#important to remember that they are not omniscient narrators...for sure

[fideidefenswhore]

I think the problem with Chapuys is that the ambassadors aren't really seen as "people", if you will, with agency and biases like everyone else, but just disembodied voices narrating the story, and so for a long time historians and writers just accepted reports at face value, because there wasn't "thought" behind it. You should write a book on him as a response to the other one. You've got a lot of interesting observations.

Omg, you're too kind. But thank you ❤️

Yeah, I actually made a similar observation to you, elsewhere, expanded a bit:

Unfortunately, the practice of using Chapuys' dispatches as the emotional blueprint for all these historical people has become rather prevalent. I think he had credible insights at times, but what's sort of forgotten is that while many of his reports are of what these people said and did (according to, a noblewo/man, or Cromwell, or a physician of a nobleman, or a servant of a gentleman, or 'several reliable quarters', or COA or Mary themselves), many others are simply what he's assuming they thought or said or felt, and have no specific incident or quote or source given. One particularly egregious example informed a lot of subsequent portrayals of Thomas & George Boleyn, namely that upon the death of COA in Jan 1536, they "must have said to themselves, what a pity it was that the Princess had not kept her mother company", with the 'must' (ie, speculation, rather than an actual report of what any of his sources claimed to have overheard) omitted.

[To wit]:

"The King’s mistress had from the very beginning resolved that the Princess should act as her train-bearer, and that she would cause her and her mother all manner of annoyances; but considering that her singular beauty, goodness, and virtue, might possibly induce the King to change his purpose, and that if the Princess were to attend Court, and be seen there continually, she might daily gain the hearts and favour of the courtiers, she has not allowed her to come." Jan 1534, Chapuys to Charles V

[Also, literally a month after this report Anne does invite her stepdaughter to court, the first of three recorded attempts, so...awkward.]

Now, as 'resolved' is not 'said' (it's also interesting that his concern seems to have shifted from the report of the year prior, in which making Mary her trainbearer was the least of what Anne threatened: 'I hear she has lately boasted that she will make of the Princess a maid of honour in her household, that she may perhaps give her too much dinner on some occasion [ie, poison], or marry her to some varlet [a low-ranking servant of poor birth, Chapuys would later refer to Mark Smeaton as a 'varlet']), this would be a case of the 'mind reading' I meant; insofar as some explanation as to why Mary was sent to Princess Elizabeth's household, which was a satellite of the the King's court, rather than the centre of everything, the King's court itself. Granted, I think AB fearing her stepdaughter's popularity is more likely, but the likelier explanation overall would be that Mary was not invited to court for the same reason her own household was dissolved; she defied Henry's appointment and determination of her illegitimacy. Youth and beauty and envy thereof was hardly the determinate factor here, considering [...] that Margaret Douglas, of almost identical age and equal in beauty (according to their contemporaries), was one of AB's preeminent ladies and much in favour...the determinate difference was that MD and her mother acknowledged Anne as Queen, and, for obvious reasons, Mary and hers did not. Rich pickings for the narrative trope casting Mary as Snow White and AB as her wicked stepmother, tho......

[nohoperadio]

Imagine a far-future society, we don't know what's happened but the Earth is dead, I'm vaguely picturing them all living on space stations or something, there are only precious few species of plants and animals being kept alive, very few indeed, you couldn't quite count the remaining species on your fingertips but you could certainly check out all of their Wikipedia pages within the space of an hour. Future Wikipedia I guess, I mean whatever it is they have. No edible fruit or vegetables have survived at all, I'm not sure what they do for food, something futuristic presumably. Some kind of... future powder?

But there's this project that's been in the works for decades, they've figured out they can synthesize an apple. I don't know how that works, but the scientists have figured out a way. They're going to make an apple and this is like landing on the moon for them, everyone's insanely hyped about it, nobody's seen an apple for millennia... well see part of what's going on here is that the historiography of the time back when Earth still existed is irreparably bad now, it's super impressionistic because so little survived. And I guess partly because the Genesis story has been all blown out of proportion (there's more to it but that's a big part of it) these guys have a really exaggerated idea of the importance of apples to Earth humans, they basically imagine us eating apples all day long and worshiping apple gods and making apple art and all stuff like that. It's pretty silly but remember they have NO fruit or veg, they eat powder or whatever it was I said, they don't even have a rough concept of what "eating an apple" might be, like does it get you high for example? I bet they think it does, like a really spiritual special kind of high! They must have embellished it so much right? Gotten real carried away.

So like I say it's really hype, they're going to finally make an apple! A real one I mean, not like an approximation of what some scientists theorize an apple might be like, they've figured out how to definitely do it accurately (somehow, idk, just trust the omniscient narrator that they're doing it for real). But: they can only make one. Too much resources required or some shit, like I said this is their equivalent to the first moon landing except maybe more so, it's not a sustainable plan to reintroduce apple trees or something, they can only make one apple ever and that'll be it.

So as you can imagine, quite apart from all the scientific resource that's gone into this project, there's been a ton of resource invested into (not to mention endless public fascination and debate over) the question: who gets to eat the apple? It's a big deal! Everybody envies whoever's gonna eat it; most people also don't envy them. Since time immemorial, the essence of the apple has been defined by centuries and millennia of myth and speculation and storytelling holding together scattered fragments of a mysterious glorious past. Very soon, the essence of the apple will be defined by whatever this guy says it is, whatever the apple eater manages to communicate of the ineffable experience that will always be theirs alone. Humanity will demand a report, and the apple eater will have to be a poet of rarest genius at the very minimum to be trusted to deliver it, they hold the most privileged position maybe anyone will ever hold by being allowed to do this, and all that will remain of that briefest experience for all eternity will be their words. They're an instant prophet, no questions asked. I don't know about you, but if that was me I would definitely shit myself.

Well anyway forget about all that stuff. I was only thinking of this because it occurs to me, you're kind of like the apple eater of your own life, right? I mean nobody's making a big song and dance of it like those crazy apple space freaks, but it's true no?, you *pokes you in the face quite hard* with your highly specific soul positioned in your highly specific situation, that's only going to happen once, you're the only one who's ever going to know what that's like, assuming you aren't going to give some sort of big testimony, somehow. Only difference is like I say, no one really cares in your case, although actually I do sometimes, I hope that doesn't weird you out. I'm just saying imagine being asked the question! As if the answer really did matter! In theory anybody could just walk up to you and do that! I promise I won't ask you, if you promise you won't ask me.

[henleygod-fics]

3

We both sighed at the same time, not even an hour had passed and one person already knew. We took Todoroki with us, we would tell Nezu everything, during the way I could feel his gaze, it was very obvious, he wanted an explanation, but he wouldn't get one from me, I would be a grave until Nezu tells us what to do.

We arrived and Aizawa entered first, again, he would fill Nezu in and then have us enter.

-So you remember??- Todoroki finally spoke, I just ignored the question- Are you a villain?-

-Hey, don't think you can get information out of me, just keep quiet until Nezu speaks-

- Nothing you say will change what I heard... you're going to summon a killer... and when you do, we're going to have to finish him off-

- Don't even think about laying a hand on me...- the door opened, surprising us.

- Please come in- Nezu said with a warm smile.

We both looked at each other annoyed, but we went in, we sat in front of Nezu and on either side of Aizawa, he just kept quiet with his eyes closed while Nezu spoke, first of all he asked for confidentiality, Todoroki accepted and then he told all the information he had about my life and what had happened, being such an important secret I thought that keeping it hidden was the most important thing or that at least they would ask me, but I see that it is not like that, I could not object to anything, after all, the situation was not going to change, it is not like we had Slenderman to erase his memory. I was startled when I felt a touch on my shoulder, it was Aizawa, who had finally opened his eyes.

- Miss Tn???- Nezu called me, I had lost myself in my thoughts without realizing it.

- I'm sorry, I didn't hear-

-You can summon it- he said smiling calmly

- Yes??- I asked looking at him, then looking at Aizawa who nodded at me- I say yes, thanks.

- But do it here- Nezu ordered.

-How? I think it would be best to do it somewhere alone, where I can calm him down and tell him that they are not enemies-

-I'm sorry, but that's not going to be possible, I need to control and monitor everything, and it will also help us with the investigation, maybe we can somehow block when others want to enter the world-

- So we shouldn't go to the place where everything is controlled, I mean I don't know, maybe the laboratory??-

-My studio is always monitored, anything that happens in this place will be recorded, it can capture even the smallest detail-

-... okay, if you say so, but at least you should go away and sit or lie down on the floor-

- Huh? Why should we do that? - Todoroki said expressionlessly, although his voice sounded distrustful.

- Fine- Nezu replied, Aizawa was already on the floor lying down with his sleeping bag and when Nezu went to sit down Todoroki followed him. I sat down too and made sure I had the wall at my back, then I blew the whistle.

Omniscient narrator.

Suddenly everything went black, an immense dream invaded them, none of them knew why but they felt a dangerous presence everywhere, they heard growls and the smell of blood flooded them, they were shaking even though they were not cold, they were beginning to feel that they could not move their bodies, they were panicking, until they began to hear screams, that took them out of the trance, Tn was arguing with a dog, similar to a very large Siberian with a big and terrifying smile, full of blood, a great chill ran through all three of them when they saw how the beast watched them and how he wanted to get closer, Tn held him back while scolding him, after a while and two blows, the dog was sitting with his ears and head down.

-I'm sorry about that- Tn said to his teachers- Smile calm down, they took care of me until I called you, believe me- he spoke taking the dog's face.

Todoroki looked at him in disbelief, Aizawa distrustful and Nezu with an expressionless face, the three of them had felt the bloodlust that the beast gave off and now acted like an adorable dog by changing its form to that of a smaller one, however none of them said a word about it.

-We should go with the others, it's been too long since we left them alone- Aizawa said, remembering that he had other students.

-True, I had forgotten about them- said Tn taking Smile.

-I sent Midnight, so don't worry, even so, go quickly and think of a credible excuse on the way- Nezu answered calmly.

The three of them returned in a hurry, they were thinking what to say when they arrived, until Todoroki got ahead of them "the dog appeared in the same way as Tn, they thought they had some relation so they called her, in the end they realized that they did and Tn was able to remember a little more thanks to it" after seeing how Todoroki tried hard to help her, she no longer thought of him as a bad boy, now she liked him... just a little and she felt calm knowing that someone else was going to help her.

When they arrived, everyone had a bad face, it seemed that Tn had been a big problem, since since she arrived, the class seemed more upset than usual. After another big explanation and lie, this time from Todoroki, everyone went to observe Tn's evaluation from inside, since the space she would use was full of cameras and they would see with more security.

- Well the test is simple, you have to defeat 20 robots, then 2 giants will appear that will try to catch you, you can escape or knock them down, but keep in mind that what you do will not modify your score- said Aizawa from the speakers.

Tn stretched while waiting at the beginning for the bell to ring. Smile was with Aizawa, he didn't want to take care of him, but he had no choice, from time to time he growled at his students when they tried to get close or pet him, especially Mina and Denki, but giving him a cookie calmed him down, which made it more bearable, the only one who could get close without problem was Todoroki, who watched him more closely, he still couldn't believe how he had become a cute little animal, when until a few minutes ago it seemed like he was going to eat them alive. On the other hand, the bell had already been heard, which gave Tn room to go in search of the robots.

He arrived at the center of the city, everything looked silent, he closed his eyes and thought, maybe if he made noise the robots would come and he wouldn't have to search one by one.

-COME ONCE AND FOR ALL- he shouted with all his might, then he felt a great tremor, there were not only 20 robots, there were many more. Aizawa "forgot" to tell him that small detail.

- She's an idiot- Bakugou said as he watched her with his classmates on the screens

-Hey Bakugou, you shouldn't say that, she didn't know there were so many- Kirishima defended her.

- If she didn't know how many robots there were, she should just keep quiet and look for them on her own, that's what I mean. But it's obvious that she can't, forget it, she'll end up devastated, another useless extra.

- KACCHAN- Deku shouted, amazed and a little annoyed by how he called his new friend.

- Do you think it will be okay? - Uraraka asked.

-Where is All Migth?? Shouldn't he stop this if it gets dangerous??- Momo opined.

-I think they should stop him already, there are too many- said Tsuyu.

-Shut up, you shouldn't underestimate her- Aizawa scolded them.

- I agree with our teacher- Todoroki replied- if something bad happens they will interrupt, for now let's observe-

A click of his tongue from Bakugou echoed through the room.

-You're right, she must be strong, remembering how she got here she must be resistant to blows, also in the fight she had with the teachers she showed that she has great power, her gift is rare, but...- Deku began to whisper and write in his notebook, alienating some of his classmates and irritating others.

-SHUT UP, DAMN YOU!!- Bakugou yelled at him irritated.

- I-I'm sorry-

Everyone watched expectantly as the girl had remained still while all the robots went towards her, they thought she had paralyzed herself with fear. Deku was about to go help her, until Todoroki stopped him, Aizawa just watched, he knew she wasn't even a bit afraid, besides "the flea" (as he ended up calling him) wouldn't stay still and at this moment he was more than calm admiring his owner, but in case of doubt he kept his hand near the button to stop the test, in case Smile reacted.

Tn breathed deeply while her eyes were closed, she was trying to feel the ground and the vibrations to know how many robots she was facing, there were around 40 or 50 once she was ready she began to lift her hair little by little, she all seemed to float and at a bad moment she remembered (both her and her classmates and teacher) that in the end she never changed, her skirt also began to rise, as did her shirt and all her clothes, something that caught everyone's attention and especially two classmates, who were scolded and beaten by their classmates.

 She automatically stopped and her hair went down, the robots were already next to her, which only gave her time to cover herself with her arms, she was hit and thrown against a building, going through the glass and being out of sight of the others, worrying them, the only thing that could be seen was the thread of blood that had been left on the ground. All her classmates were surprised by letting out a gasp, even Aizawa got up worried from his seat.

-TA!!!- Deku shouted worriedly.

"That idiot..." Bakugou whispered.

- Sensei, we have to stop him- shouted most of his classmates except for Todoroki, Deku and Bakugou who remained silent watching the situation, waiting for a reaction from the other side.

- Sensei...- Todoroki spoke calmly although he felt tense about the situation.

Aizawa looked at Smile, who was quiet, but attentive. He sighed and sat back down.

-Not yet, watch- he ordered.

The thread of blood began to move towards the hole in the wall, after a few seconds several red spikes pierced 3 robots that had approached where Tn was and then disappeared again. The entire class was amazed, Aizawa just released the air he was holding and relaxed again. Tn came out of the hole and you could see that he had a cut on his left arm, where a lot of blood was dripping, he looked towards one of the destroyed robots next to him and with the protruding tip he cut his right hand, now he had two jets of blood flooding the floor.

-What are you doing??- Kirishima asked confused.

- Is he hurting himself? - Denki wondered.

- Why are you doing that???- Momo said.

Tn took the blood that was dripping down, gathered it together and transformed it into an oz, with it he cut the robots that were nearby without any difficulty, then he turned it into two katanas and began to cut the rest in large numbers.

 When he finished, he began to hear and feel the tremors of large steps, he calmly climbed to the terrace of a building, this time he used the stairs. Once up there he waited for them to arrive, he could see how big they were, for some reason they allowed him to escape from them, but he was not going to take away the fun of the day, he smiled and jumped towards one, he undid the katanas and let the blood drip down the robot's head entering through the holes, when the 2nd robot approached, he jumped towards the head of this one avoiding the blow that ended in the other, then before the 1st robot composed itself, he hardened the blood and abruptly withdrew it destroying his head. Everyone watched as he had fallen dry.

 Before the other robot could react, he surrounded the head with his blood, and as it hardened he swung, falling on a building and cutting off the head instantly. He looked around and once he made sure there were no more he went down swinging with his blood, when he hit the ground he sucked the blood again through the wound and once ready he tore part of his uniform to bandage himself, while he walked to where his class was.

Pov Tn.

I entered the room, it was a dark place, it was only lit by giant screens that showed different spaces and places in the city where I had finished off all the robots. Smile ran and jumped towards me, I took him in my arms and when I looked up I could see several companions with a big smile.

- That was great- said a pink-haired girl.

-You have two quirks??- a brunette spoke now.

- I need to know how both of them work, although I couldn't see the first one. Can you fly by any chance???- Deku asked, with a notebook in his hand.

- Can I see your underwear again? It's just that at first I couldn't see it well...- before I could finish the dwarf fell to the floor as if something had hit him. A floating glove showed me its thumb in support... I think the invisible girl doesn't have clothes. Still, I smiled at her thanking her. Thanks to this I was able to talk to them, and I became friends with some of them, if I can call them that, Asui, Iida, Uraraka, Denki, Kirishima, Momo and Mina, I already knew Deku.

After the exam and the talk we went to the dining room, Deku invited me to sit next to him, Uraraka and Iida were also there, we talked about all kinds of things, they explained their quirks to me, Iida has something like motors in his legs, which gives him momentum and speed, Uraraka can make things float or rather remove gravity from them, Deku... Well he evaded the questions every time, so I let him be, if he doesn't want to talk I'm not going to pressure him. While we were eating I could feel them watching me, but every time I turned around there was no one, until I found angry eyes watching me from their table, the ashen one didn't bother to hide it and when I made eye contact he growled and looked at me more intensely, I stuck my tongue out at him and turned around, ignoring his screams and those of his classmates who were trying to calm him down, my classmates looked at me surprised to see me acting like that out of nowhere, I just smiled at them and continued eating. The day went by normally, we had classes with the screamer called Present Mic or at least that's what they call him and with Midnight, the only thing that could be considered significant was that Bakugou tried to fight me all the time, but he was always stopped by his friends and the teachers. When it was time to leave I ended up showing him the middle finger and before he could do anything to me I ran away.

Todoroki was at the door of the terrace, waiting for me, since I don't think he's doing anything else...

- Hello...- I said doubtfully.

- Hello- he replied, then left a long, awkward silence.

- Well, bye- I said as I walked around him to head to my room.

- Can I ask you something??- he asked while standing in front of the door, preventing me from entering, Smile growled.

- Didn't you just do it??- He looked at me even more seriously, I laughed- I'm sorry, it's just a habit, I always fight like this with my family- Smile laughed at that, he remembered the old fights with Jeff or Toby, Todoroki hearing it gave him the shivers.

- Did the assassins teach you that??- he asked seriously, although his tone sounded disgusted, Smile stopped laughing and stared at him annoyed, I caressed him.

- Hey! I understand that you don't like them or that you hate them even if you don't know them, but they are the people who raised me, they were with me since I can remember, supporting me and educating me... In their own way, but what I mean is that even if I don't accept what they do or how they behave doesn't mean that I don't love them, I love them, so don't come bothering me with them, if you don't like the idea just don't bring it up, I won't tolerate any expressions of disgust towards them- I said seriously, he sighed.

- Look, I'm not here to look for trouble, but I want you to know that I'm here to be a hero, we're all here to protect people from villains, and among them are murderers.

- And you say you're not coming to look for trouble? - I asked with a raised eyebrow.

- I know you don't want to be a murderer, but... What are you going to do when they come? I don't think you want to hurt them, but the people here won't stay still. What will happen when your friends have to face your family? Whose side are you going to take?

- They won't. I agreed to stay here with the intention of becoming stronger, my dream is to be able to end their damn obsession, but just as it is natural for you to help, for them it is to kill. It is their nature so it is not easy. The only thing I want to achieve is to become someone powerful that can stop them, my plan is that the moment they appear, before they start attacking I will leave, I will give myself in exchange for them not hurting anyone, once home they will surely want to lock me up so that I do not run away again, but I will be capable enough to avoid it and do much more than that- he looked at me expressionlessly, I think I even understand Slenderman more than him. He stayed still for a while looking at me, until he sighed and ran away from the door.

- I have a lot to think about, but I don't want anyone to get hurt either. If you fail and we face them, I don't know who will win, but I know there will be many injuries and possible deaths. When they come, I will help you. - I just nodded, I didn't expect much, but this is something. - Well, I have to go. - he said, turning around and going down the stairs.

- Todoroki! - he turned around- I know you're not doing it for me, but thank you. It's hard to accept that being a hero you have to accept a villain on your side, plus you're helping me, you're very kind- I said before leaving, I wasn't going to wait for his answer, I think that was enough, I didn't need an acceptance or to start a fight, but when I closed the door I could hear a "you're not a villain" from him, which made me smile unconsciously. In the end I ended the day thinking about what I would do to avoid a disaster when my family arrives.

[postgameroutesix]

ok rewatched the first hunger games movie + took some notes on what stood out to me while i was watching - not as developed as they will be later because im really exhausted and probably should have saved this for tomorrow but. regardless:

the opening, for not being the same as the book, is REALLY good + immediately instils the divide between the attitudes of the capital and the districts. prim’s crying over her nightmare about being chosen directly parallels her crying over katniss taking her place. also the foreshadowing of katniss singing the same lullaby she later sings to rue as she dies……

i dont remember madge being cut out? which is frustrating - her relationship to katniss and her giving katniss the mockingjay pin is a subtle but salient symbol of rebellion, esp considering what the pin becomes for katniss, and one of our firsts. i think prim being the one to give it to katniss holds a lot of weight of course and, if not madge, she is the obvious choice. the pin becomes symbolic of their relationship and the gifting of it still emerges from an act of (unconscious) rebellion. it also works as a replacement especially due to how mockingjays come to resemble rue, furthering the parallels between the two for katniss. i wish they hadnt cut madge because i think she’s an important character w what she represents, but if anyone had to replace her giving katniss the pin, prim makes the most sense

the contrast between effie and the residents of district 12 is really well done

i forgot they cut out the baker (peeta’s father) speaking to katniss + giving her the cookies as well…. annoying. again i get that, like madge, hes more of a subtle character but his role is still important….

rue’s introduction in the training having her steal cato’s knife w/o anyone noticing her and establishing instant fondness from katniss + thresh….really good :(

the addition of a scene of haymitch watching a capitol family + scowling was good

they cut out a lot of katniss + peeta’s early relationship which is a weird choice? because that of course sets up what peeta says in his interview + their relationship in the games

when the anthem plays + shows the dead tributes they are not referred to by name only by district. huge example of the dehumanisation + stripping of identities

linking back to rue’s introduction during the training: seems like they had her steal cato’s knife as foreshadowing for them having her be the one (instead of katniss) to take the bow from glimmer

they dont spend enough time on the development of katniss + rue’s relationship…theres 5 minutes if that dedicated to it leading up to her death. rue’s death is of course still impactful but rushing that development and cutting out so much is a disservice i think

im not entirely sure my full thoughts on them replacing district 11 sending katniss bread with showing an overt riot in 11 - on one hand, it takes advantage of the more omniscient perspective of the movie, but its also another example of the movie cutting out these more “subtle” symbols of rebellion (like madge, like the baker, like the avox) which is frustrating because those are extremely important as a build up eg

they gave cato a whole monologue in his final moments which gives a LOT of additional depth to his character and to the mindset of the careers + how poisoned said mindset has been by the capital via propaganda….if only they could have allowed thresh to have all the lines he already had in the book as well

i do think they really effectively took advantage of the movie's omniscient perspective to show what is occurring outside the arena during the games in parts, though i also think the loss of katniss' narration wasnt made up for in places also (largely regarding her + peeta's relationship, but also generally)

[shitmanwhyamistillhere]

i'm gonna be real with y'all, ever since Hinamatsuri Event, I have Neeeeeever taken an event story in Project Sekai at complete face value.

Call it Umineko PTSD or what, but ColoPale proved they were willing to write characters as being unreliable narrators in that event

Which is why I find it very important to remember who is the focus of each event/card story - sure there will be moments where we experience things Omnisciently, but there are also moments where you can TELL

something is going thru another character's head, and they're not the focus, so we DON'T GET TO SEE HOW THEY'RE THINKING. So like, how much different is that character's PoV from the focus character's??

Umineko and the fucking Knox Decalogues have POISONED ME, I swear

[none-ofthisnonsense]

Rewatching Headless: Episode 1 - Part 1

This is going to be quite filled with spoilers (foreshadowing, my dearest love), so it’s all under the cut!

Also, fair warning to long-time Shipwrecked lovers: I have only watched A Tell-Tale Vlog and Kissing in the Rain (and, naturally, Headless), but not Poe Party nor the Case of the Gilded Lily. Don’t expect any references to that. Sorry. (Also: I’m not quite through Unsolved Babesteries yet)

First of all, I love Diedrich’s song. It’s so creepy and funny and joyful and perfectly sets the mood for the rest of the series. It’s also very informative - right from the start, we get informations on the setting through it, and it fills us with suspense. This is done in two ways: first, we see someone running through the woods like their life depends on it (let’s be honest... It does seem like their life ACTUALLY depends on it.) The sign for the town says “Welcome to Historic Sleepy Hollow, Home of the Headless Horseman”. Very informative, too: if you missed what Diedrich was saying, here’s a reminder of where you are and what the story revolves around. That being Headless.

“Where a ghost or a witch might give you a follow”... I mean. They’re not wrong. Matilda’s definitely a witch, we meet other witch characters, and Verla’s status is still undecided but I’m going to classify her as a ghost. A real one. A corporeal one. I don’t know. That’s why I love Shipwrecked.

Diedrich is the narrator. That’s established right from the start. A bard, to tell the story. But we also learn immediately that he’s visible to the other characters (and that he can see them too) (or maybe just Ichabod? It isn’t obvious to a first-time viewer. Again, why I love Shipwrecked.) which makes us rethink what we knew: oh, this is not an omniscient narrator - since he’s living in the story - and he isn’t a character telling the story in hindsight. Stupidly important things.

Ichabod!!! He’s introduced right from the start, love this little guy. (Sean does a wonderful job, too, capturing the uncertainty that’s so fundamental to Ichabod.) He looks around, like he’s not too sure what’s happening - he’s like the viewer at this point. He’s thinking, “what is this weird thing I definitely did not sign up for? Whoa. Did not expect there to be a bard - okay, I’m going to try to roll with it.” And he does! Ichabod doesn’t quite regain his composure completely, but he tries to compliment Diedrich and get him to move on - “Interesting”.

“Again, I just needed directions. To the Old Dutch House?” Several things here. First: he’s been listening to this song before, at the same time as us, and instead of answering, Diedrich took up his bard role. And “the Old Dutch House” (fair warning: I’m not American. I’ve studied some American history but I am FAR from knowledgeable on this subject. This is what I remember from lessons years ago.) also shows us - “old”. This is a story with roots in the past. And “Dutch” - if I’m not wrong, the Northwest of the US was colonised by the Dutch (ex. New York being New Amsterdam at first), so we know that this is in that part of the country.

Diedrich being so disappointed :(( don’t worry, you’ll get to sing some more!

“You’ll just be in a cursed bog” - this is the second time magic is mentioned. It seems like it was more than just poetic license - something is off here, in this place. (I also love the “cursèd?” reminding us that this is happening “live” to the narrator! He doesn’t know either!)

Ichabod gazing uncertainly in the direction indicated - but also looking sort of resolute. Exactly how he acts during the rest of the show! God, I love character introductions. Can you tell?

Ooh. Mysterious metal piece, beautifully decorated. Could this be... foreshadowing?

The “[squelching]” (thank you MKW for your lovely subtitles. THEY ARE SO USEFUL OH MY GOODNESS.) and “cursed bog” sign reminding us that, yes, this is a mystery, but it’s also a comedy. And it’s also what makes Shipwrecked so appealing: I’m pretty sure Ichabod’s reaction is what anyone would do in this situation. He may be the main character, but he’s also just a funny guy.

Oh no. Oh no he’s scared. Oh no whose house did he just barge into. Oh no no no no no who is this woman in here. Hopefully he didn’t mess up.

DOUFFE THE DRAMATICS.

Oh no poor Ichabod is startled. It was all going fine before seeing this terrifying landlord! He tries to regain some sort of countenance and gain some little favour in her eyes - because apparently this new landlady is keen on assiduity and punctuality. (Then again, it’s her fault the house is in the middle of a BOG.)

We get a little more info on Ichabod here: he’s a teacher, going to work in the Sleepy Hollow middle school. So he’s going to be here for a while.

“I’m a man.” “You’re smaller in person.” (aside: I love Douffe’s voice. It’s perfect. I wish I could listen to it on loop for hours.) Welp, there goes that effort - she is shutting down his efforts, but Ichabod isn’t going to let that bring him down and responds with a “thank you”.

(Spoilers for Episode 8 here) Douffe is already shown as hacker, in a moment most of us probably forget but in hindsight is foreshadowing. The action is already being set up and we’re barely 3 minutes in!

Very clear rules that give us an idea of who Douffe is - she does not care. Not remotely. Not even the smallest little bit. She’s a businesswoman.

She’s also not very reasonable. She knows that rent is already very high and raising it even more. Ouch - and now a worry starts to set in: are all inhabitants of Sleepy Hollow like this, or just her? Diedrich seemed fine, but maybe after all he’s not...

Personal check or cash - a reminder that although this is a modern setting, this town is still stuck in the past. And we’re here to discover why.

[I’m going to stop commenting on every little thing now because I’ve spent 40 minutes on this and we’re not even 4 minutes in.] “Get a roommate” - THE PREMISE FOR THE ENTIRE THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (The “and they were roommates” fic Sinéad wrote that started it all.)

Diedrich is back!!! And Ichabod apparently took that advice to heart. (Who wouldn’t when your landlord essentially doubled your rent.)

Diedrich breaking the fourth wall again. I feel you Ichabod, but he’s doing his job! The Bard Union has very strict rules.

SOMEONE’S INTERESTED. WHO.

Quick aparté: I love the filming. And the framing. Just everything about the visuals in this - they really mark Shipwrecked apart from others!

“Colonial Drugs N’ Stuff”. Again: juxtaposition of old and new! I’m sensing a theme.

A mirror. In it we can see Ichabod entering the shop and gazing around. A candelabra is also visible, among other things. (Do I have to mention old and new again?)

MATILDA!!!!!! Now we’ve met 3 characters from Sleepy Hollow. (Ichabod and Rip Van Winkle don’t count.) (Also, yes, she’s my favourite character. With Brom. They’re both my favourites.)

“Good for storing the still-beating hearts of your enemies. Or your inhaler.” Matilda’s been here approximately 3 seconds and already knows what’s up. And she seems to embrace this local spookiness - if the way she’s dressed is any indication. And the way she speaks. And the shop. Look, she’s a witch, okay?

Ah. My favourite quote from Episode 1. “I thought this was a drugstore.” “I can put drugs in it.” Said so nonchalantly, too - Matilda is an enigmatic character who doesn’t seem fazed by anything.

Kat’s here! And no one is going to be surprised when Ichabod inevitably falls in love with her, if the way she’s introduced is any hint. He’s already got a crush after just a few seconds of seeing her, the dear little man!

Quick reminder that this is not a romance movie, or even a story focussed on romance. It may be there, but it’s a side plot. And Matilda reminds us of that. (Also, the only one there not under the spell, which probably says something about her)

Matilda... I love you but... Quick judgement much? (Though this exudes SO MUCH sibling energy. [Coughs in Episode 8.] Speaking as an older sister.

“Ichabod Crane, huh? Sounds made up.” That’s because it is. Not only because, as Ichabod so helpfully informs Kat, all names are made up, but because he’s a fictional character, and the viewer knows this and recognises it as the cheeky little fourth wall joke it is.

Shipwrecked doing their research I see! There’s probably something with the name but I don’t know about it right now. (Feel free to rb and add, or reply if you have anything on this.)

Spooky music. Spooky speech. This wants to creep me out and it’s doing a very good job of it. And the doubt around it - “that’s what they’re going with”. There’s something going on here, and I’m not sure it’s entirely good. I’m also getting tensed up and worried. Shipwrecked is doing a great job. I’m hooked now if I wasn’t before. Now I’m like Ichabod, and he’s asking all the right questions I want answered: “Wait, really? What do you think happened?” His curiosity very much reflects the viewer’s. And Kat leans into it...

...until she doesn’t. And she abruptly makes us return back to reality - right. Okay. I’m not going to know now - but there’s definitely something to know.

“Not everything that happens here is the result of some curse.” (Again: spoiler alert!) Yeah, but a lot of it is... it’s almost too much to be a coincidence. You might need to rethink your worldview there, Kat. (Though I think it’s a wonderful way of showing how prosaic Kat is, after all the loss she’s had to go through - Kat is probably the main character the most rooted in reality, and who doesn’t want to let go of the comfort of knowing things really exist and can be proven. [Is this why she’s attracted to a SCIENCE teacher? It’s funny how Ichabod, whose whole deal is experiments and method, is so ready to suspend his disbelief, while Kat - who we don’t yet think has any reasons to be sus - is unwilling to let herself go.] And yet, when she meets Headless, we can see such a childish wonder in her eyes - because her mother’s dead, but now a piece of her has come back, and if that’s gone back, what else can return? Kat learns to hope again.)

Ichabod is so achingly hopeful it almost hurts, because it’s clear from the very first moment that he may be into her, but she isn’t necessarily into him - as she so violently reminded him a moment ago by reminding him of the role of an adult who can “do what he wants”. She’s also very cynical, and it shows.

Aww, Ichabod is so cute and naive! But the viewer also thinks like him at this point - he’s the only one we’ve been following so far.

He tries, he tries, he thinks she’s okay with him asking her out - and then it’s all for nothing and she’s gone. That must’ve hurt. But it’s not the first deception he’ll face in Sleepy Hollow. [my wording is very intentional here.]

And she’s going, but there’s some quiet, hopeful piano music - maybe it’s not right now, but we can think he’ll eventually get there. Or is the music sad instead of happy, and he’s gotten rejected?

This is so, so good. The unfinished sentence - an echo of Rip Van Winkle’s screams in the start -, the vanishing - linked to his sudden disappearance, turning around and seeing something you didn’t expect - Rip Van Winkle again - all wonderful stuff.

But no! It’s a false alarm! And we’re back to humour, but the memory of before is still just as haunting.

And that’s where I’m concluding my analysis for today! More later.

[frodo-with-glasses]

This is a post about Ghân-buri-Ghân and the Woses, or the Wild Men.

Full disclosure: When I was a kid, I pretty much skipped this part. I was already getting very lost with the logistics of the Rohirrim’s movement, and I was very impatient for Merry and Pippin to be reunited already and Frodo and Sam to be done with the quest and back on home turf. I was having a hard enough time telling the difference between Gondor and Rohan (every other race in Middle Earth only gets one country that’s very important, but for the most boring race of them all I’m supposed to keep track of two?? preposterous), and having yet another group of humans pop up out of nowhere just to disappear after half a chapter left me baffled and annoyed.

After all, the Wild Men are pretty much disconnected from everything else in the story, aren’t they? They aren’t related to any of the characters we’ve met already. They’re not personal friends with any members of the Fellowship, or even friends with the friends of the members of the Fellowship. They have very little to do with Rohan and Gondor, and nothing at all to do with elves or dwarves or ents or hobbits or wizards or anything else that Little Me thought were the Important Parts of the story. If you took your cue from the movies, this opinion would only seem reinforced: the Riders of Rohan reach Minas Tirith with no complications greater than a Mumakil, and the Wild Men aren’t mentioned even once. If you didn’t know better, you might think the Wild Men are little more than an extraneous detour.

But it’s exactly because they seem extraneous that I think we need to pay them extra attention. Tolkien is not a careless storyteller; he’s long-winded, for sure, and has a knack for descriptions in excruciating detail, but he’s not careless. Every word, every sentence, every line of dialogue and narration and poetry exists in the story for a reason. If Tolkien didn’t have to put the Wild Men in the story—if they weren’t strictly necessary to the plot, save to solve one problem that (let’s be honest) kinda looks like it was invented just so they could fix it—that means he wanted to put them there. He wanted them there, because he wanted to tell us something.

I think it behooves us to listen.

So what is Tolkien trying to say? I have no idea. The man’s dead, and I can’t ask him. But the message I’m getting here has two parts:

1. The World Is Big

If nothing else, the Woses serve as a reminder that Middle Earth is much, much bigger than even Lord of the Rings makes it out to be. That’s saying something, because LotR isn’t a small story! This is a grand legend that stretches across nations, from one horizon to the other in an epic trek, and yet it still fails to capture Middle Earth in its every detail. Entire nations and kingdoms get lost in the wash, or are only mentioned in passing, and some names we only see in the maps at the back of the book.

Remember, Tolkien’s framing device for LotR is that it was an eyewitness account, a history written by the hobbits and supplemented with accounts from their friends. The POV characters we’ve had so far—if I’m remembering correctly—are Frodo, Sam, Merry, Pippin, Fatty Bolger, Bilbo, Aragorn, Gimli, and a sort of omniscient narrator that seems to represent “hearsay” or “local gossip”. If any of these characters didn’t witness something and come back to report it, then it didn’t make it into the story. If they didn’t go someplace, or meet some people, and come back to tell about it, then it didn’t make it into the story.

But just because the unnamed peoples of Middle Earth don’t get into the histories doesn’t make them any less important. Just because we don’t learn their names doesn’t mean they didn’t suffer under the fear of Sauron, or rejoice when he was defeated. Just because we don’t know them doesn’t make them any less…well, for lack of a better word, human, or any less important.

The War of the Ring mattered just as much to the Wild Men as it did to Gondor or Rohan or the Shire. Because the War of the Ring was about saving their world too.

2. A Treatise on Treatment of Native Peoples

Again, I’m only trying to reiterate what I can see of Tolkien’s opinion in this passage. I happen to agree with a lot of what he says, but we’re talking about him, not me.

The Woses are, as far as I can tell, the closest thing to an indigenous or native people group in the southern region of Middle Earth. Obviously they must have come from somewhere—anyone who’s read the Silmarillion could probably fill me in on that—but Ghan-buri-Ghan says himself that “Wild Men live here before the Stone-houses; before Tall Men come up out of Water”. The Wild Men preceded the settlement of Gondor, and inhabited the land even before the Numenorians; they were here First, and still they remain.

So, how does Tolkien portray this native people group? Well, the first thing he does is to say—hilariously and pointedly—that the Wild Men are anything but stupid. Ghan warns, in his broken speech, that Mordor’s forces outnumber the Rohirrim, and Eomer challenges this assertion—“how do you know that?”—to which Ghan says, if I may paraphrase, “boi I’m not a child I can count as well as you can”. The first point made is that, though the Wild Men may seem ugly and primitive and are clad only in grass skirts, they are as shrewd as the tacticians of Rohan, and maybe even more.

The next thing that happens is that Ghan strikes a deal: he and his people will lead the Rohirrim to Minas Tirith by long-forgotten roads, and in exchange, the men of Rohan must battle to drive off the Darkness so that the Wild Men may go back to their lives in peace. Of course, this arrangement benefits both parties; both are in danger, and both have a common enemy. To see the end of the Darkness would be infinitely valuable to them both.

This is fascinating to me, because you can’t really say that one party here was “using” the other, or that one benefited at the other’s expense. Yes, the Rohirrim gained the guidance of the Wild Men, which furthered their goal; but in the end, it only put them one step closer to possible death on the battlefield against a great Enemy. Yes, the Wild Men get to sit back and watch the Horse-Men risk their lives in open war, but if they should fail, what then? By helping Rohan, they are establishing themselves as an enemy of Sauron; whether Ghan realizes it or not—and personally, I think he does—this single act of defiance is putting a target on the backs of his people, should the Enemy emerge victorious. Sure, they can hide in the forests for a while—as long as there are forests. But not forever. I think that’s why Ghan takes his stand now; he knows there might not be another chance.

Ghan has established that he is shrewd, straightforward, and honorable. He even vows that he will lead the Rohirrim himself, and that they may kill him if he steers them wrong; he’s that willing to stake his life on his word. But when Theoden promises to handsomely reward Ghan for his help and his faithfulness, Ghan only asks for one thing in return: “if you live after the Darkness, then leave Wild Men alone in the woods and do not hunt them like beasts anymore”.

There’s something in me that kinda…twinges, when I read this. Like I’m half-remembering a bolt of anger from Baby Me before I checked out of this passage entirely. How dare this book imply that these kind, noble horse-people would be so cruel and barbaric as to hunt other human beings like animals? Wasn’t this the same people whose king accepted Merry like a son, and who provided Gandalf with the best horse in the world? These are the GOOD guys! They wouldn’t do something like that! The book doesn’t know what it’s talking about, clearly. I wish I could get back to the hobbits again.

But now that I’m older, I think it’s more telling that Rohan isn’t spotless and blameless in this transaction. They have wronged the Wild Men in the past; out of ignorance, maybe, and out of prejudice, perhaps, and out of fear, almost certainly. We all fear what is foreign to us and what we don’t understand. But Ghan is putting that aside for the moment. Ghan chooses to extend forgiveness. For once, his people and Rohan face a greater evil, and they unite against a common enemy. All of the sudden, Rohan has an opportunity to make amends for all their wrongs, by “driving away the bad air and darkness with bright iron”.

I’m sure I don’t have to tell you about the historical treatment of native people groups in our real world. The archetypal example, of course, is the European settlers and the native tribes of North America; but we see the same thing in Central and South America too, and that’s not even getting into the British Empire’s other affairs in Egypt and India and China and Oceania. I could talk about the Spanish conquistadors; I could talk about the Dutch in South Africa and apartheid. But it goes even further back than that. It’s what the Roman Empire did to the Germanic peoples of Gaul; what the Islamic Empire did to the entire Middle East and much of Northern Africa; what the Babylonians and Persians and the Mesopotamian superpower of the week did to their vassal states on a regular basis. Standard practice in Babylonia was to invade a place and immediately ship all the smart, strong, and wealthy people off to Babylon to be assimilated, leaving behind the weak, poor, unlearned, and destitute to till the land and keep their heads down. Can’t have a rebellion if everyone’s too dumb and starving to organize it.

(Incidentally, the Roman Empire is what gave us the word “barbarian”; the speech of the Germanic peoples they conquered was unintelligible to them and sounded like “bar-bar-bar”, so they named them after it. The fact that the word they coined now refers to a ruthless, stupid, uncouth person should tell you a lot about the Roman Empire’s opinion of these folks.)

Anyway, the point is that throughout history, there’s always been a pattern: up comes this people group who’s smarter and more advanced than anybody else, and they think that gives them free rein to go wherever they want, do whatever they want, and use, abuse, and extort the people they see as “beneath” them. The Romans had figured out indoor plumbing by the time of Christ, and they thought they were such hot stuff that they took over the Mediterranean and taxed the living daylights out of them. (Some estimates put the tax rate at about 90%. 90!! Imagine keeping only a tenth of your paycheck every month. I know it already feels like that, but still!)

We’d do well to address the question that Baby Me probably thought when I read this for the first time: “Why can’t the Wild Men just be Men of Rohan?” Why can’t they put on real clothes, and pick up spears and swords, and get on horses and ride into battle and make a real contribution? Why do they insist on going back to their primitive lives? Perhaps part of the reason the Men of Rohan felt justified in hunting the Wild Men is because they saw them as more crude and less advanced people; “they live in the forests, clad only in grass, hunting and sleeping under the stars like dangerous wild animals, and therefore must be treated as such”.

But let me ask you a question: Aren’t the people of Rohan primitive too? Aragorn describes them as “unlearned, not writing any books but singing many songs”; how is that any different from the songs that may be passed down by Ghan-buri-Ghan’s people? Isn’t Rohan crude and simple in its own way, at least in comparison to some others? Just because they build houses of wood and speak with fair, beautiful speech doesn’t mean they are better than those who don’t. If Rohan had the right to treat the Wild Men as they wished—because, as “civilized people”, they were so much smarter and more advanced—then Saruman had the right to treat Rohan as he wished—because, as a Wizard, he was so much smarter and more advanced.

I want you to get this. If Rohan does not check itself here and humbly accept the Woses as equals, then Rohan is no better than Saruman.

Thankfully, Rohan does pass the test. One of Theoden’s greatest traits is his humility, and it serves him well here. A deal is struck, a path is cut, and the Wild Men make their contribution and disappear into the forests, with only a lingering portent that the wind is changing, and maybe the times with it. The book says that they were “never to be seen by any Rider of Rohan again”; by which I take it that Rohan’s side of the promise was upheld, and the Wild Men lived on, in their own ways, unmolested, in the Druadan Forest until the end of time.

I don’t have a way to end this, but maybe that’s appropriate to the subject matter; like the Wild Men themselves, this post will appear out of nowhere and disappear just as quickly as it came. I just think the Woses are fascinating—both for in-universe and meta reasons—in spite of, and perhaps because of my initial annoyance all those years ago.

We will return to your daily crack post tomorrow LOL

[inky-duchess]

Writing Theory: Writing Children

I for one do not like children. They're small and completely irrational at some times. But children are often a intregal part of stories, especially if they are the ones telling the story. So how can we write the little buggers?

Do's & Don'ts

Don't make child wise and omniscient. It's creepy and just plain stupid.

Don't try make the kids cute. Forced cuteness is sickening and will no doubt bring up some annoying memories for your older readers.

Don't treat child characters as if they're stupid. Kids can be pretty aware of things going on around them. They're not stupid.

For the Love of God, no baby talk.

Do give them a personality. They are still people. You have to give them characterization on par with that of those around them.

They should have their own goals, wants, tastes and opinions. Kids have a lot of opinions.

Treat them as people rather than objects. They are not there to be passed around and looked at. They are kids.

Children through the years

Children are dynamic, they are constantly changing as they age. They will begin to grow traits as they age, grow a personality and become people.

1-2 Years Old

Children are beginning to learn basic skills as walking and talking by age 1. At age 2, called the Terrible Twos, children are easily excitable, speaking coherent sentences (though they may need encouragement) and able to create chaos. They are able to begin learning to tools like forks and cups but they will not be coordinate just yet. As kids are still getting to grips with their emotions, they are likely to have mood swings, ranging from happy one minute to pulling out your hair the next.

3-4 Years Old

Kids at this age can start to take care of themselves. They are dress themselves, go to the bathroom by themselves and generally keep themselves together to a certain point. They will begin to understand and follow directions. They will be able to speak complete sentences and understand most words. They will ask a lot of questions. They can be very imaginative at this age, likely to exaggerate. They will try to copy friends and older siblings.

5-6 Years Old

Children at this stage are more active and sure on their feet. They can play more elaborate games, actively interested in hobbies. They can safely use things like scissors, are able to be left in charge lf their appearance and tie their own shoelaces.

7-8 Years Old

Children at this age will cease to exaggerate and embellish stories. They are better at making friendships but are likely to get into spats. They are beginning to understand the social world around them and are more interested it it before. They will have formed a distinct personality at this stage and will use it. They are more independent, able to look after themselves.

9-11 Years Old

Children at this stage will begin to edge into the horror known as being a teenager. They will begin to learn life skills, able to take care of themselves and will begin to think they know it all but they are still kids. They still need supervision even if they think they don't. At this age, they will begin to gain an independent view and opinion of things. The whole social imagine problem will begin to become important to them, they will consider friends and imagine as important factors in their lives.

Kids as Narrators

Though children can be a font of truth sometimes, they often have a way of muddling facts and being confused by certain aspects of the story they are not versed in. Using the age ranges above, you have a clear idea of what aspects kids aren't saavy in yet. Children narrators are often thought of as one of the kinds of unreliable narrator and they can be, depending on the age and maturity. But remember, most children do not intend to muddle things or elaborate and most certainly narrate what they think people want to hear. (though sometimes it can be true).

[aye-write]

An aye-write Guide to Unreliable Narrators!

Unreliable Narrators are a storytelling staple, and they make for deeply compelling characters and narratives, but how exactly do we go about crafting an unreliable narrator - and an effective one at that?

This guide will hopefully go some way to helping you figure that out. But first, some basics? 

.-.-.

What is an unreliable narrator? 

An unreliable narrator is an untrustworthy storyteller, most commonly seen in first-person narratives. They can be either intentionally deceptive, or unintentionally, but unreliable narrators usually force the reader to question if the narrator is credible.

.-.-.

Why use one? 

There are loads of reasons to use an unreliable narrator! Here are just a few: 

Creates intrigue

Creates suspense 

Fantastic for immersion 

Enforcing an idea of suspicion or distrust 

Helps us understand the character better

Adding “reread value” - to go back and spot the clues and hints

Gives the reader a more active role in interpreting the story - having to work out what’s credible and what’s not

Impact perception on other characters

Develop theme

Set up plot twists

Keep the POV’s character’s secrets even from the reader

.-.-.

Is EVERY narrator an unreliable narrator? 

There is a lot of debate if you can ever have a truly reliable narrator, and a lot of it will come down to what kind of narrator you choose to have. Third person POV is much more likely to be reliable - but you could argue a close third can be more unreliable than an omniscient third. For the purposes of this guide, we’ll be looking more in-depth at first person POVs as they’re where unreliable narrators can really shine!

We could spend hours debating the idea that every narrator is unreliable. Everyone has been guilty of misremembering how a situation went down, of twisting an account of an event to make yourself seem better, and the same can be said for narrators. Ultimately, everyone has been moulded by their own personal experiences and circumstances. Everyone looks at life through their own personal lens. So how likely is it really that you’re going to get an objective view of something, especially when so much of the story is coloured by the character’s own take? 

These are good questions to ask yourself when you’re considering an unreliable narrator. Think about something like a break-up - both people involved in the relationship may have a different opinion about why they broke up. 

Partner 1: We broke up because they never did their fair share of the household chores and I was tired of picking up the slack. 

Partner 2: We broke up because they were wound too tightly, nagged too much, and could never relax. I felt controlled. 

So who’s telling the truth? Well, both these characters feel they are telling the truth and both sides of the story might be valid for different reasons. But the real truth is most likely somewhere in the middle. 

If nothing else, remember this:

There are three sides to every story - yours, mine, and the truth. 

.-.-.

Pitfalls of Unreliable Narrators

It’s important to remember that while an unreliable narrator can be a fantastic tool for your story, they must be handled with care. The fact of the matter is that not every reader is going to like an unreliable narrator. 

Here are some things to consider if you do choose to write one: 

Make sure, above all else, that you know the truth even if the characters do not - it can be easy to get lost among a character’s version of events and it can create plotholes 

If not signposted or hinted at well enough, the reveal of an unreliable narrator may fall flat - ruining your hard work 

Unreliable narrators may often come across as unlikable without meaning to - take care to make your character compelling 

Readers may also struggle to relate to an unreliable narrator if the character acts in a way that is hard for them to relate to/hard to even sympathise with

You cannot solely rely on a reader’s willing suspension of disbelief when using an unreliable narrator to tell a story - make it make sense with the context of the story

Clues and subtext are important here, but different readers pick up on different things, which means some clues run the risk of falling flat.

.-.-.

How can I mitigate these risks? 

Practice! Try writing shorter scenes from different POVs on the same event, thinking how each character would react and how/why it would be different from another’s. 

Make the character do something unreliable early on in the book as a signpost - even if it’s something small like a white lie - as a way for a reader to look back and notice “Ah, now it makes sense!”

Keep it consistent! Even if they’re unreliable, the character will still operate on a set of internal rules or traits 

Keep a balance between sowing doubts and the overall story 

Construct the whole experience like a puzzle for the readers to solve and keep them engaged

.-.-.

Types of Unreliable Narrators (And Examples!)

Unreliable narrators will generally fall into two categories: intentional or unintentional: narrators who are aware of their deception, and narrators who unconsciously alter the truth. 

There is also an argument for a third category - narrators who are honest but lack important details. This kind of narrator is not unreliable on purpose, but simply lacks a greater understanding of what is going on. They may simply be naïve or have a unique/unorthodox outlook on the world. 

Let’s look a little deeper at this. We have our two (or three) categories, but we can break those down further. Let’s look at them, and some examples of them, now!

1. Children A narrator of a young age, their perspective of an adult situation will be different as it is filtered through their limited understanding/experience

Examples: Jack from Room, Scout from To Kill a Mockingbird, Huckleberry Finn from Huckleberry Finn

2. Outsiders A narrator that is, essentially, different from other characters. Perhaps a misfit, someone who is alienated, or a person from a different social standing, race, class, culture, or gender. 

Keep in mind that the way someone is raised will affect their perspective - their version of events will be skewed according to their culture.

Examples: Alex from A Clockwork Orange, Chief Bromden from One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Nelly from Wuthering Heights, Invisible Man from Invisible Man

3. Characters with Conditions (Part 1) A narrator who may have a lower than average intelligence, an inability to deal with reality, or a learning disability, etc. 

It’s really important to remember that not every character who falls into this category will be unreliable purely because of this fact. Please do research, be sensitive, and consider using a sensitivity reader to be certain.

Examples: Forrest Gump from Forrest Gump, Christopher Boone from The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, Charlie Gordon from Flowers for Algernon

4. Characters with Conditions (Part 2) Someone who is having difficulties with their physical or mental health, or who may be suffering from a condition that otherwise impairs their cognitive function. Think: dementia, alcoholism, drugs, eating disorders, hallucinations, personality disorders, etc. 

Not ALL sufferers of a mental or physical condition will experience symptoms that may cause them to be unreliable - so please, do your research and be respectful if you go down this route. Consider using a sensitivity reader too.

Examples: Teddy Daniels from Shutter Island, Rachel from The Girl on the Train, Eleanor Oliphant from Eleanor Oliphant is Completely Fine, Maud from Elizabeth is Missing, the narrator from Fight Club, Eva from We Need to Talk About Kevin

5, Criminals A narrator who has done wrong in some description. They may be lying to save themselves, trying to persuade the reader/another character that what they’ve done is not wrong, or attempting to blame another character for revenge.

Examples: Nick and Amy Dunne from Gone Girl, John Dowell in The Good Soldier, Nina and Isobel from Talking to the Dead

6. Ghosts An otherworldly narrator whose experiences are not of earth.

Examples: Dr Malcolm Crowe from The Sixth Sense, the ghost from The Turn of the Screw, Lucifer in I, Lucifer

7. Liars A narrator who wilfully and deliberately lies to the reader. A word of caution - this type of unreliable narrator is hardest to pull off and needs careful attention so that the reveal they are lying doesn’t come off as “And then I woke up and it was all a dream”-esque.

Examples: Dr James Sheppard from The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, Pandora from Big Brother, Briony Tallis in Atonement.

.-.-.

How to Write an Unreliable Narrator This has been a long one, but we’re nearly there! Here are my top tips for getting down to the nitty-gritty of the writing of an unreliable narrator: 

Make them a liar - either deliberate or by omission Lying is one of the fundamental elements of an unreliable narrator - whether intentional or unintentional. In the end, an unreliable narrator is someone who can’t be trusted to be truthful. One way or another, the reader has to be deceived. But how can we avoid that sudden reveal of “It was a lie all along!” that may upset or deceive some readers? Well, the simple solution is to make lying a part of the character’s identity. 

In The Catcher in the Rye, Holden Caulfield, one of the most well-known examples of unreliable narrators admits there are things he doesn’t want to talk about in the very first paragraph of the book. He also refers to himself as “the most terrific liar you ever saw”. So maybe try something like that! Maybe your character is caught out in a lie early on, maybe another character remarks on a history with lying, maybe they out-and-out admit they have a problem with the truth? The possibilities are endless. 

Keep your reader in the dark Readers are used to having more information than the characters. If you’re writing an unreliable narrator, try flipping that on its head. Have the narrator withhold certain information from your reader and see how it impacts the story. 

Be unreliable from the start As we touched upon before, people are inherently unreliable when they recount a story as their point of view is filtered through their own experiences and beliefs. Your narrator shouldn’t suddenly or randomly become unreliable, they should be unreliable from the start - even if it isn’t immediately obvious. To help with this, hint at plot points, qualities or personality traits that might compromise them - and their story - later on!

Leave clues Following on from our previous point, if you‘re planning a devastating plot twist that’s linked to your unreliable narration, your best bet is to sprinkle some breadcrumbs as you go along the story. For example, if your character is concealing important information, drop hints that they may be untrustworthy so that when your reader thinks back, they realise the clues were there all along.

Reality Bites If readers are experiencing the story from deep inside your MC’s point of view, it can be quite difficult for them to orient themselves to the truth. A way to get around this is to use other characters to provide a dose of reality. 

So, for example, if you have a character who suffers from drinking-induced blackouts, or has memory lapses, have the blanks filled in by other characters. You may also choose or have another character contradict your character’s whereabouts, perspective, or account of an event.  This is especially useful if you have multiple POVs!

Providing a dose of reality will help anchor your reader’s experience, allowing them to identify - or at least tip them off to - the difference between the unreliable narrator’s perspective and what’s really going on. 

.-.-.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this guide and/or found it useful! 

If you’d like to request a particular guide, please pop into my inbox and leave a request! I might be opening up a Kofi account, so please do consider supporting me if you’d like to see more of these guides or if you’ve found them useful! 

[howtofightwrite]

Setting Goals for Your Characters

Not sure how to properly ask this but how do I write a fight scene between two characters who are both trained but might have different skill sets, while anyone still might get out alive that it could factor in?

Two things come to mind. First, it’s unlikely that you’re writing from both character’s perspectives simultaneously. Second, not every fight is going to be to the death.

When you’re writing a scene, it’s important to have clear goals for the participants. Violence is a way your characters attempt to exert their will on the world around them, it doesn’t simply occur for its own sake. (This isn’t a moral judgement; just that if your violence lacks motivation, it will come across as hollow. There are ways to leverage this, but, that’s a more complicated topic.) If you have two characters who want each other dead, then chances are someone’s not walking away. However, if you have characters with different goals, then any combat that occurs will be at cross purposes.

You don’t necessarily need to explain those goals to your audience. In fact, by default, your characters are unlikely to know their foe’s goals. That’s the biggest consideration in the other part of this question.

Your characters aren’t part of a psychic gestalt. They don’t automatically know what the other people around them are thinking, feeling, or planning. Even with an omniscient narrator, your characters won’t know their foes thoughts and plans, though the audience may be. With a limited narrator, you’re going to be writing the scene from the perspective of one of your characters, and, again, they won’t know what their foe is planning.

When both of your characters have the same background, it can provide an edge against one another. They’ve had the same training, and they’ll have learned the same strategies, tactics, and techniques. This means they have some ability to predict the other’s actions. They’ll be in a better position to predict their foe’s goals, and how what they’ll do to realize them.

If your characters have different backgrounds and skillsets, they won’t have that advantage; that’s the difference. They’ll have to guess at their foe’s methods, based on the information they have. They’re less likely to know what their foe wants, and they won’t know how their foe will go about achieving their goals.

So, how do you write two characters with different backgrounds in conflict? By remembering that they’re different people, and don’t know what the other person was trained to do.

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron. Every contribution helps keep us online, and writing. If you already are a Patron, thank you, and come join us on Discord.

Setting Goals for Your Characters was originally published on How to Fight Write.

[ashen-sky]

There are a few parallels between Thrawn and Ascendancy that I interpret as the author showing us specific moments that build Thrawn and Eli's relationship.

The first that really struck me was Eli and Thrawn's conversation about Thrawn becoming Admiral(pages 95-96), and how it was similar to Thrawn and Ar'alani's (at the time Ziara). That conversation in Ascendancy is an important moment for the two of them as it cements Thrawn's faith in Ar'alani, and it serves a similar purpose between Eli and Thrawn. In both cases it's an odd pledge of, almost loyalty,but definitely support, to his conversation partner. In the latter conversation, Thrawn is basically saying he will work towards a rank to let Eli walk his own path again, while in the former he's encouraging Ar'alani down a path she isn't sure of but that she wants.

The next is less a specific incident and more multiple battles and Eli's political advice. Like in Ascendancy, it's Thrawn against politics and someone has to be there to point out the political traps. Alot of them are similar to Thrawn and Ar'alani's conversations, and with Ar'alani being one of the first people chronologically to look out for Thrawn like that, it means something.

Since Ascendancy was written after Thrawn, it could be seen as fleshing out off handed comments (maybe even accidently) or even lazy writing (reusing concepts that were left vague in a previous work), but I think a reasonable interpretation is that these are moments that Thrawn is calling out. These are moments that, to him, made Eli a friend like Ar'alani. Thrawn is somewhat narrated by Thrawn, we see his personal thoughts and observations in italics, so it would be reasonable to assume this book is things he remembers with a bit of omniscient narration.

Note: I haven't read the last Ascendancy book yet and am still a few chapters short of finishing Thrawn, so this is just based off what I've read so far.

[cnovelssirmeower]

WWX’s POV and Novel Composition

Overwhelming majority of MDZS novel is written from WWX’s point of view. This causes the novel’s events and/or characters being interpreted by WWX and that necessarily leads to ambiguity as the reader could interpret the same events differently.

This is immediately established in the “present” timeline of the story. We, as the readers, know thanks to meta-perspective (it’s danmei, after all) that LWJ is in love with WWX and wants to protect him and because of that, we, unlike WWX, can see and understand LWJ’s fits of jealousy. This doesn’t mean WWX is intentionally misleading, he’s not, but our information differs from WWX’s. WWX doesn’t possess omniscient perspective and interpret events/characters based on what he knows. However, his knowledge is sometime incomplete or false and as such he naturally comes to wrong or flawed conclusion. That said, WWX is extremely good at deduction and more often than not, his interpretation of the events is right or not far from the truth and interchangeable with omniscient narrator perspective. However, the same can’t be said in case of characters and their motives.

LWJ is private, almost expressionless person who tended, when younger, lash out in embarrassment and had complicated feelings about his father’s possible influence on treating his possible future spouse and love in general. This led to WWX misinterpret LWJ’s feelings and believe LWJ dislikes him and disapproves him.

In case of JGY, WWX lacks knowledge regarding his true nature and can only guess. That makes JGY one of the most ambiguous characters in the entire work, as we can only try to separate the real person from his lies and rumours. We, as WWX, lacks reliable source of information and are not even sure if he killed his own son.

JC is entirely different can of worms. The guy’s intentions, motivations and feelings are covered and contradicted by his behaviour and words almost constantly, so only his sister, younger WWX and JL have chance to understand him. The novel acknowledges it as well and shows some of his feelings and thoughts on page, because otherwise the reader would have no chance either.

The novel is also written as framed with the “present” timeline. We learn of WWX’s past and the world’s events from flashbacks initiated by specific incidents. The first large flashback is brought by WWX thinking about how much LWJ changed and comparing it with the version he got to know the best. The next big one is provoked by him being revealed as the Yiling patriarch. WWX remembers how he came to be who he used to be and how, while alone and feared, LWJ was the only one willingly to face him outright. Looking back, he’s willingly to finally accept LWJ’s help. The third big one is initiated by the Second Siege and WWX compares the events leading to them both and how this time, he’s not alone.

In all those instances, WWX remembers the stages of his life that shaped him as a person, influenced his present and how the present and the past compare to each other. However, he only remembers events important to him. The Sunshot Campaign is covered very lightly and more explored in NMJ’s memories than ever in his own, despite it being a war that dramatically changed the world. The same can be said about The First Siege and that’s where it is especially interesting. WWX had lost hope and so his death was to him just a natural consequence. It was insignificant to him, and despite it being once again a situation that changed the history and caused his death, it didn’t change anything to him and didn’t shape him into who he was now. For that reason, one of the most significant battles of that era, is not shown at all.

However, it was important and life changing to people around him. LWJ became a father/caretaker and it with the Nightless City massacre changed him into the person he was at the start of the novel. JC lost all possibilities of having a closure about his sister’s death and speaking to WWX about why he killed JZX. He then became something similar to a vengeful ghost and didn’t manage to move on from those traumas. LSZ lost his family and became a Lan.

I love it as it shows that even something so important to many characters and the world, can be completely meaningless to another character.

[disneyat34]

Encanto at 35

A review by Adam D. Jaspering

Encanto is the story of Mirabel Madrigal. A young Colombian woman, she lives in an enchanted house, in an enchanted village, with her enchanted family. Unfortunately, Mirabel has the misfortune of being the only Madrigal without a magical gift. Unsure of her role or purpose within her family, she lives life one day at a time. One day, signs and omens appear, indicating something is not right with her family and her home. Her fate is apparent for the first time: Mirabel will be the one to save her family, or else, she'll be the one to destroy it.

“Encanto” is a Spanish word that doesn’t translate directly into English. A close approximation is “enchantingly beloved,” acting as a noun. Both enchanting as beautiful and enchanting as magical. In the context of the film, Encanto both describes the village setting, and serves as the village’s name.

It’s surely no coincidence that the word also ends in “Canto.” Alongside the family name “Madrigal,” the theme's primary focus is apparent. A musical affinity is deliberately interwoven into the film.

Lin-Manuel Miranda returns to helm the music and lyrics. This time, he brings more of his signature flair. With Moana’s soundtrack, Miranda was imitating a classical Disney showtune style. The songs were great, but they were formalist creations. He wrote songs for Disney the way he believed Disney songs were supposed to sound.

The music of Encanto is more representative of Miranda’s style. We hear his trademark wordplay, hip hop influences, boisterous appreciation of showtunes, and a blurring of genre lines.

Miranda went above and beyond experimenting with the various Latin music subgenres. The movie’s Colombian setting presents both traditional folk music and modern styles. All of it formed into a theatrical pop construct. To people unfamiliar with Colombia's musical styles, it sounds beautiful, exotic, and inviting. To those who are, it sounds like a cavalcade portrayal of an underrepresented land.

Just like everything else Lin-Manuel Miranda touches, the fan response and commercial success followed. Encanto’s soundtrack was at the top of the Billboard chart for nine weeks. Every song appeared on the Billboard Hot 100 chart, with five songs cracking the Top 50. “Dos Oruguitas” earned Miranda another Academy Award nomination for Best Original Song. The album went platinum in just four months.

But as popular as the soundtrack is, there is a film supporting it that needs to be discussed. Encanto is a movie about a multigenerational family. There are twelve people living under one roof. It’s plot requires a functional understanding of the Madrigal family tree, their history, and the interpersonal relations among them. The movie has an important duty. It needs to make all of its lore known, understood, and remembered before the movie can begin.

In the past, Disney films have had difficulty supporting large casts. It’s difficult to introduce a large number of people, while expecting the audience to remember their names and personalities. It’s also a challenge for the movie to find enough screentime and plot to justify all these characters. Would Mirabel’s large family serve a purpose onscreen? Or would it be like 101 Dalmatians, only important in terms of sheer quantity?

The movie uses two different methods to spit out its exposition. The first, in a prologue, a young Mirabel is told her family history by her grandmother. As a family elder is teaching her family history to an eager young child, we the audience are eavesdropping on the conversation. We learn the origins of the Madrigal family’s gifts, the nature of the magic, and the magic candle at the center of it all. informative and it feels natural. It’s an organic way to present details slowly and purposefully without relying on omniscient narration.

The second method is stranger, but just as effective. In the movie’s opening number, the now adult Mirabel introduces us to her family. In a fast-tempo patter song, not only do we learn the family’s names and relationships, we learn each of their associated magic gifts. “The Family Madrigal” is a silly and unconventional way to learn the character roster, but it’s effective.

Mirabel isn’t breaking the fourth wall by singing directly to us. Throughout the film, a small assortment of kids observe and comment on situations occurring. Much like a Shakespearean chorus, they frame and contextualize important plot points. Ideas that couldn’t otherwise be expressed visually or verbally are directed towards them, even if they’re off camera. They also ask rhetorical questions, keeping the plot threads moving in intended directions. It keeps the story of the Madrigal family from becoming cloistered. It reminds us of the stakes throughout. The movie doesn't concern just a privileged family, but an entire village. Their personal problems have municipal consequences.

For brevity’s sake, we won’t explore every member of the Madrigal family. Suffice to say, each member of the supporting cast has a role and function in the story. Nothing feels extraneous or redundant. Everyone has a unique design and characterization, differentiating them. Everyone contributes in someway, be it to move the plot along, to lighten the mood, or to visually depict changing circumstances. Everyone adds to the film, building on circumstances rather than distracting or overshadowing. Nobody is ever just their one gimmick.

Mirabel’s sisters get two major explorations of the film’s theme. As is tradition in musicals, both Luisa and Isabela reveal their inner secrets and frustrations through song. Long kept hidden from everyone, including themselves, simple words will not suffice.

Luisa’s gift is abnormal superhuman strength. Her song, "Surface Pressure,” is a revelation that her strength has made her incredibly insecure. Due to her gift, she can literally move, lift, or carry anything. Every chore, every duty, every task, she feels obligated to take on the burden. She obediently does so, feeling guilty about ever resting or declining a request. Doing anything less would be a waste of her gift.

Luisa knows full well nobody else can do what she does (or at least not as effortlessly). She also knows these duties must be done for the good of the Encanto. If she doesn't get the work done, she's unfairly placing a burden on others. She's an involuntary workaholic who's placed the world on her own shoulders.

Isabela’s gift is the ability to grow plants and flowers instantly. The beautiful botanical displays implore her to be an epitomized version of femininity. Her song, "What Else Can I Do?,” is a confession that despite her outward perfection, she’s deeply unhappy.

The image Isabela puts forth is one immaculately curated. Her horticultural gift has always been at the forefront of her entire image. She can create a wave of pink flowers instantaneously. So she dresses and behaves like a girl whose persona requires so many pink flowers.

So much so, Isabela has had to suppress any interest or affection that would betray such an image. She has spent so long trying to be a perfect beauty, it’s become effortless and boring. She’s never had the opportunity to pursue any latent interest. Such as a newly discovered thirst for creative expression.

Both of these are in contrast to Mirabel’s character arc. With no magic gift to call her own, Mirabel has always felt like an outsider in her family. She’s felt unimportant and insignificant. She has no immediately obvious and presentable talent in a family of superstars. She’s generic. With no gift, she has no purpose, and therefore no direction. Mirabel can do anything, but can’t do anything with that freedom. Her sisters have great talents, but are stuck doing one thing forever. Neither party is happy, but for opposite reasons.

But despite these suppressed miseries, all three remain loyal and faithful to their family and their Encanto. As unhappy as they are, leaving would be even worse. And they know this as a fact.

Throughout the film, we see the complete Madrigal family tree, but one member is conspicuously absent. Whenever his name is brought up, the topic is swiftly dismissed. We only get a ominous, uniform warning: ‘We don’t talk about Bruno.’

Early on, we have no frame of reference of Bruno’s fate or what he did to earn such a reputation. What heinous act did he perform to be disgrace by his home? What legendary crime has expelled him from his family? What grievous misdeed has made him such a pariah? With all the secrecy and displeasure, one is fully ready to accept Bruno as the film’s villain.

As Mirabel investigates her family’s secrets, all signs point to her long disappeared uncle. She can’t accept his status as an unperson any longer. She needs to know the truth. Again, the truth comes out in song form.

In a film full of hit songs, “We Don’t Talk About Bruno” is the biggest hit of Encanto. For months after the film’s release, the song dominated popular culture. It spent weeks atop the singles chart, and was a viral sensation. It’s difficult to compare mathematically due to the changing states of music consumption, but all indicators imply the same thing: “Circle of Life” was popular. “Let It Go” was big. “We Don’t Talk About Bruno” was a sensation.

The song details the ire, the fear, and the resentment everyone has towards Bruno Madrigal. We hear of Bruno’s many transgressions. We learn both why everyone dislikes him and why they’re glad he’s gone.

But as Mirabel learns, Bruno did nothing wrong. His so-called faults are severely hyperbolized. Everybody’s stories are sour grape justifications for their feelings. Bruno is gone. Rather than miss him or mourn him, everyone convinces themselves they're happy Bruno is gone.

It’s clear something is awry. Even if the rumors and reputation weren’t disingenuous, they don't answer Mirabel's questions. She needs to know why Bruno is gone and why he disappeared when he did. Everyone is making excuses, justifying their feelings towards Bruno’s absence. Whatever Bruno did, Mirabel will never know by asking. Everyone is lying to themselves. They'll of course lie to her.

Bruno’s gift is precognition. He’s an interpretation of the Cassandra myth. In Greek mythology, Cassandra was blessed with the gift of foresight. However, no matter what she saw, she could never convince anyone of the oncoming truth. She was doomed to witness tragic events she could not prevent.

The difference being, when Cassandra spoke the truth, no one would believe her. When Bruno spoke the truth, everyone blamed him. The various prophecies espoused by Bruno are impartial accounts of the future. Whatever happens, happens. Bruno is just the messenger. But he gets the blame all the same.

So what drove Bruno to exile? On the night Mirabel learned she had no magic gift, Bruno tried to discover what had happened. Such an anomaly surely meant something important. His ensuing vision was unlike any he’d seen before: a quantum flux of two possible futures. He saw Mirabel standing in front of the Madrigal home. In one state, the house was healthy, sturdy and strong. In the other, the house was in ruination.

Bruno couldn't blame his niece for the impending fate of his family. Nor could he present such bad news to his family. Rather than disappoint them, scare them, or lie to them, Bruno fled. His family thinks he abandoned them in a time of need. Instead, he's kept a dark secret to himself for years, scared to face the consequences. A self-imposed life of isolation is preferable to traumatizing his loved ones.

Knowing that she's possibly destined to doom the family, the burden is now on Mirabel. How can she avert a tragic fate? How can she prevent the fall of her Encanto? And what's causing the magic to fail in the first place?

The matriarch of the family is Mirabel’s grandmother, Alma. Like Mirabel, Alma has no magical gift herself. Instead, Alma is the one who is responsible for her family’s gifts. Many years ago, it was her who found the candle’s magic. In the 50+ years since, she presides over Encanto, making sure her family’s gifts are being used to the benefit of all. She has no gift herself, but considers herself responsible for the entire community.

In her desire to maintain a pleasant life for all, Alma has mandated perfection from her family. Not harshly, and not maliciously, but mandated all the same. Her words and actions have put forward an attitude of domineering control. As such, the Madrigals have internalized a need for perfection and obedience. Anything else would be sacrilege. But how can one function when the platitude “Respect your elders” determines everything in your life?

Encanto has a unique feeling to it, separating it from other Disney films. Mirabel doesn’t go on a grand adventure to learn something about herself. There’s no villain causing pain and suffering who needs to be toppled. There’s no MacGuffin that will fix every problem once acquired. There’s no quirky animal sidekick. There’s no battle between good and evil or right and wrong. It’s just a family and their long-seated problems which are coming to a head. This family just happens to have magic powers and live in a magic house.

In truth, Encanto feels more like a Pixar film than a Disney film. Pixar’s stories are more introspective and personal. They tend to center on relatable and enthusiastic characters whose comfortable lives are upended. They go on a journey to fix their status. They learn something essential about their lives and their self-worth. They find solace in others, helping solve their problems, too. Problems get solved, not in a way expected, but in a way needed. Disney heroes strive for something good. Pixar heroes find something better in themselves.

Mirabel has been an outsider in her own family. She hasn't realized how unhappy she’s been all these years, subjected to such a life. She hasn’t noticed how stressed and tense and stifled her family has been. She hasn’t realized how domineering and controlling her grandmother has been. It’s always seemed normal to her. She’s only known this as her life. She's never questioned it. But now, faced with her family's destruction, she begins seeing literal cracks in the façade.

Things need to change, but how? Everyone else is comfortable with their lives, convincing themselves they’re comfortable, or afraid of upsetting others. Mirabel's actions seem either inflammatory, disrespectful, or petty. How can she convince her family to talk about their feelings when they have a complex song and dance number about not talking about subjects that upset them?

The crux of the movie is generational trauma. Trauma experienced by a family elder has the ability to affect their children and grandchildren. Sometimes it's physical and abusive. Sometimes it's psychological and manipulative. In the case of the Madrigals, it’s a chronic need for perfection.

The movie never explicitly states when Encanto takes place. There’s a deliberate timeless quality to the picture. It could easily take place in the present, or at any point in the past hundred years. The only piece of technology seen throughout the film is a color film camera.

But there are strong indicators, assuming one is versed in South American history. In a flashback, we see Alma and her departed husband as a young married couple. Their happy life is upended when forced to flee their home. Soldiers move in on the city, violently ransacking the town. These enemy soldiers are only seen illuminated from behind. Those in the know would recognize them as soldiers from Colombia’s Thousand Days War.

Even without the historical context, it’s an easily sympathetic backstory. In a short span, she survived a war, became a refugee with newborn triplets, and saw her husband murdered by nationalists. It was a major traumatic experience. So much so, the mystic forces of the world bestowed Alma with a magic candle. It created a secluded valley where she and other refugees could live in peace, isolated from war and bloodshed. 

The candle also awarded her family line with magic gifts to serve this new village. Alma was indeed blessed with great fortune, but has never forgotten it came at a dire price. She never wants anyone to live through a fraction of what she’s experienced. Anarchy cannot destroy any more lives. But there’s no point in saving everyone from misery if the process itself is causing misery. Her obsession with perfection is eating away at her family.

Bruno’s vision wasn’t Mirabel either fixing or destroying the family. It was both. She needed to destroy its dysfunctions to save them. Mirabel never received a gift because it was her destiny to fix this. Had she received magic powers, she’d only be another extension of the trouble. This the type of problem that can only be seen by an outsider.

Coincidentally, Pixar has explored the idea of generational trauma twice. The first in the 2017′s Coco, and again in 2022′s Turning Red. Both films center their conflict around fantasy. Both integrate the fantastic and the dramatic. Both agonize over the troubles and problems that have rippled through generations. And both are resolved in a satisfying way.

Released between these two pictures, Encanto seems like a natural companion piece. But while both Turning Red and Coco intertwine their protagonists’ personal journeys with their exploration of family troubles, Encanto falls short. Pixar’s offerings focus on the invisible conflict between children and elders throughout. Generational conflicts are explored from the start to the conclusion. Much of Encanto is spent recognizing whether there’s even a problem to begin with.

By the time Mirabel recognizes her family's issues stem from her grandmother's actions, the film is rapidly approaching the finale. The idea is dropped into our laps almost unceremoniously. The movie declares its theme like a mystery detective announcing the culprit.

In fairness, the plot thread isn’t pulled from thin air. The subtext was always there, just shoved into the periphery. The movie wanted us to focus on other things instead. Things like Bruno’s absence and Mirabel’s prophecy. The movie was dangling red herrings, trying to keep its fantasy elements in the forefront. It's as though the writers were ashamed of the conclusion. As though family drama and grief processing were too mundane for their fantasy world.

When Mirabel and her grandmother discuss their issues, the resolution arrives questionably fast. It’s emotional themes are localized to one scene, and that scene is handled in a very mature, low key, expedited way. It’s a sensible discussion between a grandmother and her granddaughter. It’s not a bad representation of an introductory therapy session, but it feels insubstantial for a movie. Its more of a forced resolution than an actual satisfying conclusion.

In both Turning Red and Coco, the cycle of generational trauma is broken with storytelling twists. Actions, revelations and discoveries overwhelmingly change their respective families. Everyone learns something they couldn’t have possibly understood before the adventure at the core of their movie. The trauma is broken because their entire worldview is now different.

But in Encanto’s case, the trauma is broken because the writers want it to be broken. Mirabel reaffirms her love for her family. Alma promises to be patient and understanding. And this solves their problems. It’s an easy, unearned path to resolution hiding behind sentimentality.

It’s also a major stylistic mismatch from the fantasy concepts we’ve seen so far. There’s no discovery of a long-held secret. There’s no radical upheaval in the family dynamic. There’s no sacrifice or loss or change in the family’s magic. Mirabel and Alma have a conversation, apologize, and that’s it.

It’s ironic that such a treatment befalls a film about the struggles of who you want to be conflicting with who you’re expected to be. Disney had an idea of what ending they wanted, and forced it to end in such a way.

It’s even more ironic that this wasn’t the only time such an occurrence befell the film. It happened during the character design phase. Luisa is an ox of a character. She’s able to lift entire buildings without effort. Being such a strong person, Luisa is naturally drawn bulky with muscular limbs and torso.

One would think this would be a fairly straightforward portrayal of a strong character. But the animators had to emphatically fight the producers to keep this character design. From the producers’ perspective, the overly-muscular woman would be off-putting and intimidating. She’d look unappealing on merchandise, and kids would stray away from any product featuring her.

The opposite wound up happening. Girls in the coveted youth demographic absolutely loved Luisa and her design. She was the breakout star of the film. What little merchandise existed featuring Luisa sold out quick.

Meanwhile, Disney gambled on the stereotypically girly Isabela, whose products only sold average. Funny enough, Isabela’s character arc concerned her frustration towards her conventional femininity. She considered her curated, manicured ways confining and unsatisfying. But it was that artifice that was slapped on bedsheets and bookbags. It’s like the merchandising gurus were hoping kids didn’t pay attention to the film.

It’s not until Isabela abandoned this life that she found happiness. Such a departure is visually represented by fluorescent highlights in her hair and a splotched dress. Like Luisa, this design was also sought after, but not as readily available as other merchandise. Both wound up being available in greater quantities, but not until after the Christmas buying bonanza.

Even the casting process squared expectations against reality. Mirabel is voiced by actress Stephanie Beatriz. Except for a supporting role in the film adaptation of In the Heights, Beatriz didn’t have a history in music or musicals.

Beatriz is most famous for her role as Rosa Diaz, a hardened, intimidating police detective on the sitcom Brooklyn Nine-Nine. This is likely why the filmmakers first approached her for the role of Luisa. They assumed Beatriz was identical to her character in real life. In reality, Beatriz is a substantially upbeat, energetic, feminine person. Detective Diaz is almost an opposite of her actual personality. Aside from the family strife, she was uncannily similar to Mirabel. Beatriz was soon offered the film's lead role instead.

In all, Encanto had a problem defining its very definition. It was made in defiance of corporate expectations. Disney assumed they knew what audiences wanted, and what shortcuts would be acceptable. Those assumptions were not only wrong, but often backwards. 

During production, Disney CEO Bob Iger stepped down from his position, replaced by Bob Chapek. This change in leadership combined with a misunderstanding of audience expectations is troubling. These are the necessary circumstances to bring about another dark age in Disney Animation. But since this blog’s exploration into Disney’s past has caught up with Disney’s present, we can’t tell for certain. We’ll have to wait and see.

In conclusion, Encanto is a very energetic and colorful film. It has a vibrant soundtrack, memorable characters, and a good sense of humor. But its trenchant themes are left unintegrated, leaving its message contrived and superficial. While the narrative itself is anemic, the film's strengths carry it ably. It’s a well-built house, but it’s on a lousy foundation that needs repairs.

Beauty and the Beast Fantasia The Lion King Frozen Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs Cinderella Alice in Wonderland Sleeping Beauty Mulan Zootopia Tangled The Little Mermaid Aladdin Lilo & Stitch The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh Pinocchio The Jungle Book Robin Hood The Sword in the Stone Bambi The Emperor’s New Groove Encanto The Hunchback of Notre Dame Moana The Princess and the Frog The Great Mouse Detective Big Hero 6 101 Dalmatians Bolt The Three Caballeros Lady and the Tramp Frozen II The Rescuers Down Under Atlantis: The Lost Empire Wreck-It Ralph The Fox and the Hound Fantasia 2000 Peter Pan Dumbo Hercules Meet the Robinsons Brother Bear The Black Cauldron Raya and the Last Dragon Melody Time Oliver & Company Treasure Planet Tarzan The Rescuers Pocahontas Saludos Amigos The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad Winnie the Pooh The Aristocats Ralph Breaks the Internet Dinosaur Fun and Fancy Free Make Mine Music Home on the Range Chicken Little

[idiotic-genius]

How to write an immersive scene

requested by @noa-i - check out their blog, they have amazing lists of helpful links to writing guides!

As a writer, it is mostly inevitable to get to the point in writing where you are questioning whether anyone will actually want to read what they have created. A question greatly important to writing something the reader gets hooked up with is: How do I lure them in and make them feel like they are part of something? Sometimes, writing immersive makes THE difference between a scene quick to skip over and a scene you can't take your eyes off. But how do you create immersion?

In this post: 1. Worldbuilding 2. Narrators 3. Writing visually 4. Setting the scene 5. Example to summarize

Step 1: Learn your own facts

It might be banal, since you are the author, to re-read your own notes and think about what you have written so far. However, to get the reader hooked up, make them INTERESTED. This is easily accomplished by creating a detailed fictional world that doesn't seem flat. It might be a tiring process, but it always pays off! Knowing exactly what kind of world your character finds themself in makes it a lot easier to fill in details that subconsciously make the reader believe they are dealing with an actual real-world instead of "just" a fictional one. But even though it may seem harsh, cutting out some details and facts might make the reader feel much more comfortable. Their mind wants to insert them into the universe they're reading about, so overloading them with too many unnecessary details can be just as defeating as giving them too little info. Here is a link to a great beginners-guide on worldbuilding.

Step 2: Know your narrator

As we all know, there are a bunch of different narrator types to pick from when starting a new story, and each of them is good for a different thing- reaching from the typical first-person narrator (The Hunger Games, Percy Jackson) over personal third-person (Warrior Cats, Harry Potter) to omniscient third-person (Anne of Green Gables) and biased third-person (A Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy). If you are writing an unbiased third-person narrator in your WIP, you can just skip this step. However, if you have any indication at all in your story as to who the narrator is, you might want to think about this more closely. The narrator is the bridge that connects the reader to the fictional world. To immerse the reader in a book, it's usually easiest to use the first-person narrator or the personal third-person narrator, because that way the reader will either imagine themself as the narrator or as a friend of the main character, which keeps them interested. If your narrator is an actual character in the story, it is necessary to keep their speech and description patterns consistent with themselves and the events of the story. For example, a character narrating that has never visited a school or similar should not use highly scientific words to describe what's going on, etc, because it will interrupt the reader's reading flow and disturb the immersion just as much as time skips do.

Step 3: Writing visually

After making sure you have the narrator and the world they're in all set, it's time to choose a writing style, more specifically, to decide the visuality of it. What I mean by that is that having a fictional world so flat it's boring is just as bad as not describing it in a way that delivers it in the way it deserves to be delivered. Picture it like this: Every scene starts in a white room, with neither windows nor doors. If you as the writer don't describe what is going on in that room and what it looks like, at best while keeping the narrator's character in mind while doing so (to make it "3D"), the reader will never know what is actually happening. This also includes adapting the length and complexity of sentences to the scene: In a combat scene, you will usually find short and cut-throat sentences to represent the intensity and living-in-the-moment mindset of a fight, however, in a meaningful conversation between two characters about a heavy subject, it's more likely that longer and more complex sentences are of use to mirror the narrator's deep thinking of the subject and their concentration on the conversation.

Step 4: Setting the scene

By setting the scene, you fill in this white room in the reader's mind, adding characters, sounds, furniture, windows, and scenery in general, while still leaving space for the reader to fill in the blanks. To find a middle between these two extremes is up to every individual writer and depends on the writing style. If you over-describe the room, the reader will know every detail about it, but it will take away their focus from what is actually happening in the scene. However, if you don't set the scene at all, the reader automatically makes up what the room might look like based on what they imagine, and then breaks out of the immersion as soon as you mention something, later on, to be in the room that they did not picture. For example, if you just say that A enters B's bedroom, the reader might quite as well imagine there to be small windows, some bookshelves, a standard bed, etc. If you don't set that up right in the beginning and later on mention that B has small windows, the books stacked on the floor, a bunch of plants, an aquarium, and a bunk bed, the reader will get confused because it doesn't fit what they had pictured before. So ask yourself: What is so important that the reader should know it before the scene actually starts? Context also matters in that case.

5. Example

In the following, I will write the same scene multiple times in different styles to illustrate what makes a difference in writing immersion. The scene goes as following: Jae falls into a dark room underground with a hooded, mysterious person waiting for him. The hooded person greets him and lights a candle, and in the emitting light, Jae realizes who he is talking to. Remember: These are more caricatures of the different writing styles than actual representation and are very overexaggerated, but you get the idea.

1. first-person narrator (Jae), scene not set properly, no visual writing, no consistency in speech pattern

After three seconds, I landed on something soft and realized I had landed in a chamber underground, slightly lit by the moonlight above me. I walked through the only doorway and found myself in a second room. A hooded figure in the middle of the dark lifted their arm. From the table beside them, they picked up a candle and lit it using a lighter. "Hello, Jae", they said, and in the newly emitting light, I recognized them in front of the fireplace.

-> feels flat and jumpy, gives no significance to the change of scenery

2. biased third-person narrator, scene set properly, overly descriptive visual writing, consistency in speech pattern

After falling for what felt like an hour, even though it was probably just a few seconds, Jae finally landed on something soft. Before even attempting to get up, he shivered at the fresh memory of what slimy, earthy, suddenly appearing tunnels felt like. He stared up through the hole at the moon and the stars, and immediately recognized the constellation of Cassiopeia, high up above him. Cassiopeia is said to have angered the Gods, so they gave her the gift of divination, but made it so that nobody would ever believe her prophecies, finally banning her into the sky as this constellation. Weirdly enough, the stars' pattern doesn't look like a woman, or a human, at all. Jae slowly stood up from where he landed and realized he had fallen onto a rather big cushion with a print of primroses in yellow, pink, red, and blue. He looked around in my new location and found himself stuck in a small portico with no windows at all and only one doorway. The walls seemed just as dirty and muddy as the tunnel he had fallen through, and as he looked closer, he spotted about a dozen small, pink worms slithering through the soil. The floor on the other hand was made out of dark wooden panels- if you wanted to call it a "floor". The pieces were just loosely stuck onto the earth underneath, and mud squeezed out from the gaps in between. Jae slowly walked over them and reached the doorway after just four steps. He saw a hooded figure standing in the center of the next room. The room had two sources of lighting: One, the moonlight shining through the disgusting tunnel, and two, a crackling fireplace. It looked like it belonged in a small cottage, being made out of red bricks and looking a little old with the small black-and-white pictures put on top of it. The flickering orange glim of the fire met the silvery-white shine of the moon in the middle of the room. On the right side, Jae saw a big old round table made out of similar wood as the floorboards outside. There were obvious scratches on it, some made by smaller knives, others bigger and maybe made by swords, with splinters on their edges. Apart from two, the fours chairs around it seemed just as maltreated, but the two others were polished and reflected the two light sources, with no scratch marks at all. On top of the table rested a metal candlestick with one slightly burned-down candle stuck inside it. The candlestick had a few scratches as well, on the side and at the bottom. "Hello, Jae", the figure said snarkily, with a voice deep and rough like sandpaper. They wore a black cape, smooth on what Jae could see of the inside and rough on the outside, with a big hood covering their hair and most of their face. A few of the blue buttons with a golden pentagram engraved on them were missing from the coat, and it was slightly ripped in a few places. One strand of dark hair fell into the person's eyes as they reached out for the candlestick, lighting the candle inside with a silver zippo-lighter. The lighter had small scratches as well as a few symbols on it. Slowly, the flame grew bigger and bigger, until the shine from below reached the figure's face. Jae's eyes went big as he realized who he was talking to.

-> little place for the reader's fantasy, but details make scenery deeper and less flat. This kind of description does make sense if the narrator/the character the narrator fixates on (Jae in this case) is very observant and/or intelligent because they will notice details that others don't. The question is whether those details are important enough to keep in the story.

3. first-person narrator (Jae), scene set properly, visual writing, consistent speech pattern

After what felt like an eternity of falling and silently begging not to die from the impact, I finally landed with my eyes squeezed shut. Okay, legs, arms, and head still in place... I slowly opened my eyes again, realizing I had landed on a soft pillow with a flower print. Cautiously, I got up, gazing up at the tunnel through which I had fallen. The view of the slimy earth made me shiver involuntarily as I blinked against the bright moonlight far above me. The sky was clear enough to see stars, which could have been far more enjoyable if it hadn't been for my miserable situation. I had landed in a small chamber underground, with a single doorway leading into a bigger room. The walls were just pure earth and seemed to swallow all noise, but when I took the first step, the sounds of my shoes on the dark wooden floorboards and of the mud squishing out from beneath them was louder than I had anticipated. I could hear the crackling of fire from the next room and see the orange glow as I made my way over to the doorway and took a glimpse into it. The room was not very big, but also not as small as the one I had landed in. There wasn't much space because of a wooden round table and four chairs, which all seemed very old and maltreated, judging from the scratches on them. I could make out a few pictures on the fireplace, and in front of that- "Hello, Jae." I had to suppress a gasp as I realized that I was not alone. In the middle of the room, right where the silvery moonlight and the orange glow of the fire met, stood a hooded figure. Their coat looked as old as the few pieces of furniture, with missing buttons and rips. I couldn't make out much of their face, even though I squinted my eyes, but the flickering light made it hard to see anything, let alone recognize. But that voice... Before I could come to a conclusion, the figure reached for a metal candlestick standing on the table and lit the candle inside with a silver lighter. As the flame grew bigger, they dispelled the shadows below the hood that had disguised the person's features before. I could feel my eyes get big as I finally realized who was standing before me.

-> Gives enough information to "fill the white room" without dwelling on details too much, shows the context of the story, gives Jae a consistent personality

So that's it for this post! I hope I managed to pass on a thing or two that I learned while researching and that this post will help you with your writing. Please acknowledge, I am not trying to attack anyone's style of writing!! If you write the way I wrote a "non-immersive" scene, it does NOT mean that your writing style is bad, let alone wrong, because the existence of many different writing styles is what keeps it individual and interesting! Find your own way and let nobody get you down :)

[writingwithfolklore]

Expanding on Narrator

My first ever post on this blog was a bit of an opinion piece about LGBTQ+ representation in Disney, or more specifically, how narrator can perpetuate shame in the younger gay community (check it out here!). I proved why it’s important to be careful, but I didn’t really get into how to responsibly wield the power of the narrator, so that’s what I’d like to expand on today!

The narrator, whether it be your main character in a story, your camera, or a literal narrator, is one of the most important and powerful parts of storytelling. There is no such thing as a neutral narrator—narrators must take sides to tell story. We follow our protagonist, see the world through their eyes, learn their biases, and in a major way, can often express our own (even unintentionally).

In directing, recognizing any single place in the script where you may have bias is a part of your script analysis process. Directors are constantly identifying and challenging their biases on every script—stuff like, ‘as a man can I identify with Kailey’s struggle as a mother’ or any privileges one might have, clouds in judgement, sore spots, past vendettas, etc. etc. We have bias because we’ve lived for quite a while before writing or coming upon a piece of writing, it’s nothing to be ashamed of, as long as you’re honest with identifying it.

We should do the same thing as writers, because not only do we have bias, but we’ll need to identify and understand the bias our character’s have. In a few months we’ll be talking about what makes an antagonist an antagonist—when creating an ‘evil’ character, it’s our bias that tells us what makes them evil. Something I’ll expand upon later, but it’s a good thing to keep in mind as an example now.

Also in directing, we determine in each scene who the scene belongs to. Which ‘side’ does the camera take in the scene. This is important for novel writing as well. When I say ‘who’ the scene belongs to, I’m talking about dynamics. Who is controlling the scene, who has more power, who is making the moves that’s evolving the story? In most cases it’s going to be your protagonist, that’s why we’re following them, they’re in the driver’s seat. However, up against an antagonist where they lose, in any part where they are proved wrong or the audience knows they made the wrong decision based off their partner’s reaction may shift bias/power towards the other party.

If you’ve ever written a scene where you want the readers to feel empathetic towards someone other than the protagonist, and the protagonist is in the wrong, you were likely writing a bias towards the other person. That’s exactly what you’re supposed to do! Remember, narrators always take sides.

So what’s the point of all this? Why am I rambling on about directing and bias? (and writing ‘bias’ enough times to make it a drinking game—don’t do that) Because the narrator is telling the readers what they should also think. Through writing, you are imparting your worldview, misconceptions, biases, onto your readers. Especially important to be mindful of when writing for young audiences (thus Disney movies made my examples in the first post).

The narrator proves whether the characters are right or wrong. It is omniscient (in all cases, this isn’t about third-person omniscient/limited, I mean that even if your narrator only focuses on one head in the room, it still has the knowledge of the world it’s in.) It tells the readers how they should feel, what they should think, and in many cases, reflects back on you as the creator.

You’re feeling the responsibility now, right? I’m sure you’ve read a book where an opinion that differs from your own makes you put down the book, but kept reading a book where the main character holds an opinion that differs from your own.

That’s the power of narrator. As an example, if the main character hates dogs, we can excuse that as a flaw or characteristic of the character. However, if the narrator tries to tell us ‘all dogs are evil’ dog-lovers are going to put down the book. It’s the difference between reflecting a number of opinions to show the complexity of an issue, and siding with an opinion.

Now listen, your narrator should have strong opinions—narrator’s always take sides, even if they show both sides, if you approve both through your narrator your meaning is going to get confused. The whole point of theme is that your narrator holds a very specific opinion, such as ‘All humans are inherently good seen through how the majority of society treats children’ or something like that. You can show the other side, but in the end, you’re trying to disprove that side. You’re trying to prove your theme. So narrators do side with opinions, shown through how characters who also side with that opinion often find success, whereas characters who don’t (typically the antagonist) fail in the end.

(Clarification on theme, if needed, can be found in my ‘theme is not a question’ post here!)

If your antagonist wins in the end, you’re sending a message about their beliefs, such as ‘In the end the world is negative and pessimists see it as it is, thus they can gain more power over it’. This is a pretty cliché example, but you understand what I mean, to create conflict characters have different beliefs and goals or different beliefs on the same goal, and someone has to win. Whether the person who wins is rewarded or faced with consequences proves your theme.

This is a large and complicated subject to talk about and we’re already running a little long, so I’ll try to sum it up here.

TL;DR

As the teller of story, your narrator is informing the readers what to think at every moment. This is how we tell story, if we didn’t tell readers what to think and feel, you wouldn’t have a single sentence. Everything we creatively write is a form of manipulation. Or in a nicer term, guidance towards the intended understanding of the characters, world, mood, theme, style, etc.

So you have to be careful what the implications of your narrator are. You have to search your biases, critically examine what you write and how you think, in order to ensure you aren’t sending an unintentional message. If a character is rewarded (reaches a goal, faces no consequences, doesn’t react negatively) for what the general story is trying to condemn, it’s going to be confusing for readers. We’ll ask, ‘do you want us to like dogs or not?’ (I love dogs, to be clear here)

Examine who your character is and what they go through. Examine your consequences, and how they apply to different actions. Examine how your pacing and sentence structure places significance on certain things over others. Really, critically think about everything you’re writing, keep your list of biases in your head, your theme close at hand, and don’t be afraid to change something major if you think it’s sending the wrong message.

I hope this is helpful and informative for some of you. It can be a daunting thing to think about, but I believe as long as you write with compassion and are clear in your intended message, you’ll come out just fine in the end.

Good luck, happy writing! On Wednesday something a bit shorter, thanks for sticking in there!

[ouyangzizhensdad]

WWX is an “unreliable” narrator but he’s not that unreliable either

I’ve come across takes within the fandom which disregard certain information conveyed in the novel by invoking the fact that “WWX is an unreliable narrator” in instances where there are very little to support the idea that this element was a discrepancy reveled to be so later in the text or through subtext. It made me reflect that the fandom’s tendency to repeat that WWX is an unreliable narrator (which is not unfounded!), especially in jokes, has perhaps landed a hand in over-emphasising the impact of the ways in which MDZS’ narrative is framed through WWX’s perceptions and experiences, thereby allowing people to cherry-pick certain information given by the narration. So here’s my bone to pick: WWX is an unreliable narrator to a degree, sure, but he’s not unreliable to the point that everything presented in the narrative can be put into question indiscriminately.

All narration, outside an omniscient narrator, will present a limited perspective. In fact, it is easy to argue that writing always offer a limited perspective in that, just like a camera lens needs to point towards something, the written form can only convey a limited amount of information at once. When the “lens”  or the frame through which we make sense of the events taking place is a character’s POV, the way our perspective is limited is further shaped by who the character is, their internal life and to what they bear witness. 

While it creates many challenges for a writer, framing offers as well many possibilities. It can amplify the characterisation or the work’s thematic discussions (we can think of a story being told through the perspective of a child to further explore themes around the loss of innocence, for instance). As readers, we don’t just see what the character-narrator is able to see of the world, but we also come to understand how they perceive the events that happen to them. Moreover, it can also be used to withhold information from or deceive the readers in an coherent or “organic” manner which espouses the psychology of the character and the work’s thematic explorations in order to create narrative tension. Framing will at times get categorised as a work featuring “an unreliable narrator,” although it tends often to be in the cases of more extreme examples. After all, not all books told through the perspective of a child are inherently said to feature “unreliable narrator,” but certain works which mobilise a child’s naïve/innocent perspective on the world to great narrative or thematic impacts will be said to feature an unreliable narrator.

MXTX clearly has a penchant for using this type of framing to withhold information from readers (as seen in her other works), but it is important to point out that it is not the only way she chooses to conceal information. The fact that MDZS contains a detective mystery plot further explains why it would be important to ensure that readers become aware of certain elements in a manner that maintains suspense and creates narrative tension that feels organic. However, the use of framing as a device in MDZS is not total. Not only does the narrative shows us at times things that WWX would not be able to have seen,  readers also often find themselves in the know in moments where WWX is still in the dark. WWX’s limited perspective never fools us into thinking that, for instance, it was a guniang who kissed him at Phoenix Mountain. On a subtext and metatextual level, there is not necessarily always a lot being withheld from us. All these suggest that WWX is not really a pure example of an unreliable narrator. 

With this preamble, here are the reasons why I have until now called WWX an “unreliable narrator” beyond the use of framing which limits, at times, the information we have access through because of WWX’s perceptions and experiences:

the fact that there are gaps in his memories (some of which he regains after a period of time and some which we never see him recover by the end of the novel)

the fact that he “conceals" to himself and others (and thereby to the readers) some of his feelings, suffering and, perhaps more importantly, his motivations (the core transfer and all the being the most striking one). 

It is important to remember that, when it comes to unreliable narrators or this form of framing more generally, savvy readers are provided the necessary tools to reconcile the discrepancies in the narrator’s account (unfortunately, perhaps the most important tool of all, reading comprehension, cannot be provided by the text itself). Novels with unreliable narrators are thus always more than the sum of their parts, since knowledge of the entirety of the work is generally necessary to reconcile these discrepancies. This is where fandom’s convenient mentions of WWX’s “unreliable narrator” status when questioning details within the narrative often ends up falling short for me, since these takes rarely explain how the novel suggests these elements need to be questioned. 

Further, I’ve noticed that some people seem to read “unreliable” to mean “untrustworthy” or “deceptive”. There are certain types of unreliable narrators who are deliberately deceptive, but this is not really the case of WWX. Extreme examples would be types of narrators who are lying, deluded or mentally ill, and this is not what we’re playing with wrt WWX. Instead, WWX is mostly unreliable in the same way we all are unreliable narrators of our own lives. The only times in the novel WWX’s concealment is deliberate is when he’s concealing his motivations or the true extent of his suffering and sacrifices. 

TLDR: Although the narration in the novel is in the 3rd person, it is almost always framed through WWX’s voice and limited perception as an individual player in all the events that took place in the narrative. As such, while it is important to consider how MXTX uses this framing as a device to create suspense and withhold information from the reader as well as strengthen her characterization of her main character and colour her thematic explorations, the fact that many people in the fandom call WWX an “unreliable narrator” should not be taken as a blanket permission to view him as someone whose perspective is not credible across board or that we need to question indiscriminately all the information we get from his POV.