#imo duh its a bit up to interpretation

[yaboisnelf]

remember when kori said dick ran away with bruce's credit card in one pocket and roy in the other. yeah. get his ass kori. 🛼🛼‼️‼️

happy pride and spiderman movie day

[roobylavender]

hi i hope you don't mind anons about this but i thought your post abt sns shippers re: ss was rly interesting! i think it's rly common for m/m shippers in general to look at a canon, poorly-developed m/f ship and laugh at the female character's plight like it's a sort of revenge for their m/m ship not being canon. i wanted to say though that i think the reason this is so prevalent among not only sns or nrt fans in general but also ppl who don't rly keep up with nrt as a whole (like all the viral memes and posts about how canon adult sske is a deadbeat dad, etc) is precisely because of the existence of boruto; i know you disregard that series entirely (bc duh lmao) but as someone who got morbidly curious enough to follow a decent bit of it - i truly don't think any other canon sequel in fiction has gone so far as to undermine its own canon ships. there's so many instances where you genuinely have no choice but to interpret the situation as sske and nrt each respectively being trapped in loveless marriages unless you're wearing glasses that are not merely rose-tinted, but ass-blasted with barbie tier pink paint. so unfortunately it makes sense that ppl make the jokes you mentioned in your post - the material is canon, but everyone is so OOC that the ppl laughing about it can still feel like they can ignore it as it's not the "true" canon that fits each character. imo it's like how comics fans laugh about their faves doing stupid things in like, the latest tom king run or zeb wells's new arc or whatever - it's "canon" but so clearly contradicts years of per-established material that ppl don't take it seriously, so they can criticize it without feeling like they're actually insulting the character. like there's so many spidey fans on reddit or twitter or whatever who obviously adore peter but also constantly share memes humiliating him or making him seem like this completely different, awful person bc it's commonly understood that this isn't the real(TM) pete. but ofc none of this negates ur broader point abt fandom misogyny, i just think this is why it's so prevalent wrt nrt's canon ships in particular, if that makes sense!

oh for sure like i wonder so often about what the landscape of the fandom would look like had so much post-canon content never been a thing to begin with. the fandom misogyny would still be there obv but like you implied it probably wouldn’t be as prevalent as it’s unfortunately become. i curse the existence of deadbeat dad sasuke everyday it’s so sad like there was so much potential going off of chapter 699 and nearly all of it went to waste 😭

[emma-what-son]

Emma Watson can’t sing.  Here’s how I know:

I stumbled upon this article today. Since we were recently discussing Emma’s singing in Batb I thought I’d post it.

Elise's Voice Lessons April 2017: Have you seen Disney’s 2017 version of Beauty and the Beast? I’m betting you have. I practically dragged my husband to it by pointing out how many action and alien movies I had watched with him since we’d last seen a chick-flick. And it’s topped the box office how many weeks in a row? I don’t really know, so fortunately that’s not what this blog is about. This blog is about singing. And Emma Watson singing . . . holy over-processed, Batman! ​ Now someone out there is bound to be offended and jump to Emma Watson’s defense—she is after all millennials’ beloved Hermione Granger. But hear me out! I know that Emma Watson is not a professional singer, and I’m not so naïve as to think there wouldn’t be some touch-ups made to her singing—I’m not even strictly a purist. Bring on the Auto-Tune for touch-ups if you must!

Since finding out that Emma Watson had been cast I knew I was unlikely to get an interpretation as lovely as the Broadway or London Casts’ stage productions (the original London cast is the best version of the Disney musical out there IMO). Which was unfortunate, since this ↓ is truly lovely. Sadly, "Home" didn’t make it into the movie other than as part of the background music. ☹

However, moving on with life, I was completely willing to give Emma Watson a chance. Belle is, after all, a fairly young and innocent character, so an untrained but pretty voice would be fine for that character. Even refreshing. But that is not what Disney delivered. Disney delivered a “photoshopped” version of a voice that doesn’t sound like Emma Watson’s speaking voice at all, with echoey reverb and telltale signs of A LOT of Auto-Tune within the first few phrases of Watson’s singing.  

And that makes me frustrated for so many reasons. I’m frustrated that Disney won’t stand behind their choice of Watson and let her voice be her voice. It makes me mad, because it’s teaching young girls that their voices have to sound processed to be beautiful (read more on my opinion about that here). And I’m annoyed that Disney thinks they have to cast someone who is guaranteed to send those money-spending millennials to the movie theater rather than having the confidence to hire someone with less name recognition but more singing experience and stand behind their quality of work. It’s like an artist who screws up a drawing or painting but says “Oh well, I’ll just scan it and fix it in Photoshop.” 

But the Photoshopped version is no longer a painting. Duh. Over-processing a sound is just as glaring as an over-processed image if you know what to listen for.  And after reading this, you’ll know what to listen for. First let’s begin by listening to the opening song from the other two Disney versions.

The first is the animated movie. The singer is Paige O'Hara, a Broadway actress. Try listening for slight pitch variations. Nothing truly out of tune, but little dips and shimmers. If you can’t hear that yet, no worries. Slight differences in pitch can be hard to pick out if you’re not used to it. Listen to the longer notes especially. If you know what vibrato is, that’s an example of very slight pitch changes. Scooping or swooping sounds are hitting a pitch slightly flat and then raising the pitch to be in tune. ​ Now ask yourself where it sounds like she’s singing (she’s obviously in some sort of recording studio situation, but what might the shape of the room look like? Can you visualize it from the sound? I’m asking you to use your "bat sense"). Outside? Inside? In a long hallway? In a small room? Large room? Room with a high ceiling? In her car? In the shower?

The second recording is Susan Eagan from the original Broadway cast. You hear the difference right? You may not be able to quite put your finger on it, but it’s there, right? Ask yourself the same questions—do you hear pitch variations? Where is she singing? If you’ve got time, switch back and forth between the two and try to really identify the differences between them. You might mostly notice how long they hold out the notes or the way the pronounce the words. However, try to really use your "bat sense" again and hear the difference in the sound quality. 

Right, so where does it sound like these singers are singing to you?  If I were to describe it, I’d say that O’Hara’s version sounds like she’s in a small carpeted room, more or less. She’s got kind of a light, “thin” sound, like there are no hard walls or anything for the sound to bounce off of. She even sounds a little like she may be outside, where again there would be no walls for the sound to bounce around on. Eagan’s recording sounds like she’s in a bigger room; it’s a little more reverberant like maybe there’s a tall ceiling where she is, or a long empty hallway (not literally, but do you get the idea of describing the sound?). ​ All right, now let’s move on to Emma Watson’s version. Again, listen to pitch, especially on the long notes (though there aren’t many of them in Watson’s version). Ask yourself where it sounds like she’s singing.

Okay, okay, doesn’t it sound like she singing in the bathroom? I mean, seriously? Do you hear that? That’s called reverb, short for “reverberate” and it’s extremely common to add it to modern popular music. So maybe it’s a quality that just jumped out to you as “modern.” But the thing is, it’s not real. No human voice actually sounds like that. It’s possible for the human voice to generate its own quality of depth—that’s what singers study for years to learn how to do well without damaging their voices. It’s the mature sound quality in the first two examples. But if you want to make a thin voice sound more “mature” and resonant, you can artificially add reverb. And there’s a lot of reverb when Emma Watson sings in Beauty and the Beast. I especially notice the difference as the rest of the cast enters in singing “Bonjour! Bonjour!” Their sound is dramatically less touched-up. And what about pitch? Doesn’t Emma Watson have the most wonderful accurate pitch EVER? She’s so good, her pitch is purer and more flawless than either of those previous examples we listened to. And that’s once glaring indicator that Auto-Tune has been used. Do you hear how Watson almost never actually holds a note out? Maybe that’s a stylistic choice. More likely though, I think she is unable to sustain the note for very long with clarity of sound. Her breathing seems shallow which may be one reason why.  She also may tend to go flat on sustained notes as I hear very minor blips toward the end of these longer notes where I think the sound producer has messed with the pitch a bit (listen to the sustained notes on "before," "people" and "say." And there's a very definite blip on "sell").  They don’t sound like the natural vocal blips of placement changes or passagi (read about that here). So can Emma Watson sing in tune? Or I guess the real question is, how far out of tune does she sing? I don’t know, because they put a band-aid on it. I can hear where there used to be a "problem" because I can hear where there is now a "fix." Is it covering a paper cut or a gaping hole? I have no idea. But shame on Disney if they’re covering up paper cuts and making young girls listen to an artificial sound that they can never hope to achieve. Because the vast majority of those girls have no idea that what they’re hearing is fake.   Shame on Disney for adding artificial maturity to a voice and teaching young girls in yet another aspect of their lives they need to try and grow up sooner.   Pile on the makeup, stuff your bra, and sing with a deeper voice.  Because young and innocent isn’t beautiful enough. That’s what girls need to hear, right? So do I know that Emma Watson can’t sing now? Actually, as a voice teacher, I’m guessing that underneath all of that processing her voice is just fine. But that’s not the message Disney is sending. Her voice was so bad that they thought they had to rework and patch up her voice until it’s not even a truly human sound. They didn’t do that to Gaston’s voice (but then, they actually cast someone who had singing experience for his role). And in 20 years when sound processing technology has changed the difference between the two voices is going to be even weirder and more noticeable than it is today. So, thanks Disney, for sending a subliminal message of hastening maturity and setting an unattainable standard of vocal “perfection.” I’m sure girls everywhere will thank you someday.

[blodreina-noumou]

4, 12, 13! The 100 (duh), and for 13, you can choose the character

Thank you so much, my friend! 💛

4. Do you have a NoTP in your fandom? Are they a popular OTP?

This is known, of course, but Be//arke. Part of why I dislike them is because they’re such a popular OTP, and because I get a little bored with seeing that subsection of the fandom make everything that happens in this show about their ship.

That being said, I’ve been less salty about it lately. 

We will finally know, one way or the other, what the writers have intended all along, with the upcoming series finale. 

Either they will be an explicitly romantic couple, or they won’t.

Because it’s undeniable that they care for each other, deeply, or that we’re meant to get that impression, at least. They love each other, however ill-defined what exactly the nature of that love is has been on screen. They are each other’s buttons, the one person they’ll each go way too far for, even when other people would make more sense as hostages or bait. 

Bellamy spent all of s6 ignoring his canonical girlfriend so he could save Clarke. It was a snapshot of a few days within that universe, but it’s really hard for me to still be like “B/C shippers are delusional, smell my skeptic farts, mreh heh heh” when the past season emphasized their connection so much. He visibly mourned Clarke in a way that we did not see him mourn Monty and Harper, who he spent a lot more time with. He immediately supported Clarke at the beginning of the season, despite everyone else in his family being (imo, rightfully) very upset with her recent betrayals. He was shown to be in conflict with Echo more than with Clarke this past season - although he and Echo made up and are still solid, from where I’m standing. So that’s messy and kind of unsettling. What’s the plan with that?

Because if the writers aren’t headed towards an explicitly romantic relationship, they’re doing a hell of a job stringing B/C shippers along. 

And that leaves a bad taste in my mouth, regardless of how I’ve always felt about those characters as a ship. The writers and actors are far from oblivious about how that section of the fandom feels. The idea that they might be muddying the waters for no reason other than to fuck with people bothers me. It never used to, but it does now.

I’d actually prefer that they were headed towards a Be//arke Happily Ever After, than that they were stringing along their fanbase that way.

More likely, if history is any indication, things will still be muddy, one of them will die (my money is on Bellamy at this point, because of Bob’s subtweets apparently referencing Be//arke) and we’ll still find ways to argue about it for as long as the fandom persists after the show is over.

So at this point, they’re a NoTP for me, but I’m not super salty about it like I used to be. A year from now (hopefully) we’ll have the answers. Nobody can really say exactly what kind of love exists between Bellamy and Clarke until we see how it ends for them.

12. Is there an unpopular arc that you like that the fandom doesn’t? Why?

I used to say The Flame, but lately, I feel they really fumbled the potential that plot device had in s6. I just wasn’t as engaged with the Sheidheda concept as I could’ve been. Too many holes, too much missing backstory, too much blown potential in showing us other Hedas, outside of Lexa, Sheidheda, and Madi.

So these days, I’d have to say that I probably have an unpopular viewpoint for a Clexa shipper - Clexa wasn’t healthy, and was always doomed. The showrunners didn’t realize the sociopolitical impact that would have, because they attempted to take the same blase, non-issue attitude towards sexual orientation that the universe of The 100 has. I think the Clexa story played out exactly as it was always meant to, and if you strip it of its real world implications, it’s some of the best and most heartbreaking bit of character work that the show has ever done. 

It’s not about a timeless love story, but about the tragedy of a budding affection between two young women caught up in the politics of war and their opposing cultures - a tragedy which has nothing to do with them being wlws, and everything to do with them being oppositional leaders, and kindred spirits in a violent world. They were shaped into cold pragmatists, but around each other, they allowed a certain level of vulnerability and softness of the other person. That was what was beautiful, and the tragedy is in the truth that a connection like that never would’ve thrived in the world of The 100.

I’ll always love Clexa, but I don’t feel much like a Clexa, if that makes sense.

13.  Unpopular opinion about XXX character?

I’m going to go with Jasper. The general consensus that I see a lot about him seems to be that he was a better character before 2x16, that people miss Puppy Love Jasper. Some even go so far as to say that his arc didn’t make sense, that he was annoying or a whiny brat in s3 and s4. I couldn’t disagree with that interpretation more.

I feel a lot of people don’t fully understand the series from Jasper’s perspective. There is so much he’s unaware of, so much he witnesses, and so much he misses out on. There is so much implied loss in his life, much more than just Maya. I don’t believe her death is the sole thing that drove him over the edge - I think it was simply the final straw.

Before he’s locked away in Mount Weather, Jasper is shown to have a few close friends - Monty, of course, but also Finn, and Octavia. He spends the most time with all of them, and ends up losing all of them, on some level, by season 3. 

He struggles to forgive Monty for his part in the Mount Weather genocide. 

We never see him receive the news of how Finn died, and I think, given the way Jasper talks about him (“looks like Finn finally got his peace talks”; “you hear that Finn? he thinks he’s innocent, none of us is innocent!”) - I think we’re meant to assume that people sugarcoated it, and that Jasper doesn’t know the extent of Finn’s crimes. So in his eyes, he loses a good friend to a pointless war. 

Octavia falls in love with someone else, just a few days after kissing Jasper, and ends up so busy with her new culture that she more or less abandons him. Monty and Octavia (and later, Harper) all try to reach Jasper, but he’s too far gone at that point - he’s too alone. 

He also loses his parents (he mentions them in s1, and then we never hear about them again, so I think we can assume they died either in the Culling or on the way down to the ground, when the Ark crashes.) 

And he has his budding leadership crushed, his hope that he can somehow impact the future, and prevent the horror around him snatched away, by his former leaders genociding an entire civilization, including people who helped them, including the first girl he ever loved. She dies in his arms, though, in case the general horror of that wasn’t enough.

He loses so much more than just Maya.

He loses more than just about anybody, and it all happens to him while he’s fifteen years old.

Justice for Jasper Jordan. My heart always hurts when I think of him, and I hate to see people talk so poorly of him.

This is so long, and I could go on about Jasper forever, so I’ll stop now. Thank you so much again for the questions, and I hope you enjoy the essays you totally did not ask for, lmao!

[roxannepolice]

But yah rey as a character is just so frustrating you know? Cause like, yeah sure she could be complex with a powerful arc where shes forced to come to terms with the fact she wasted years of her life on self-imposed delusions in a cathartic way, or she could be a flat piece of marketing cardboard which Disney is banking on vagina+superpowers=profit without having to go through that persnicty character flaw overcoming or the like. Because like you said, hearing shes a nobody (which ngl, her assuming she was a somebody wasn’t really ever supported in tfa, just that her family was coming back and she desperately wanted them to) is apparently the worst thing but it changes absolutely nothing, not her approach, not her demeanor , if vaguely sad is the absolute worse a character is gonna experience in a goddamn space opera then yeah, full offense ill take the l on Mary sue discourse but her character will definitely be a boring ass wash. We all make fun of whiny new hope Luke but him being a kinda nuisance to both the audience and those around him is what made is transformation into full blown Jedi knight so powerful. With Rey so far what weve got is badass perfect cinnamon roll finally get her due as such, which is clearly working for some people, but I fail to see how that isn’t spectacularly tone deaf to make a protag in this genre such. Operas about drama, not patting you on the back. Rey (assuming she remains as is) would’ve been fine as a protag s the only piece of Star Wars media we ever got was a new hope. But rn she a chosen one architype (and I know that bunch of ppl are gonna go but the series ‘but shes not the chosen one, Anakin still is, the new series isn’t trying to make her one!’ but lets not beat around the burning bush, if u got a character that walks on water and the reason why is because god said so, ur dealing with a chosen one trope and if a character is star wars is made ultrapowerful in lore breaking ways because force said so? Yeah were dealing with a chosen one.) when we had both the deconstruction and the reconstruction done. Shes a straight hero when the success of the ot rest on hitting the formula near perfect the first time. What exactly is Rey, the individual character, bringing to the table? What makes her story supposedly so important the a perfectly good ending had to be made invalid to tell it? A bunch of ppl will say heroines’ journey! But if that’s the case I gotta say, wheres all the feminine shit? Im serious, if the heroines journey is reintegrating the feminine and realizing ‘oh shit mom had a point’ there where is both the feminine skills/coping mechanism and the mom? I mean I saw some ppl arguing for leia in a ‘reys Persephone!’ meta (she isn’t, you can make a much better case for ben himself as Persephone to be quite frank, yall are focusing so much on the trees ((girl gets abducted by guy)) that u forgot the forest existed, the actually story ((girl winds up queen on the underworld, well gee whiz which character just took control of that after leaving the world of living and a grieving divine mother behind, it’s a mystery apparently) behind, it’s a mystery apparently) ((but seriously though even if we hope for dark rey does anyone assume its gonna be taking control of a dark/dead coded org at least partially at this point, do you, do you really??). but given the fact she had what, one line of screen dialogue that’s breaking ur arm with that stretch. As far as skills go I guess you could make an argument for scavenging, but if that’s the case dlf did a shit job of conveying that as female-coded. Everything about rey in tfa seems deliberately androgynous, and yeah, she had her hair let down/mascara moment, but that’s tied to her ‘failure’ on the supremacy thus something nw.SPEAKIGN OF FAILURES ON THE SUPERAMCY AND LACK THERE OF. I find it kind funny that bunch of reylo bnfs (you know who they are) are all ‘hur dur fanboys/antis are dumb and don’t get story structure.’ And then going, ‘why are yall asking how/assuming rey fucked up in throne room/climax of her story in the second portion/darkest point of her character arc? Why do you hate women/ur own ovaries so much?’ because it like walking into a prefurnished house and being told by the relator ‘HERES THE LIVING ROOM’ and having no damn couch. It’s a living room, I expect a couch here. And in a movie where it’s the low point of a character arc and they drag puppet yoda out to tell me the movie is about failure, I expect a damn failure in whats clearly the climax of the characters arc for this movie. As it stands now there are three possibilities imo. 1st, rey had no failure, she is the pure badass maid o light ppl want and every inch the boring cardboard she is accused of by fanbros, remains static, and is relegated to an also ran to benlo taking the most compelling character trophy this trilogy in 10 yrs2nd possibility and the one im hoping for, failure speech wasn’t just thematic explanation but also foreshadowing, rey fucks up big and dramatic in a way that makes her manage to stand out as unique with both her contemporaries and her predecessors(last part, if its ever to much lemme know pls im sorry i just gotta get it out) 3rd and most likely possibility, rey isn’t the main character, benlo is and that’s why his failure both moral in the throne room and logistic on criat take center stage for the last third or so of the movie. Rey is merely a pov character to tell the dramatic villain protag story they wanted and have their very marketable unproblematic Disney heroine cake too.

Ok, so this discourse kinda died down by now, but thanks to that it’s possible to maybe have a calmer look at it I’m totally not trying to justify my late response.

Anyway, the good result is that quite recently my brother, who’s not overly taken with Rey - or the sequels in general, for that matter - said something which really stuck with me as a possible crux of the problem: 

She’s neither comical nor tragical. Just bland. 

This neither comical nor tragical really struck me. And the more I though about it, the more it was appearing to me that this qualm really applies to the sequels as a whole. The thing is that DLF are essentially telling a straightforward story that they’re trying to make captivatingly convoluted. And not just make, but keep this appearance over four years. And this is... a narrative teeth crasher. Like, when you’re honest about the endgame (in the context of the most structural meanings of comedy and tragedy), you can maintain a decorum, though you can also play with it, of course, whereas when you don’t want to be honest about the endgame, you end up mixing the styles somewhat messily. You can’t break or discuss with the rules without acknowledging them, so to speak. Because the originals were honest about the happy/hopeful endgame (the first episode is title A New Hope ffs), they could allow themselves deeply tragic moments like Larses’ deaths, Han getting frozen, destruction of Alderaan, etc. Because the prequels were open about being a tragedy, they could allow themselves lighthearted comic relief for the sake of lighthearted comic relief. 

The sequels... badly want us to consider the possibility of FO winning and Ben dying unredeemed while simultaneously insisting we root for those things not happening, while appearing conscious we’re definitely not buying the former and the latter only somewhat. And it’s tiresome. Dishonest. And indeed, bland. If the story is a tragedy it will be a bloodcurdlingly real one, if it’s a comedy it will be a borderline grotesque one. 

But yeah, returning to Rey, I guess as the main character she’s a lens which focuses the above problems. A very bitter tragedy of what her parents did t her prevents her from being comfortably comical whereas whoohooos I like thats and prancing like a husky on red bull over idols and visions because it’s for children so it must be hopeful prevents her from being intriguingly tragical. So I guess the intentioned effect was tragicomism but, from pov of an engaged casual fan that is my bro, it’s neither. 

As far as Rey’s heroine’s journey lacking some of the usual elements, I blame it on Disney being... a bit too ambitious, maybe. I think they tried to make a heroine’s journey that isn’t ostentaciously seeped in traditional feminine/masculine traits, maintains the structure without what could be called accidentals. On the one hand, I would point out that hero’s journey has pretty much desexualised itself over time, we are rather accustomed to “shero’s” journeys, but on the other... maybe Disney set out on a too novel a territory and may crack their teeth on it, alongside trying to out-Vader Vader at redemption. To elucidate, “toxic femininity” in which a heroine is supposed to find herself in the beginning of her journey, in Rey’s case is uprooted from any of our usual concepts of feminine-masculine social roles (it’s space, duh). My interpretation is that Rey’s version of toxic femininity kind of exists in contrast with Kylo Ben’s version of toxic masculinity - and since the apparent focus of the story is the attitude towards the past/parent figures, toxic femininity would mean her clutching onto the past. Which is why I predict that some act of IX will find Rey inebriated with apparent success in masculine world, meaning she’ll be the one rejecting the old gods this time - and I would point out that panel in Poe comic where she shows herself more sceptical towards idolisation of past don’t mind me, I’m just expressingmy trash dreams for a proper sith lady Rey.

Then again, Rian Johnson said she already found perfect balance between Luke’s clinginess and Kylo’s rejection of the past, so... idk, maybe I’m giving DLF too much credit again.

As for the Persephone thing, I guess the rub is that this reylo reading focuses less on the traditional reading of the myth (where Demeter is the actual main character and Kore is a Princess Peach MacGuffin) and more of an interpretation of it as one of the eldest (at least in Europe) versions of story depicting a transition of a girl into a woman, making Persephone more of a protagonist. 

Like, y’know, this Persephone (D. G. Rosetti, source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proserpine_(Rossetti_painting))

I’m no expert, but myths can lose their original meanings because of power relations (anyone still remember about Dionysus, the god associated with excessive drinking, going through a very Christ-like death and resurrection?) and I think it’s possible that this is the case with the story of Persephone becoming a pre-scientific explanation of seasons changing over the year. So teah, that’s how I always understood the Persephone theme regarding Rey.

But yes, I must agree that I’m confused about Disney’s handling of the mother figure, which... Look, SW became a legend of a modern myth because of how epically Lucas handled the hero dealing with his very explicit father. So yes, I don’t understand what exactly is their game with Rey Nobody from Nowhere in this regard. It’s one thing that they had a cool idea with giving her no lineage, another that parent figures are an essential element of archetypal journeys and from symbolic viewpoint the case of a female character the biological relationship is even more crucial than in male’s. And I swear to all the ewoks and porgs in the galaxy, I do hope Disney’s idea of Rey healing the mother/daughter divide isn’t through her healing the divide between Leia and Ben. Again, this isn’t the idealistic sphere. Just... no. 

Anyway, I still maintain hope (this whole meta blog is built on hope) that Rey will indeed turn out to have a proper personal mistake which will make her stand out in the saga. I do have to admit, though, that I find your last theory very likely. I mean, even when I read all the reylo metas going oh, Rey is going to have such an exciting arc in IX, she has so much to deal with though of course it’s not going to compromise her morally, it will be sooo exciting, I just... f*ck’s sake, what you’re describing isn’t a dramatic character only a dramatised role model. It’s great if that’s your thing, but don’t claim it is space opera-worthy, in operas people drown themselves because of cursed sailors, kill over a break up, decapitate over a bad dream and get dragged to hell over a dinner, not persuade their fallen lovers to change their ways, let alone patienly wait for them the understand the error of their ways (and if they do it’s doomed to end in someone dying).

[sigurdjarlson]

the great irony is that the brotherhood was founded specifically to prevent callous and lassie-faire use of nukes and superweapons against civilians as well as to protect technology so that it could be later used to help everyone. Like the first maxson was horrified when he learned the US government he was fighting for was committing war crimes and atrocities as well as experimenting on it's own people. and yet maxson has become that very force himself.

I definitely agree but I think it’s a bit more complicated than that.

Please don’t take this as hostile or condescending. I had a ton of fun writing and considering all this. Friendly discussions are fun :D I’ve been writing a lot on this topic lately so I got carried away. 

Of course I could be wrong or misinformed on some things (or all of em who knows!) I like to keep that in mind when talking about things.

I have my qualms with the BoS and they stretch back to Roger Maxson himself tbh. It’s always been a deeply flawed organization. I think any military organization has the potential to be very dangerous (and will arguably always be flawed to some degree.) especially when there are no other bodies of government to regulate it (post-apocalypse I mean). 

Military organizations are..their reasoning is usually based on (1) whats the best tactical decision to win (2) how to achieve said goal (3) what results in the least casualties even if it means causing casualties yourself (the trolley moral question come to life really) (4) It may be immoral but it will be worth it in the long run. The ends justify the means (5) how to maintain and control a powerful position 

“The Greater Good” 

Honestly that and “the ends justify the means” are some of the most dangerous ideas out there. Sometimes it’s necessary. 

extremely simplified ex since i don’t feel like writing an essay’s worth of moral dilemma shit - 

: If you can only save one: do you save one person or a group of people?

People have to use that everyday. Nurses, doctors, military organizations, anything that puts lives in other people’s hands.

but when taken too far and defended so righteously it becomes dangerous and can be used to “justify” all kinds of hateful rhetoric

Maxson is a strange mix of Lyons and some of the pure blooded old time-y BoS rhetoric. Jokes about nuke throwing robots aside and Maxson’s affinity for big weapons they aren’t killing civilians or experimenting on human beings as far as we know (synths that might be another matter)

that’s not a defense of course since they’re still deeply flawed and immoral in many ways (bigots) but I would argue that it’s more they went back to the older viewpoint where only THEY are allowed to have such weapons because they are the only ones responsible enough to use them (snort). Instead of regulating tech they’re back to hoarding it.

from what I’ve seen prior to Fo3 they’ve never really been involved in civilian life unless it benefits them in some way (trade for example) and otherwise they couldn’t care less since Tech > Human Life.

and you’re right that’s always been their thing. Confiscating and regulating tech so people can’t use it to fuck things up again. And that’s a noble goal at it’s core but the BoS twists it to suit its needs far too often. And goes about it terribly. For a long time it was tech > human life because lost lives are collateral damage and it’s all for “the greater good.”. They would eventually bring about technological change for all and such so *hand-waves casualties* it’ll be worth it..right?

that changed with Lyons in the capital wasteland when he abandoned what the rest of the BoS believed to be their main objective (getting tech) they cut off all support for that reason because they assumed he’d gone “native” by becoming too charitable

it’s not the norm for them to help civilians without an ulterior motive. The BoS is rarely altruistic in that way. But Lyons changed his little sector and was met with a lot of vitriol for it. Some of his own men left. Sadly while that’s the better and more moral standpoint they dug themselves into the ground due to a lack of soldiers, backup and supplies. (Plus the enclave and shit)

and I’m tentative to say this because I don’t want people to think I’m /defending Maxson/ cuz I’m not but he does keep with some of Lyons’ old ways.

while he went back to the tech hoarding he took with him Lyons’ thing for helping civilians (to some degree), allowing wastelanders into the BoS and also unfortunately took Lyons’ obsession with eradicating abominations. (Which in Lyons’ case was mostly super mutants but Maxson took it even further with synths and arguably took it to an extreme. 

However that bigotry was already in the BoS. He didn’t create it. He just very charismatic, in an extremely influential position and that combined with the BoS’ cultish motives creates an extremist organization. 

You know..I was thinking about it and the BoS has always treated ghouls pretty shitty tbh. They don’t outright attack non-ferals even in Fo4 but they certainly treat them like crap so it’s not surprising. There’s no change there from prior history to Fo4. 

And going by the facts we have,the BoS in Fo4 have never attacked non ferals unprovoked. Synths and super mutants yes. But not even completely? You can bring synths in the Prydwen itself and they bitch but they don’t shoot em down (Danse was a completely different story imo cuz they see him as a spy and traitor as well as a synth)

The shoot on sight policy doesn’t always seem to apply to non-hostiles. (Key word being doesn’t always since they do typically shoot synths on sight) Their vitriol and bigotry does but we haven’t seen them actually go about killing people of the Commonwealth that aren’t hostile. (Excluding some non-hostile synths) I might be wrong but despite their zealous rambling about abominations we haven’t seen them do anything like that have we? 

The institute and their synths being the exception since they are permanently labeled enemy since they’re at war with them in their mind. Which is why they try to make you destroy Arcadia (fucked up yes but they don’t seem to have a concept of not everyone on the other side of the war is the enemy..sigh)

The same goes for the Railroad…which I disagree with people who say they weren’t even a threat. If you help the Railroad you eventually go on to destroy the BoS. They are correct in assuming they could and will be a problem. While I don’t agree with their decision to kill them obviously..from a tactical standpoint it makes sense.

Loose ends can bring down an organization and they were covering all their bases to make sure all threats were neutralized. A very..callous move but tactically sound.

However the best idea for everyone would have been to compromise but noooo just blow up the other organizations (Looking at you too Desdemona and Father. I swear the three of them are all so..ughgfjgf.)

I mean why destroy all that knowledge they had?? A complete waste.

Imo the Minutemen are the Commonwealth’s best hope. 

The BoS could be a force for good but there would have to be significant change and I don’t see that happening anytime soon. That’s what’s rather tragic about the BoS to me? 

They could do SO MUCH good but..they don’t. They fuck shit up more and somehow convince themselves that they are saving the world. 

Maxson is.. this weird hybrid and the Wiki (which I know is dubious but I agree with this interpretation) describes as conflicted between the old BoS ways and Lyons’ more idealistic ideals.

he does care for the people of the commonwealth and they do send out squadrons to help civilians (its in the terminal entries somewhere. There are a surprising couple of entries that describe them helping civilians unprompted which is supposedly not the norm for old-school BoS)

Maxson is..weird lmfao. He cares but he seems to have no idea how to actually help others? Well, perhaps a better way of saying it is, he’s doing what he considers to be  “helping” 

While I’ll never ague Maxson isn’t a shitty person because he is. He’s a bigot. Duh. I will say he’s not 100% evil either. He’s not a psychopath like people try to claim.

He orders Cade to make mental health of his crew the biggest priority, seems reluctant to even send Ingram out because “we can’t lose you..I’m sorry.” Despite being told she would be more effective than other soldiers. And helps civilians even (but not at the expense of the BoS of course *snort* but another tactically sound decision or they would end up like Lyons..which I wonder is why he makes some of the decisions he makes..but that’s a different post) 

Maxson is..he’s impulsive and incredibly..zealous. He has an army at his command and the lives of millions in his hands. Which leads to a lot of “the ends justify the means” which has always been a BoS thing (a military thing actually) and it can quickly become very dangerous especially combined with bigotry.

that and the BoS considers casualties to be collateral damage and unavoidable

building a giant robot to throw nukes at the institute is..effective I suppose. It’s definitely going to destroy the enemy which is their #1 prerogative. It also puts them in a solid position of power and control since who’s going to challenge the people with a giant nuke throwing robot eh?

it’s..strange. But I think it comes down to “the BoS are the only ones who should he allowed to use this because we know how to use it” which is arrogant and..questionable but so is most the BoS’ rhetoric.

but jokes aside Maxson hasn’t gone on a rampage across the Commonwealth with it. Although I’m sure there was collateral damage but to them that’s necessary to complete the mission. Is it moral? No but I think that’s how they think.

actually we know there was collateral damage because of all the civilians in the institute. But for the sake of being fair they aren’t the only organization who orders you to kill everybody regardless of whether or not they were implicit in the creation of synths.

Maxson is extremely charismatic and passionate while also being from a long line of family that has been literally defied by the BoS. It’s not at all surprising that he’s got such an extremist following. He brought the organization back to its “original mission” in a lot of the soldier’s ideas and yet he still seemingly holds onto some of Lyons’ ideals..

I think that’s where the random comment from soldiers “Maxson may seem compassionate but I can assure you the institute will face his wrath” comes from

we the audience kind of go “….um what” but in their eyes he is compassionate because he’s not completely disregarding civilians and such. Which is compassionate to the BoS I guess lmao? It’s not the norm so that’s why they take notice

I think Maxson is very confused and unsure of what the fuck he’s doing. He’s conflicted. Throw a 20 year old in a leadership position? Not their brightest move no matter how talented he is.

He just..does things. Hell his brain isn’t even done developing lmodgdkofh. 

sadly his idea of helping people only applies to people who he sees as people (synths = Enemy to him. No gray area) and he’s..I think we can all agree he’s going about it the wrong way lmfao. But he is genuinely trying to help people and he’s genuine (Discovering voice files was awesome) when he says he cares and that’s super interesting to me. 

Because he’s doing the exact opposite in a lot of ways. 

I don’t see him as a war hungry psychopath as much as behaving in a complete and utter militaristic manner. Most wars are fought in the same manner “if we attack them first they can’t attack us-“ or “it’s the greater good!” but it’s..counterproductive and creates a cycle of war and death.

And maybe there is some hunger for battle. He’s a 20 year old soldier who thinks he’s gonna swoop in and save everyone. Battle and glory and all that. It’s a toxic view but not unusual for military organizations or warrior cultures. 

There’s also the fact that the BoS outright discourages (or bans) any sort of free thought. It’s in their tenants you must listen to your Elder without question. Obey your superiors without question. Don’t trust others that aren’t in the BoS.

It’s so cultish..but when you look at that you can see how they became so extreme. They aren’t exposed to new ideas, just the same ones again and again. Which is why letting Wastelanders in and interacting with the locals is actually a good thing.

Sadly that means nothing  if they don’t change other aspects of their organization, their mindsets, or actually allow people to have these discussions.

Anyway yeah Maxson doesn’t know what the fuck he’s doing lfldhdfh.

Every villain is a hero in their own mind, eh? 

Even the US Army prior to the war thought they were doing good. But they weren’t. 

People who believe without a doubt they are doing good, that they can do no wrong, that the ends justify the means..are some of the most dangerous people in the world.

Anyway I have several posts in my drafts full of me discussing this shit so I’ll shut up now.

I just..it’s interesting to me. 

I wish Bethesda wouldn’t have dropped the ball on my Trash Man. He has so much potential and..this is probably my most controversial statement about him. I think there’s hope for him but certain things need to happen in order for change to occur. A lot of things. But god damn it I love a good, rough, messy storyline.