.

As for Twilight, I actually did read these in year 9 in school, and I snuck the movies into my house too (I still have PTSD from my mother bursting into my room and catching me- don’t worry she’s not a crazy religious person anymore. She even watched Twilight for the first time in last year’s lockdown lmao). My friendship groups reference Twilight memes multiple times a day and I even gifted my best friend a poorly printed ‘BWTHHYBL’ (‘Bella where the hell have you been loca?’- God, Jacob, why did you say this) on a piece of paper and stuffed it into a small frame for her birthday present a few weeks ago… which she keeps beside her desk, just as I intended… so I think it’s safe to say that Twilight has not exactly faded into the background of pop culture just yet, even though the hype surrounding the series began well over ten years ago.

Nostalgic review

Rating: ★★★ (for Twilight only)

Book wise, I can’t actually write my old opinions of Harry Potter because I grew up in a weirdo Catholic cult that quite seriously believed J.K Rowling’s works to be articulated by the devil’s own hand (I’m sure Rowling is involved with the devil for other reasons, but that would be due to her obsessive transphobia not her writing). Using my imagination and hypothesising a little here, I’m going to assume that had I been allowed to read the books I would have loved them. Magic books and boarding school stories were a great love of mine, after all.

Now, for Twilight. I read this series just once, about nine years ago, and while I recall thinking that Meyer was not a very good writer I do know I was hooked on the storyline. I don’t know what she laced that series with but it was addictive for no good reason, especially given how many weird racial stereotypes were in there, in addition to her Mormon ideals that permeate Bella’s every move. Whatever it is, I know I ate it all up even with the awareness that it was not good (no, I don’t mean morally due to religion, I just mean it was compelling garbage).

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone Review

Post-read: ★★★★

Synopsis: On his 11th birthday, Harry Potter discovers that he is the orphaned son of two powerful wizards and the survivor of an attack by the evil, most powerful wizard to have ever lived, Voldemort. He is whisked away to the wizards’ school Hogwarts, where he studies and hones his powers, and eventually comes face-to-face with the enemy everyone believed to be dead.

I’ve seen plenty of criticism of Rowling’s writing problems, many of which I absolutely agree with. The writing is not the best, and this article actually dissects Rowling’s patterns and explains how she fails as a writer. Despite this, for the first book of a series that many young children read, I don’t think it is all that bad. My younger siblings struggle to read well, but I’ve begun reading this book to them for bedtime and they say it’s ‘good for learning’, so that’s something I’ve taken into consideration while thinking over this.

In terms of setting and place, Rowling did a good job of transporting me to the various locations in the novel. Part of the charm of Hogwarts is experiencing the rainy weather, the crackle of the fireplaces and the eeriness of sneaking about a giant castle in the dead of night just like the characters. It felt very vivid to me, and while that may be in part due to my having the film scenes to envision while reading, I believe Rowling did well. Harry’s first encounter with the Weasley family and the house-sorting scenes are enjoyable and lovely beginnings to Harry’s found family after a dreadful upbringing in the Dursley home.

Harry Potter is a very clear example of the Hero’s Journey literary route, which makes the storyline very easy to follow; the heroes and villains are very distinct, there are clear goals, and the main characters have genuine and natural character development as the story goes on. The adventures to the Forbidden Forest and other off-limits areas of Hogwarts are all the right amount of engaging and spooky. The opening chapter does have me on the fence still in regards to its length and basis for introduction. Upon first reading it, I found it a bit strange that it’s written from the Dursleys’ point of view, as this awful couple may have adopted Harry, but they are simply not the Main Characters. The conversation between Professor Dumbledore and Professor McGonagall goes on for a longer time than I would think necessary. A brief analysis of this scene is actually available on the Pottermore website, and it explains some of the clever details written in. Regardless, the film’s choice to shift the immediate focus to Harry was a better choice in my opinion.

Something that became a source of amusement to me while reading was the obvious hate every house has for Slytherin, and I know that’s because they contain most of the ‘bad’ characters, but having read so much fanfiction from other fandoms just using the house characteristics and lore meant I’d never read so much consistent Slytherin-hate before. ‘Stinking Slytherin’ Harry says- well, he’ll be maddened to know half the internet bases half their personalities around being Slytherin. Yes, this is a call out, for myself included.

Characters who aged well: good or bad, the characters in Harry Potter are entertaining, even as an adult, the children’s antics and developing friendships are entertaining and heart-warming as they become closer. Voldemort is a solid villain, and the Dursleys and Malfoys are well-written antagonists; children tend to adopt their parents’ values for better or worse, and Draco and Dudley are perfect examples of the way young people turn out when raised within a vicious cycle.

Characters who aged badly: Severus Snape with his weird grudge against Harry. I don’t care about your history with his parents, Harry is a child, and you are an adult school teacher. Get a grip, sir.

It would be remiss for me to ignore the strong controversy surrounding J.K Rowling herself, though it isn’t the focus of this review. Strongly criticised for lack of representation for both POC and LGBT+ readers, Rowling has constantly made alterations in recent years, claiming certain characters to be something they were never written to be; most notably, Albus Dumbledore being announced as gay but with no scene in the books nor the films alluding to it. I would also add in that while Hermione’s character is great for exploring an ‘outsider’s’ perspective (the daughter of two muggles in the wizarding world), she also does take the role of the ‘bossy girl’ in a male-dominated book series. I’ll link an article here that discusses some of the gender roles, sexism and other concerns across the series.

Favourite scene/quote: “‘There are all kinds of courage,’ said Dumbledore, smiling. ‘It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends’.”

A wonderful piece of advice for young kids! It’s something a lot of people don’t learn until they’re older- how important it is to stand your ground no matter who you’re up against, and that sometimes the people you like and admire aren’t always in the right.

As for my favourite scene, that would have to be when Neville stands up to Draco! Harry tells Neville he is ‘worth twelve of Malfoy’, and Neville, red-faced and timid, stammers the words back to Draco later. Neville is my favourite character (he’s just so cute I love him) and I was so proud when he joined Ron to fight against the Slytherin bullies.

Twilight Review

Post-read: ★★

Synopsis: awkward teenager Bella Swan moves to the tiny town of Forks where she meets mysterious classmate Edward from the strange Cullen family and becomes determined to find out more about them.

Re-reading Twilight I was made aware of two things. First, that the writing is just as bad as I remembered it to be, and second, that despite knowing how ridiculous it is, I still love it.

I was still invested in what happens. The romance, the drama, the detective work leading up to Bella’s confirmation of supernatural existence- all of it. As this article acknowledges, much of the appeal of Twilight is its bad writing: the sentence structure is basic and easy to binge-read, making it perfect material for a young audience to enjoy, especially for kids who might not normally pick up a book in the first place. There is also not much to worry about in terms of applying solid concentration, because many scenes border on being simply filler content.

For all of its ease, I still found myself plagued by its many problems the entire read, so at best I would rate it two and a half stars. Sorry, Meyer.

Something I thought about more extensively while reading was that Meyer essentially took away any real ‘flaws’ of vampirism with her reworking their existence. Vampires are evil and eat humans? Solved! The ‘good’ vampires are ‘vegetarian’, eating only animals. Vampires can’t go in the sun or they’ll burn alive? Sort of solved? They won’t die a terrible death, but *shock horror* they will sparkle. Bella describes Edward’s skin to be like ‘thousands of tiny diamonds were embedded in the surface’. So, the stakes are what, exactly? The vampires are beautiful, never age and don’t even eat humans. If anything it’s comedic that the Cullens don’t show up to school on sunny days, lest they… sparkle. Honestly, I don’t hate the concept, really, but Edward’s constant referral to himself as a ‘monster’ doesn’t really make sense with the knowledge that the Cullens are extremely tame… after all, humans hunt and eat animals too.

The final chapter and epilogue tie everything quite neatly together, and if Meyer hadn’t continued writing the novel could easily be left at book one. Bella informs her mother she wants to stay in Forks with her father, and Jacob Black the werewolf comes to the high school dance to tell Bella that the Quileute tribe will be ‘watching’ her and Edward, still distrustful of the Cullens (even though the Cullens have done literally nothing, but whatever, that’s over dramatic territorial werewolf-vampire drama, I guess). It ends with Bella still pestering Edward to turn her into a vampire, and him declining. I suppose that’s enough of a cliff-hanger to warrant a sequel?

Characters who aged well: Did any of them, really? To be nit-picky, it could be argued that all of them have one too many problematic roots to age well. I’m going to add in Carlisle and Esme, though, because I can’t find fault any serious fault with them. I’m also going to add in Bella’s father, who despite being criticised very constantly for not keeping an eye on Bella, did a decent job. After all, Charlie had no way to know anything about the supernatural world that turned Bella’s life upside down, and I don’t think he can be blamed for that.

Characters who aged badly: well. Um. A massive part of Twilight’s criticism is Bella’s one dimensional character. I’ve always been on the fence about it, because sometimes people just really are quite bland, and she is a depressed teen so I usually cut her some slack on that count. My real issue is Meyer’s intention for Bella to be a Mary Sue rather than a substantial character: while she can be headstrong and humorous in passing, she does not have any real opinions, thoughts or motivations that aren’t related to Edward or the Cullens to the point that she has no initiative to exist outside of being with him. This also makes her selfish in her lack of care for her father; I understand not caring too much about the kids you have to attend school with- not many choices in a small town- but the way Bella shuts her dad out is just too much. As for Edward, why does he like Bella, really? I understand the intrigue of not being able to read her thoughts, but beyond that there’s really not much going on. I think they actually do have some good banter between them and parts of the relationship are very fun, but if you took away the vampire aspect, none of it makes much sense (*spoiler* like, say, Bella’s sudden marriage to Edward in Breaking Dawn immediately after high school graduation would be just as weird to us if they were only human as it is to the townsfolk in Forks).

Both the novel itself, the film and Edward’s character- and many of the male characters in the series- normalise a lot of misogyny, gender roles and sexism (please refer to the links for further information). Edward’s misogynistic tendencies- rushing in without asking Bella’s consent to ‘protect her’- are portrayed as desirable, and Bella is flattered by it. Every girl in the books- human, vampire or werewolf- is described unimpressively, always some form of shallow and petty compared to every male character having a distinct personality. Rosalie had so much promise for a strong female character, with her university degrees and interest in mechanics, not to mention her revenge on her rapists, but it all becomes lost in her overwhelming dislike of Bella (which worsens with the realisation that Rosalie sees herself as a ‘monster’ because she can’t have children, and she hates Bella for being a ‘real’ woman).

I’m going to link one article here about racism entrenched within the Twilight series. The writer discusses the racial bias within the Twilight saga, and while it is primarily geared towards the movies, the points made also reflect the characters in the books. Concerning the lack of diversity in the series, Stephanie Meyer is quoted saying she ‘wrote that they [the Cullens] had this pale glistening skin!’; she refused to allow Twilight director Catherine Hardwick to change any Cullens to people of colour, wanting the actors to resemble the white friends and family she had in mind writing the books. Hardwicke herself had hoped for Alice to be of Japanese descent, but that her ideas were thwarted as Meyer ‘just could not accept the Cullens to be more diverse’. While Meyer allowed some of Bella’s school mates to be POC, it is concerning that the most prominent character she accepted being non-white was the antagonist vampire Laurent, who was played by a black actor. Along with all the ‘good’ characters being white, there is also the issue of Jasper’s backstory as a proud Confederate soldier- which Meyer seems to portray with a strange reverence.

I’m also going to link a Reddit thread here where people offer their different opinions on whether the novels, movies or Stephanie Meyer herself are racist or at the very least, very ignorant. The werewolves of the series are not as present in the first book/movie, but the legends of the Quileute tribes are referenced- and changed- according to how Meyer wanted to use them in her story. To summarise, many readers believe Meyer’s use of descriptors such as ‘dogs’ or ‘mongrels’ toward the werewolves (the Native American Quileute tribe) are racist. This is due to the Cullens (the good, all-white vampire clan) being the ones to refer to the Quileute people in such a way; furthermore, they are the only non-white people in the books, making Meyer’s decision to liken only POC to animals more questionable; others argue that the ‘dog’ term is only because they are effectively intended to be giant dogs.

Favourite scene/quote: “‘You said last night that you weren’t interested in any of the boys in town.’ But he picked up his fork again, so I could see the worst was over.

‘Well, Edward doesn’t live in town, Dad.’

He gave me a disparaging look as he chewed.’”

Charlie just doing his best while Bella always remains a few steps ahead of him is one dynamic Meyer wrote decently (probably because it was all in aid of Bella’s only motivation in life: being with Edward).

The chapter ‘The Game’ holds my favourite scene from the novel, aka the iconic baseball game regarded as the film’s best scene. It’s a fun moment where Bella watches the Cullens play baseball as a storm rises, requiring the thunder to mask the loudness of their hits. Unlike the film, the novel is able to explain the dynamics between the Cullens and how their powers work, specifically detailing the communication between Edward’s mind-reading and Alice’s ability to see the future.

Overall verdict:

Owing to the stark popularity of the books I’ve discussed here compared to my past choices, there was a lot more material and controversy to discuss for this review.

I found both books to provide a solid feeling of time and place. I love stories shrouded in rain and dark forests and both series are set firmly in just that. Like I mentioned earlier, I have issues with both authors’ writing, though I still feel that it is more acceptable in Harry Potter than Twilight. Interestingly, there is no character in either novel that I really see myself in, which is rare; I like plenty of them, I just don’t relate to anyone in full.

With author Stephanie Meyer’s Mormon beliefs and personal morals obviously creating these characters, it isn’t exactly an easy case of separating art from artist. Twilight is an entertaining read for all its flaws and its too far gone to ‘cancel’ now- although I suppose it has probably been cancelled numerous times anyway?- but it isn’t too late for readers to educate themselves on its problems to prevent Meyer-level ignorance where possible. Harry Potter, on the other hand, doesn’t have the same ties to the writer that Twilight does. Most of Rowling’s problematic behaviour came well after the books were written, but I’ll link one article here that discusses how some transgender fans have responded to Rowling’s actions. For some people, the controversy has affected their abilities to love the franchise anymore; others have chosen to separate the content from author, akin to many Twilight fans.

Personally, if religion hadn’t interfered with my ability to read Harry Potter as a child, I maintain that I would have loved it, especially as I enjoy the films now. Just as with Twilight, I typically find it easy to enjoy stories while understanding their flaws. There is a keen amount of nostalgia surrounding both these franchises and likely always will be, but there are newer stories with real representation being released all the time, and the ideal outcome for me would be working towards popularising these series over wasting our time arguing over already-published novels!

[clubofinfo]

Expert: In Part 1, I talked about the power of social media giants and claims of “free speech” on their platforms. Again, I am referring just to the U$, as I am most familiar with the debate on “free speech” there. In the future I may expand this analysis to other capitalist countries. The bourgeois conception of “free speech” is so ingrained that Nadine Strossen, a former president of the ACLU, can spout on The Real News about a “we the people” government in the U$, while declaring that government regulation through net neutrality and antitrust laws, along with consumer pressure, and “free speech” (or counter speech) can stop the bigots in their tracks. This is a laughable notion from a person who says porn should be tolerated (not restricted or banned), is currently a contributor for the Federalist Society, criticized campus speech restrictions, and was a friend and fan of Antonin Scalia! She also, infamously, defended the actions of former ACLU president Anthony Romero, who had agreed to “screen the organization’s employees against terrorist “watch lists”…in order to qualify as an officially approved charity for federal employees,” advising the “Ford Foundation to “parrot” the Patriot Act in formulating controversial new restrictions on the speech of its grantees,” and trying to impose “very broad confidentiality agreement and technology rules on ACLU employees,” as argued by former ACLU board member Wendy Kaminer, who also harshly criticized the organization for its policies on civil liberty. As The Onion joked in one article, when Strossen was president, the ACLU declared that it would “”vigorously and passionately defend” the Georgia chapter of the American Nazi Party’s First Amendment right to freely express its hatred of the ACLU by setting its New York office ablaze on Nov. 25.” That’s how ridiculous the ACLU is, without a doubt. Last year, the Supreme Court held in Packingham v. North Carolina that a North Carolinian law that restricted access of sex offenders to social media violated the First Amendment. More than that, this case, which was the first major case on the topic since the Reno v. ACLU case in 1997, opens the floodgates for “free speech” to apply to the internet as the latter is considered analogous to a public forum, perhaps leading to further jurisprudence. But more than being a supposed victory for “free expression,” which was likely cheered on by the ACLU, Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion raises the question of what parts of the internet would fall under First Amendment protection. In this opinion, followed by a blistering dissent from Samuel Alito, Kennedy, clearly a tech optimist, wrote that the First Amendment is a “fundamental principle” meaning that “all persons have access to places where they can speak and listen, and then, after reflection, speak and listen once more,” adding that this now applies to cyberspace, including social media, with users engaging in a “wide array” of “First Amendment activity” that is “legitimate” and “protected.” He added that the digital age has a “vast potential to alter how we think, express ourselves, and define who we want to be” which can quickly change, while implying that the First Amendment may offer some protection for access to social media and the internet. As for social media, he argued that it not only allows “users to gain access to information and communicate with one another about it on any subject that might come to mind” but that it is the “modern public square” that, in his view, allows for people to explore “the vast realms of human thought and knowledge…mak[ing] his or her voice heard.” This is clearly an optimistic view of social media which often is filled with utter and mundane garbage. I think social media includes many more pictures of people showing off their dogs, newborn babies, and silly cat videos, than those who engage in discussion that opens “human thought and knowledge.” What is Kennedy smoking here? With this decision, the arguments of those like the ACLU that want “an uncensored Internet, a vast free-speech zone,” the EFF that wants “sufficient legal protections for users and innovators,” and Strossen, are clearly boosted. Still, this does not mean there will be “free speech” on the internet anytime soon. While the general conception is that “anyone can say anything online,” this is not only changing but it is inaccurate because intimidation is not protected speech on the internet, along with inciting violence, making threats of violence, privacy invasion, defamation, copyright infringement, inciting a riot or inducing lawbreaking, “fighting words,” false advertising, and disrupting school activities, to name a few. While some say that the First Amendment asserts that one can express themselves “without interference or constraint by the government,” the fact is that a government can “place reasonable restrictions on free speech, such as those that restrict the time, place, and manner of the speech.” Some have tried to use the Packingham decision to declare that there should be “free speech” on the internet. Others, like White nationalists and Neo-Nazis, have gone even further to draw a parallel between private shopping centers and social media platforms! If this connection was to be made, which is a remote and absurd possibility, those on social media would not be able to “unreasonably intrude” on the private property rights of these platforms, having to “reasonably exercise” their rights while their ideas would not be allowed to have “free rein.” Additionally, their words and actions would have to be deemed peaceful, orderly, and not disturbing the functioning of these platforms, with the latter allowed to restrain the “time, place, and manner” of user’s speech. They could be prohibited from imposing “blanket and total prohibition on the exercise of First Amendment activities” of users but they would also be allowed to restrict those engaging such speech so they did not obstruct or unduly interfere with “normal business operations” or does not impede, distract, or interfere with the business itself. Furthermore, anyone who engaged in substantial damage or physical obstruction of social media could be restricted or banned, along with being prohibited from annoying and harassing individuals. At the same time, while users could have the right to “freedoms of speech and religion” they could also be restricted if there was a public space where they could use their rights apart from social media, and by the fact that the U$ Constitution provides no protection or redress from a private person or corporation, with the 1st and 14th Amendment not applying to action “by the owner of private property used only for private purposes.” This is not what the bigots would want! Even with these interpretations, Twitter could still say it is a private sector company, which requires users to abide by their rules. Additionally, it is worth noting that these social media platforms are not public since the “supposed public square is actually a small group of digital platforms owned by an even smaller group of giant transnational corporations,” a fact that should be obvious.1. Even Mozilla, which says that “the principle of free speech is a foundation of Western democracy” admits that “free speech gets more complicated in private spaces – that is, spaces not owned by the government…private businesses have every right, legally, to refuse service to individuals who don’t adhere to their stated policies.” Jimmy Dore and others have said the First Amendment should be applied to Facebook (and other social media) because they see it as a public space and have also said that such outlets should be public utilities. Now, in order to be a public utility, these social media companies would have to be classified the same as other companies providing “a service to the public such as transport, energy, telecommunications, waste disposal, or water and any other public goods and services.” The question arises: are companies like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, to give a few examples, public service corporations that engage in operations that “serve the needs of the general public or conduce to the comfort and convenience of an entire community,” which currently includes “railroads, gas, water, and electric light companies”? Well, we know they are clearly private companies with operations which are “executed by private individuals,” comprising some of those in the corporate (or private) sector which is “responsible for the allocation of the majority of resources” within a capitalist economy. Now, to be a public service company, they would have to “provide a service to the public” which includes “transport, communications and the like.” These social media platforms likely would fall into the category of public service company rather than a public service corporation because they do not necessarily serve the needs of the general public or conduce convenience or comfort of an entire community. Instead they gather private information and make it public, selling it for profit, having great power over people’s lives. Likely such efforts to make social media a public utility will fall flat because the U$ government is legally obligated to “preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation” even with other provisions on civil liability. The bourgeois conception of “free speech” is broadly held across the Western World. Even the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that recognizes the “right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” (Article 18) and “right to freedom of opinion and expression” (Article 19) is limited by the fact that everyone can be subject to legal limitations to secure respect and recognition for freedom and rights of others, along with meeting “the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society” (Article 29). There are many laws across the world when it comes to speech, with some countries trying to experiment different levels of censorship online, irking those who defend the bourgeois conception of “freedom of speech,” with some even bringing in anti-communist rhetoric to complain about “the lack of transparency found in Soviet-style governance structures” disappearing in Eastern Europe. Some, like the horrid organization, FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) have declared that “the best antidote to tyranny is free and spirited debate, not suppression of speech,” which Jimmy Dore basically expressed on his show, while others like HRW or The Guardian complain about the “Great Chinese Firewall” and challenges “journalists, bloggers and dissidents” have to undertake. This has led to a list of “enemies” of the internet and efforts to break through claimed “closed societies” (one organization gives the examples of Iran and China), believing that making these societies “open” will bring goodness to the world. This id despite the fact that the internet has “been a revolution for censorship as much as for free speech” as The Guardian admitted back in 2008, which anyone with sense would recognize. Clearly, the majority of those in the Western Left are indoctrinated to think they are free, leading them attack other leftists across the world who holding power as noted by Andre Vltchek. However, his analysis is faulty since he incorrectly describes China, part of the revisionist triad (the other two countries in this triad are Laos and Vietnam), as communist when it has actually been on the capitalist road since 1976, with a form of state-supported form of capitalism which is different from that of the West, and saying that Russia’s policy is “clearly anti-imperialist” when it is actually just nationalistic. Clearly, some individuals have more of an ability for speech than others. As the subreddit of /r/communism puts it rightly, which I still agree with even though I was ousted as a mod after I began criticizing China as capitalist rather than saying it is socialist (consensus of the subreddit’s mods), “speech, like everything else, has a class character, and that some speech can be oppressive.” This is something those who believe in the bourgeois conception of “free speech” cannot and will not acknowledge. As one person put on Twitter, after responding to a story that the court system in the U$ repealed a law forcing porn companies to “prove that their performers are of age,” that the principle of “free speech” in the U$ almost seems that it is “inherently bourgeois.” In the capitalist society of the U$ this bourgeois conception of free speech manifests itself by capitalists like Robert Mercer, the Koch Brothers, George Soros, Pierre Omidyar, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and many others, having the ability to publish and project their speech more than those on meager budgets. Basically, this means that ordinary people, the proletariat, have no influence (or power in) on the decision-making and politics of the U$ despite all rhetoric claiming they have such influence. How this manifests itself in the world of “free speech” is it means that those capitalists who are hatemongers can spread their horrid message far and wide while those who try to counter them get less exposure.2 We do not have to give such speech “respect” as some have declared we should, since there is the idea of the heckler’s veto, where a public event is canceled or suppressed due to “interruptions, protests, or violence” or the threat of such actions, one of the many tools, apart from de-platforming (not by social media outlets, but literally in person or by organizing against them online) which can be used to fight against bigoted or otherwise detestable individuals. In the end, there should be criticism (and efforts to counter) corporate control over information but this does not mean we have to defend hateful speech. Instead, those who speak truth to power, especially on the political Left, should be vigorously defended. As Michael Parenti once put it, “democratic victories, however small and partial they be, must be embraced…We need to strive in every way possible for the revolutionary unraveling, a revolution of organized consciousness striking at the empire’s heart with the full force of democracy, the kind of irresistible upsurge that seems to come from nowhere while carrying everything before it.” Victory to the proletariat! A socialist world is possible! * Paul Blumenthal, “The Problem Isn’t Alex Jones’ Free Speech, It’s Digital Platform Monopolies,” HuffPost, August 11, 2018. * The U$ is standing against principles outlined in many international agreements like the UN’s Millennium Declaration (in its section about equality between men and women and “participatory governance), the Vienna Declaration (has a section saying that the international community should comprehensively and speedily elimination all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and other intolerance), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) (which says that all states have to pursue a policy of eliminating all forms of racial discrimination, promoting racial understanding, condemn racist propaganda, eradicate all incitement to discrimination, and declare those organizations that engage in racist propaganda illegal), and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) (with a section about how freedom of religion and beliefs is protected by subject to certain limitations, and that “propaganda of war” along with any “advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred” has to be prohibited). http://clubof.info/

[lisatelramor]

Not Left To Stand Alone ch 18

The heist was held in Beika, practically in Kudo’s back yard. Saguru was less familiar with Beika’s museums although due to Suzuki Jirokichi’s obsession with challenging Kid, he had spent time in the Beika area before. Once upon a time it would have felt like stepping into a well versed role, returning to a Kid heist like this. Tonight, however, it only emphasized how much he didn’t fit in here anymore. There were police officers from all over Japan, drawn together for the sole purpose of outsmarting Kid. Saguru hung back from the chaos. He could make out Kudo examining Kid’s target on a stand, and Aoko as she coordinated the groups of officers, making sure everyone knew what their part was and minimizing the interdepartmental conflicts.

He could even make out Hattori Heiji. He’d never liked the man much due to personality clashes, but he couldn’t deny that he was a good detective in his own right. Hattori was with a group of officers most likely brought in from Osaka, arguing with a woman over something written on a paper he held. There were other detectives here as well, a man he vaguely remembered from a few heists, the infamous Sleeping Kogoro who looked too old to be caught up in all of this and almost as out of place as Saguru felt, a woman with short hair, and possibly more.

The reporters at least couldn’t get too close. Aoko had kicked them outside the police perimeter half an hour ago because they were disrupting the preparations too much. They’d pounced on Saguru when he arrived, so at least he could be sure that the school would have proof he’d attended the heist.

“Hakuba-san,” a voice said. Kudo approached, pulling Saguru out of his thoughts.

“Kudo-san.” Kudo held out his hand for a Western handshake and Saguru met it. Kudo’s grip was firm and his gaze as sharp as Saguru could remember from the brief moments the two of them had met before.

“It’s been a long time,” Kudo said. He looked back over the museum. Saguru followed his gaze. There were a multitude of cameras and sensors that Saguru knew each had separate power grids and backup generators attached. The target itself, an almost unassuming uncut ruby set into a Mesopotamian necklace, had been surrounded by traps and an electrified pedestal. Everything that could be tried against Kid probably had been done before; they’d taken to doubling or tripling the methods that had tripped him up or slowed him down in the past. There were rotating patrols that stuck with their source division so that there would be no unknown faces among them and have the best cooperation. Searchlights covered the sky and a thorough search perimeter kept people from crossing into the museum. Saguru knew that Aoko even had officers stationed in nearby buildings in the hopes of discouraging any potential snipers. Outside the perimeter were hordes of Kid fans. Not even the increased dangers of heists over the years had discouraged their enthusiasm.

“What do you think?” Kudo said.

“I think Kid is going to have to work hard to reach his prize,” Saguru said. “Although it seems unwise to have so many people from around Japan attending; Kid has always thrived through impersonations, with so many unfamiliar faces it will be much easier for him to get away with wearing someone’s face.”

“That was Nakamori-keibu’s opinion as well,” Kudo said. It took a beat for Saguru to realize that he meant Aoko and not her father, the dissonance of the title sitting oddly in his mind even if he knew that she was the inspector now. It was also odd that she went by Nakamori in her police work when Saguru was fairly certain she had kept Kuroba’s last name, if the name plate on her house was anything to go by.

There was a loud yell and Saguru frowned at Hattori as he and the woman he’d been arguing with got in a shouting match.

Kudo sighed. “I’m not sure why they’re both here.”

“Both? Hattori I am familiar with,” Saguru said, dry tone implying he would rather he wasn’t, “but not whoever he is speaking with.”

“Hattori Kazuha,” Kudo said, equally dry, but with none of the distaste Saguru held. Kudo was friends with Hattori if Saguru remembered correctly… “She’s Heiji’s wife. They’re on the outs again at the moment though.” Saguru raised an eyebrow and Kudo shrugged. “They’re hot and cold sort of people.”

“…I see.” That couldn’t be healthy.

“It works for them.” Kudo nodded toward where the detectives were starting to congregate around Aoko. “Join in the pre-heist analysis?”

“Of course.”

Kudo gave him a friendly smile. “Good to have you, even if it’s not the best circumstances.”

Saguru felt a bit bad for all those times he’d thought uncharitable thoughts about Kudo in the past. He wasn’t too bad.

The detective huddle had more people than Saguru was used to, including Hattori though thankfully he’d lowered the volume on his argument to barely audible hisses and grumbles at the edge of the group. Aoko looked around the circle and Saguru felt her eyes land on him. She frowned deeper than she had already been frowning. “Hakuba.”

“Nakamori-keibu,” he said in a neutral voice; this was not the time for familiarity.  

She gave him another hard stare, no doubt over his broken promise, before continuing her sweep of the people around her.

“As all of you know, tonight’s target is Tiamut’s Hope. This is the first time this thing’s being showcased to the world, so let’s do our best to keep it safe.” A Mesopotamian necklace of uncertain age and origins found recently in a Greek dig, of all places. Its name was callback to both Greek and Mesopotamian mythology due to the almost cult-like setup that had been found around the stone and the single body buried with it. Saguru wasn’t surprised that it was Kuroba’s target; it fit too well under his parameters. “You all know what we have set up to stop Kid, now I want you to turn your heads toward what ways he’d get past it.”

“There’s too many people,” Hattori said at once, and it was off from there, one weakness pointed out and a plan made to cover it, pin balling back and forth.

Saguru held back any observations he had. Most of them were covered by the others anyway, but he it would feel like a betrayal to Kuroba to actively help plan how to catch him these days. There was discussion of how Kid would escape if he got the stone, but despite many good points made, Saguru couldn’t shake the feeling that Kuroba would choose the glider today. The wind was steady but it was a cloudy night. All the more perfect to blend in to once he was airborne. It had been years since he last attended a heist though. Saguru didn’t know what to expect. Kuroba always strove to do the unexpected. How he had kept people guessing for almost two decades was a testament to his brilliance, and that the combined best minds around Saguru now hadn’t caught him only emphasized that fact.

The discussion broke with Aoko sending people off to different posts to best handle the problem areas they’d identified. When she got to Saguru, she stopped again.

“I promised to stay out of heists,” Saguru said. “I wouldn’t be here if I wasn’t being forced into it. I am retired after all.”

“You better keep the rest of your promise,” Aoko said shortly. Kuroba remained hers to catch; it wouldn’t be Saguru who interfered with that. “I understand that you didn’t have much choice being here, but if you’re not getting involved, go watch the cameras and stay out of the way. That should be enough to give a show of joining in.”

“I will do that then.” He nodded to her and watched her center herself. He could only imagine what it must be like to throw herself into hunting the man she once loved—and still did even if the hurt and anger were stronger—month after month. Saguru couldn’t have done it.

It was a bit weird to be staring at black and white monitors instead of being in the thick of things. It wasn’t unfamiliar; he’d had plenty of cases where he’s spent hours in surveillance, but for a Kid heist? He’d always been as close to the action as possible. If not near the target, then in Kid’s path waiting to trip him up. Now he hoped Kid would escape. Looking at the sheer number of things being used against him, it seemed like it would take a small miracle for that to be possible. But he really truly hoped.

The clock ticked down toward Kid’s stated time. Saguru watched the monitors for any sign of something out of the ordinary. Kudo was near the target. Hattori on the second floor of the museum near a stairwell. Aoko on the main floor with the target. One of the unknown detectives out near the outer perimeter— Saguru frowned at the monitor. He’d almost thought he saw… Yes, there it was again, a familiar shape on the edge of the screen, barely sliding past the camera’s near blind spots. He waited for it to appear again and this time the figure couldn’t avoid the camera as well.

It was like high school all over again, Kuroba’s appearance and all. Only it was the wrong Kuroba on the screen.

***

Aoko was going to pitch a fit if she realized her son had successfully gotten past the police perimeter and into the heist proper. Actually, Kuroba would probably join her.

Saguru slid away from the monitors, calculating the route Takumi would most likely take. The only person who noticed him leave was the officer guarding the door. He’d have to point out that security flaw to Aoko at some point; hyper focus on the monitors was open invitation for Kid to infiltrate the room.

Saguru caught up to Takumi right as he was trying to get into the museum, lock picks in hand as he took advantage of a brief gap in the guard rotations.

“You know,” Saguru said, “the camera covers this spot and the door has three different alarms armed at various points along it.”

Takumi dropped the picks, slamming back against the door. “Holy shit when did you get there?!”

“Just moments after you got here from the looks of it.” Saguru picked up the dropped picks. All handmade from bits of scrap metal and wires. Impressive. Also something Aoko no doubt would disapprove of on principle. “What are you doing here, Takumi-kun?”

Takumi straightened, shoulder squaring. The stubborn jut of his jaw was all Aoko even if he still resembled Kuroba more than not. “I wanted to watch the heist.”

“I’m sure you’re perfectly capable of watching the heist from behind the police line. Or better yet, on home on your TV.”

“I want to see it firsthand!” Takumi waved a hand at the building behind him. “Kaa-san has spent half my life chasing after Kid and I’ve never even gotten to see what goes on behind the scenes. For some reason this 200th heist has both Kaa-san and Tou-san acting more stressed than normal and I want to know why.”

“So you came to the heist as clearly that isn’t going to have any negative repercussions if you got caught,” Saguru said.

Takumi flushed, hands balling into fists and teeth gritted together. “Look, I get it, it’s stupid and impulsive. I still want to know!”

Saguru shook his head, glancing at his wrist watch. Barely any time now… “Regardless of what you want, you can’t be here. If Aoko sees you on those tapes, she’s going to have a meltdown and she can’t afford to be distracted right now.”

“Maybe I could help? I mean I got this far didn’t I? And Kid’s a showman; maybe a magician’s perspective—”

Saguru caught Takumi’s wrist and started pulling. Takumi was too startled to drag his heels in, stumbling after Saguru wide eyed. “That wouldn’t work,” Saguru said, keeping calm. There was too big of a gap, the next police group should have been there, but they weren’t. Kid or someone else? “Your father was brought on a few times as a consultant for that reason and no progress was made. No offense, but he is more of a showman than you are.” Takumi sputtered, trying to pull away now, but Saguru’s grip was firm. “You got this far because something has happened to the guard pattern and luck. We’re not pushing that luck any further.”

Takumi yanked hard, almost dragging Saguru to a stop. “It’s not like I’m going after Kid! I just want to see what a heist is like!”

Saguru stopped. “Look, heists are not safe. No matter what hype they get, the injury rate increases every year. I know for a fact that your parents have kept you as far from this as possible for your own safety.”

“I know the incident rates! That’s all the more reason why—”

They froze as all lights in the area cut out. Saguru counted, waiting for the backup generators. A few lights flickered and died again, only one or two in the distance running as they should. “The generators were tampered with…” Kid or not Kid? Most likely Kid, it fit his tactics. “Come on, we need to go. The heist is in progress.”

“What? Already?” Takumi hopped a few steps after Saguru. As they spoke, Kuroba was probably already in the target room. They rounded a corner and Takumi flinched as they found the missing guard rotation sprawled across the ground. That had to be on camera unless those were tampered too… “Are they…?”

“Unconscious,” Saguru said, sparing them a once over. He could see their chests rise and fall as they breathed, not a mark on them. “They’ll wake up in a bit with nothing worse than a small headache.”

“Is that…is that normal?”

“For a heist? Yes.”

Takumi’s eyes were wide as they neared the police barricade. There was no hiding that they were there now, not when Saguru wasn’t trying to. An officer on duty noticed and moved to wave them down, but at that moment a loud boom and crackle came from behind them.

Behind them, the museum became a mass of fireworks, whizzing and exploding in multicolored lights. It was the perfect amount of dramatic that the public no doubt expected. In the sky, one of the search lights projected Kid’s caricature against the clouds much like something out of Batman.

The crowd cheered.

Everything was light and roars of sound until it was suddenly a roaring rumble and smoke, and the cheers were turning to screams. Saguru looked over his shoulder and saw a chunk missing from the corner of the museum. Not Kid. Definitely not Kid. Takumi wrenched around, trying to run toward the smoke as there was another explosion, but Saguru caught him around the waist.

“Kaa-san is in there!” Takumi shrieked, struggling.

“She has enough to worry about without worrying about you!” Saguru shouted back.

The police perimeter was broken in the chaos, Kid’s fans panicking, and it was easy to get swallowed by the mass of people, elbows and pressing bodies pushing them further and further from the museum. Saguru lost track of where they were. Everything was flashes of scared faces and Kid caricatured clothing and keeping a hold on Takumi through it all.

The mess parted and they were dumped into an alleyway. The communicator Saguru got earlier in the night was going off on his hip spouting snippets of things in a jumble that made it clear that Kid hadn’t made his escape just yet even in all the chaos. He could hear Aoko’s voice in that jumble though, so he was reassured she was alright. Takumi slumped against the wall, wrist still in Saguru’s death grip, pale and shaken. Saguru let go. There was going to be a nasty bruise on his wrist later. “Are you okay?” Saguru asked.

Takumi stared back blankly.

The communicator went off again, this time a clear statement that Kid was on the roof. Aoko’s voice. “Aoko sounds like she’s fine,” Saguru said.

“Did Kid blow up the museum?” Takumi asked.

“I doubt it. It’s not his method of operation.” Saguru scanned the sky. If Kid had been driven to the roof then it was only a matter of time until he escaped via glider. He moved down the alley toward more open roads; these were closed off around here from traffic due to the heist, but eventually they’d come to somewhere Saguru could call a cab and get them all back home safe. Takumi trailed after him like Saguru was the only thing that made sense at the moment and losing him would be losing the last tie to reality. Behind them was still a mass of panicked bodies and sirens. There were no more explosions at least.

They crossed two blocks before Saguru saw the triangular blur of Kid’s glider. It was barely visible in the cloud cover and residual smoke, but it was there. “Kid is escaping headed north,” Saguru said into the communicator.

“Unable to pursue,” came the response, Aoko’s voice a frustrated growl. “Too busy containing the mess here.”

Saguru planned to reply that it would be too late by the time they got out of the building anyway when the glider wobbled. It flew a few more feet before nose diving sharply. “Shit.” Kid was down. Kid was down probably injured, possibly dead, with the majority of the police force containing a small riot of hysterical panic. Saguru tossed the communicator away as it kept spouting updates from different police teams. Keeping it could lead everyone back to Kid and he wasn’t going to do that to Kuroba. Kid had fallen two, three blocks away at most.

Let him be alive, Saguru thought.

AN: Please don’t kill me. Also, who saw something like this coming?